Furthermore, a lot of nonprofits are financing at least part of their operations through grants. Those grants often require them to prove that they work was completed and done so in compliance with the grant terms. Photographs could be part of the evidence they collect to document how they used the funds.
Comment on Volunteering enshittification
athairmor@lemmy.world 3 days ago
This is just so they can take photos and video of volunteers and they don’t have to get releases from each and every person every time someone snaps a photo. Without this waiver, getting photos and video would be a pain in the ass and take up some of every volunteer’s time.
Think about it. You’re asking them to jump through extra hoops every time you’re volunteering. Now, they have to track who signed the waiver and who didn’t. They can’t have staff or volunteers just snap photos whenever they have time. Now, they have to plan every shoot. This costs time and money.
It’s probably really is better for them to just not have people volunteering who don’t want their face on a flyer or to be seen in a commercial or training video.
BigGovernment@lemmy.world 3 days ago
bleistift2@sopuli.xyz 3 days ago
Without this waiver, getting photos and video would be a pain in the ass and take up some of every volunteer’s time.
No. OP stated the solution: If they want to take a photo, all they need to do is to announce that, ask everyone who doesn’t want their picture taken to leave for a moment, wait 10 seconds, and then take the photo. This takes 30 seconds of time. And you’re comparing that to the loss of not having a full worker work for them?
athairmor@lemmy.world 2 days ago
That’s completely unrealistic in most situations and would never take a matter of seconds. Also, it would make every photo stages. All that to cater to one person’s preferences is not reasonable.
A_norny_mousse@feddit.org 2 days ago
(Professional) photographers do exactly that in many countries that have decent law around people’s privacy.
Usually they ask before they start shooting. So the result is not staged. And they respect people’s answers, because they could get in trouble otherwise. It’s also usually about faces, so they can still shoot the objectors from other angles.
So - since all this is happening in reality, it is not unrealistic.
athairmor@lemmy.world 2 days ago
Very few countries require consent in public and some that do, like France, make exceptions for art and other non-commercial photos.
But, we’re not talking about some commercial photographer taking photos in public. We’re talking about an NGO who wants to snap photos anytime while people are doing their work. It’s absurd to think they can stop everyone every time to get some snaps.
Trust me it’s not worth having that one or two people working with their special requirements. A blanket waiver saves tons of time and hassle.
j4k3@lemmy.world 3 days ago
It requires trust that is not inherently limited in any way. That is authoritarianism. I want nothing to do with any organization that does this. I will not give them any personal information to keep on record either. They have no financial incentive to secure that information and every reason to hide it when they fail to secure that information. Giving anyone the benefit if the doubt and blind trust is begging to become a slave like serf under neo feudalism. It is already happening. You own nothing. You are extorted at every interface in life. A physical part of your person – your digital presence is owned by others with the sole purpose of exploiting and manipulating you in this new age of digital slavery. Consumer protection is a joke now with companies like Delta airlines using your digital slavery with AI in a price fixing scam to extort you for the most you are able to pay. Eventually that will come with some high interest loan for everyone that flies, tying the serfs to the land. It is critical to say hell no to this dystopian nonsense now as normalization is only making it worse.
athairmor@lemmy.world 2 days ago
I say this is a complete over reaction and a photo for the org is not comparable to whatever Delta is doing. You want to hide in a bunker and never show your face in public? Go for it. But, there’s more productive privacy battlefields out there than an NGO wanting to snap photos for for their marketing. Your face is going to be out there, anyway.
j4k3@lemmy.world 2 days ago
Don’t let lawyers be lazy or rule the world with this authoritarianism. Write with better language more in line with modern cultural values instead of ambiguous data theft nonsense. Have higher expectations. You are either part of the problem or part of the solution. Your only real vote is your choices you are willing to accept. When your choices normalize monsters, you bring monsters upon us all. You matter. You are important. You must make the choice if you are a monster. Your choice is the most important choice in the world. I choose to avoid bringing you monsters because I care about you too.
Pika@sh.itjust.works 3 days ago
Yeah, I agree with this. However, I wanted to add in that in many cases, even without the disclaimer, the volunteer company could legally be able to disclose those pictures.
Because in order for something to be commercial, it needs to be promoting a product or an organization. So a big company just posting pictures, saying, look, this is our volunteer work, doesn’t necessarily require any type of disclosure notice.
As long as the volunteer work was being done in a public location(or even a private location with signs), then it’s free game. It’s more of a cover the grey areas in the law policy and remove the extra work if the intent is to promote a product( like you mentioned.)
Rhynoplaz@lemmy.world 2 days ago
This is exactly why.
It doesn’t sound like a big deal to me. Some of you will think me naive, and I’ll think you’re paranoid, but that’s just how it is sometimes.