The Insider: You can't film here
- Published: 18 June 2008 17:17
- Last Updated: 18 June 2008 17:17
- Reader Responses
Thugs in day-glo jackets are taking away our freedom to film in public.
My cameraman and I had gone by arrangement to 10 Victoria Street in London to interview a high-ranking police officer. The area is infested with government buildings and my cameraman was shooting a general view of the one we were visiting. His presence galvanised the insolently somnolent security officer within, who charged outside to bark at us that we weren't allowed to film the building without permission.
It had happened to me the day before at a bank in Holborn. A trainee journalist shooting a story about the credit crunch wanted a wide shot of herself taking cash from a hole in the wall. Within two minutes a bank employee came out to tell us we needed permission to film the building. I was able to disabuse her and she retreated in confusion.
It's happened at St Katharine Docks, Trafalgar Square, Leicester Square and in front of City Hall. And that's just London. Try going to any shopping mall in the country with a camera on a tripod and see how long it is before a day-glo jacket stops you. If you ask for his pointless permission, expect it to be refused or referred to head office for a response in a few days' time.
Want a picture of the MI6 building on the Thames? You can stand on Vauxhall Bridge and use a tourist camera or your mobile. No problem. The way not to do it is to use a vaguely grown-up camera on a tripod. Big mistake. They'll be on you before you can take off the lens cap.
And how do they know you're there? Why, they've seen you on their cameras, of course. Did they ask permission before taking your picture?
How did we let this happen? Where's the statute that says that tourists can film whatever they like but broadcasters can't? Where does it say they can take my picture without permission but I mustn't film their building? I asked the high-ranking officer about this. No, thought not.
You can predict two responses to this complaint. First, the Don't-you-know-there's-a-war-on? defence. You could be terrorists taking reconnaissance pictures. It wouldn't occur to these folk that terrorists are more likely to use a handheld MiniDV camera than spend £3,000 on a Z1 and tripod to pretend to be a TV crew that'll be stopped and questioned anyway. It wouldn't occur to these folk that a little tourist camera can shoot onto the same format as the big camera.
The second defence is it's "private property", which would be relevant only if you were trying to steal or damage it.
One handy hint… when the hi-vis jacket approaches you and tells you you need permission to film this public place, hand its owner a card with the following words on it:
"No one may speak to this camera crew without permission.
"Please apply to ___________________ giving three working days' notice of your intention to address this crew, stating who told you to do it and why."
We might then start to get to the bottom of this insidious nonsense.
The Insider is a TV journalist
