3 ms·
You completely misunderstand my point. Which is probably my fault. I'll elaborate. I'm not so concerned about the legal ramifications of surreptitously recor
by nobody9999 4y ago
You completely misunderstand my point.
Which is probably my fault. I'll elaborate.
I'm not so concerned about the legal ramifications of surreptitously recording conversations. I would never do that, as I believe it's unethical to do so.
Whether it's legal (and in many places, only one party needs to know that a recording is being made) or not, I believe that recording someone without their knowledge is unethical. Full stop.
That's it. I don't care (too much) about the law or whether or not there's any real jeopardy if someone breaks that law. It's still wrong.
Some may disagree with that assessment. But I do not want to be surreptitiously (I keep using that word. It definitely means what I think it means.) recorded.
tl;dr: Surreptitiously recording other people in the course of everyday life is wrong and unethical, regardless of circumstance.
- tallanvor 4y agoIt is your opinion that it's unethical to record people without informing them, and it's fine to take that position. My position is that the act of recording someone without their knowledge is not inherently unethical, and that the reason for the recording and how you use it is what determines whether or not you are doing something unethical.