I first noticed the school’s surveillance cameras in grade 10. After a friend pointed them out to me, I made a mental note to look for them in the halls and stairwells. I didn’t think much of them, though. They were probably only used to investigate incidents and some of them might be fake. I mean, a surveillance system sounds pretty expensive. Surely though, there was nobody actually monitoring these cameras.
Well, that was my idea of it until this year. At first, it looked like a clever and easy way for administration to get a general idea of the goings-on in the school: “According to our cameras, students are still in the hallways.”
But then, things got more and more specific, and scary: “The two boys on the third floor looking at the bulletin board, you are now late.” … “Girls besides stairwell 5, go to class.”
Suddenly, the mysterious P.A. voice became an omniscient figure in our school. Or at least for those five minutes before class.
But where is the limit to our privacy? How far will they go? In what direction are we heading?
“Girl crying in the corner because she’s failing all her classes, please move along to class now.”
“Oi! You there, making out on the second floor! You have thirty seconds to get to class.”
Yeah, that’s right. She’s talking to you. Big brother is watching.
So what changed this year? Did the school decide that it would now monitor the video feeds? Or have they been doing that all along and are now making it known to all students?
Either way, I can’t help but wonder what the school hopes to accomplish with this. I doubt that the cameras actually deter people from doing stupid things in the halls. We still see plenty of that. So far, the cameras have been used to tell students that they’re late for class. But unless the mysterious P.A. voice plans to call out on every student, this doesn’t seem like a very effective way to discourage lateness. Singling students out on the P.A. system just seems to be another one of our school’s amusing tics, though a slightly disconcerting one. Apparently, students cannot be trusted to walk to class without a voice telling them to do so and a camera trained on their backs.
Well, at least there will never be cameras in the classrooms, right?
“Girl with the blue jacket sitting in the second row of room 231, the answer to question 34 is actually B, not C. Try a little harder next time, will you?”
you refer to the use of surveillance equipment as if they’re strip-searching students. the extent of a camera is to keep an eye on what’s going on. what’s the difference between a camera on a staircase corner and a vice principal standing there watching? nothing.
stating that the administration has no right to use security cameras is equivalent to saying that the administration has no right to see what the hell is going on inside its own hallways. they’ve been telling people to get to class using the P.A. system for years now, and now they’re using it in conjunction with the cameras.
it is creepy. it is annoying. it is not a breach of your rights.
all they’re doing is telling students to get out of the halls: it’s not really an invasion of privacy. kids these days think any use of security cameras constitutes a breach of some idealized right. is it annoying? yes. does that make them big brother? no.
it’s one thing to use surveillance equipment to follow up on an incident. it’s quite another to use it with petty things like lateness to class. when a ruling body takes advantage of their security measures as such, it sure as hell constitutes a breach of “some idealized right.” that being said, in what way is the author’s comparison of garneau’s ridiculous use of cameras to big brother invalid?
you refer to the use of surveillance equipment as if they’re strip-searching students. the extent of a camera is to keep an eye on what’s going on. what’s the difference between a camera on a staircase corner and a vice principal standing there watching? nothing.
stating that the administration has no right to use security cameras is equivalent to saying that the administration has no right to see what the hell is going on inside its own hallways. they’ve been telling people to get to class using the P.A. system for years now, and now they’re using it in conjunction with the cameras.
it is creepy. it is annoying. it is not a breach of your rights.
the extent of the camera is to have necessary documentation to suss out a suspect in case of a crime or a fight. it is not to keep constant tabs on students going about their business as though they’ve wronged before they have. Imagine walking into a grocery store and being admonished for leaving an item in the wrong place over the PA system, instead of their using the system only when the law calls for it. Not only is it creepy and humiliating, it’s a breach of your rights. For more information, see http://www.priv.gc.ca/information/guide/vs_060301_e.cfm
all they’re doing is telling students to get out of the halls: it’s not really an invasion of privacy. kids these days think any use of security cameras constitutes a breach of some idealized right. is it annoying? yes. does that make them big brother? no.
it’s one thing to use surveillance equipment to follow up on an incident. it’s quite another to use it with petty things like lateness to class. when a ruling body takes advantage of their security measures as such, it sure as hell constitutes a breach of “some idealized right.” that being said, in what way is the author’s comparison of garneau’s ridiculous use of cameras to big brother invalid?
you refer to the use of surveillance equipment as if they’re strip-searching students. the extent of a camera is to keep an eye on what’s going on. what’s the difference between a camera on a staircase corner and a vice principal standing there watching? nothing.
stating that the administration has no right to use security cameras is equivalent to saying that the administration has no right to see what the hell is going on inside its own hallways. they’ve been telling people to get to class using the P.A. system for years now, and now they’re using it in conjunction with the cameras.
it is creepy. it is annoying. it is not a breach of your rights.
the extent of the camera is to have necessary documentation to suss out a suspect in case of a crime or a fight. it is not to keep constant tabs on students going about their business as though they’ve wronged before they have. Imagine walking into a grocery store and being admonished for leaving an item in the wrong place over the PA system, instead of their using the system only when the law calls for it. Not only is it creepy and humiliating, it’s a breach of your rights. For more information, see http://www.priv.gc.ca/information/guide/vs_060301_e.cfm
the fuck is all of this true:/?
the fuck is all of this true:/?
i knew the picture looked familiar
i knew the picture looked familiar
at least we’re allowed to wear headwear now. time to disguise our identities, right?
at least we’re allowed to wear headwear now. time to disguise our identities, right?
i know they used to keep the video feeds in a closet, and they only opened it up to check what happened during an incident (like a theft). i guess they just decided to monitor in real-time now
i know they used to keep the video feeds in a closet, and they only opened it up to check what happened during an incident (like a theft). i guess they just decided to monitor in real-time now
unclear distinction between truth and artistic elaboration
level of speculation immature