upvote
> When filming in the street, for example, for a street interview, TV typically blurs the faces of Japanese-looking people passing by (except for foreigners). While in the West people have no respect to other people,

Am I missing something or is this just plain racism? There are lots of japanese people who don't look japanese, foreigners who are permanent residents, and japanese-looking people that aren't japanese - how is it respectful to protect just a certain ethnic groups privacy?

reply
It's not racist. It's all about the intention; as a company, you don't want to expend a single extra dime to comply with the regulations. since the population is pretty much homogeneous you can just blur out the Japanese and you are pretty much guaranteed to cover 99% of the cases.

Business don't exist to respect or care about people they exist to generate profit so the idea of a business "respecting" something is not even realistic.

The law is what outlines what are the limits and guarantees the basics rights to everyone.

reply
It's easy: if you don't look Japanese, then you are not Japanese. A paper signed by someone in the government doesn’t make you Japanese.
reply
Ok, so you're agreeing that it is "plain racism".

> A paper signed by someone in the government doesn’t make you Japanese.

You claim that the government of Japan does not have the power to bestow citizenship on individuals?

reply
[flagged]
reply
And what about visitors to the country? Do visitors get treated with more respect than strangers? In foreign cultures, they do. So this analogy doesn’t follow through.
reply
Foreigners don't blur faces so their faces also don't get blurred. Fair.
reply
I'd guess so judging by the downvotes.
reply
It should be edited to avoid snarkiness.
reply
Yes. The West likes flagellating itself for being racist, but in [current year] the rest of the world is invariably much more racist.
reply
I try not to litter. I even pick up litter when I see it. Does the existence of serial rapists mean I shouldn't bother? Should we never worry about moderating our own behavior if anyone else out there is worse?
reply
>While in the West people have no respect to other people

Big overgeneralization. Here in Germany the "Recht am Eigenen Bild" (literally right to your own image) has existed for decades, and similar to Japan publishing images of others has some pretty big limitations and without consent is usually restricted to places or persons of public interest. To the chagrin of Google Street view or Twitch streamers

reply
It’s more generally known as personality rights / right to publicity and a lot of western countries have laws relating to this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personality_rights

reply
I think that's rather silly. If it's a public place, and I have the right to be there and see all these faces with my eyes, why can't I exercise this right mediated by a camera?
reply
Because people don't want to be posted online and you should respect that. Seeing and posting online is different.
reply
> Japan is more advanced than West in terms of privacy protection

Please stop confusing the US / maybe UK, Canada, Australia, NZ with "the West".

Countries like Germany and France have very strong privacy protections.

reply
> While in the West people have no respect to other people, and don't bother to blur anything. I think it would be better for everyone if you couldn't post photos of other people without their permission and if annoying Youtubers would go to jail.

Every burglars wet dream. I have no idea what crime is like in Japan but in EU this is not an option.

reply
I am not sure but probably you can show a recording to police. But not post it online. Also punishment for burglary can be pretty heavy so better choose some other country.
reply
As an example, in Spain it is illegal to have dashcams, and its content cannot be used in a trial - but you can share the content with insurances and policeman, and recording is generally not prosecuted. It is nonetheless an opening if an officer is searching for a way to fine you...
reply
Please show a source for that claim. Afaik having the dashcam is legal (under conditions like it being mounted securely, not obstructing vision, recording limits so it's not surveillance,...) but publishing the video might violate data protection laws
reply
I stand corrected, what is illegal is to operate them continuously, not to just have them as I simplified above.

"If, for example, you use a continuous recording of the road in which other vehicles' license plates are visible to defend yourself against a traffic ticket, you could be violating data protection, a serious offense that could be punishable by a fine of up to 300,000 euros."

https://www.race.es/camara-para-coche

reply
I don't understand what you're saying? Are you saying that the only reason people don't do crime is because of a lack of privacy? That's patently nonsensical.
reply