I. RESPONSIBILITY TO INDIVIDUALS FILMED PRINCIPLES OF ETHICAL DOCUMENTATION In the fields of human rights, journalism and documentary filmmaking, there is a tradition of ethical practices generally aligned with the desire to “minimize harm” to the subjects of reportage. These practices include obtaining the informed consent of individuals interviewed and filmed and assessing the potential risks involved in documenting and sharing their stories. Curators not involved in a video’s production have a more difficult time assessing whether individuals gave their consent to be filmed, and if sharing the video could cause them harm. This section addresses the risk of harm to individuals and communities filmed in eyewitness footage, and provides strategies to help assess, weigh, and address those risks. First, we review some of the main concepts behind ethical documentation. CONSENT SHARING Obtaining the informed consent of an individual to record and publish his or her image and story is key to responsible and ethical documentation. Some people choose to keep their lives or experiences private, or to share their stories anonymously, for personal reasons or due to security concerns. Informed consent involves an understanding by the individuals filmed of the purpose and potential audience of the video, as well as the risks involved in appearing in it. By granting consent to be filmed, an individual is deciding to participate and to assume the potential risks that may be involved. That decision is not necessarily permanent; someone who grants consent may regret that decision after further reflection, or due to changing security risks. It is important to respect the fact that an individual’s decision around consent may evolve over time. While the practice of obtaining informed consent has a long tradition in human rights, journalism, and documentary filmmaking, individuals outside of those professions are often unaware of the concept, or do not have the opportunity to ask for consent from the individuals they film. Some videos are recorded without subjects aware they are on camera. In the case of certain human rights videos, the filmer is also the perpetrator, and exposing the victim’s identity is part of the abuse itself. (See section on Perpetrator Footage on page 9.) FOR MORE INFORMATION INTENDED AUDIENCE AND USAGE Not all eyewitness footage found online was created and uploaded with the intent of being shared in the public domain. The subject may have consented to the recording for a specific and limited audience, but not for widespread circulation. Consider the case of the 2014 hacking of Hollywood celebrities’ online accounts2 to obtain nude photos. After celebrities’ private online accounts were illegally broken into, many of their private photos became publicly available online and were widely shared. But this was clearly not the celebrities’ intention for the footage: their original consent was given only for a specific audience and purpose. More generally, individuals often share information on Facebook or Twitter with the understanding that only their limited number of friends or followers will see it, or without a clear comprehension of privacy settings that determine who can see information they share on their social media accounts. Get tips on obtaining informed consent at bit.ly/Tips_ InformedConsent 179 VIDEO AS EVIDENCE: ETHICAL GUIDELINES V 1.2