Reiter's Camera Phone Report

Man in China beaten to death after using camera phone to record protests

A Chinese man was beaten to death after using his camera phone to record protests of residents in a rural village in China who were upset about the government’s decision to establish a garbage dump near a residential area, according to The Guardian.

Wei Wenhua, the general manager of a company owned by the local water resources bureau, was pulled from his car and beaten by chengguan, enforcers who are paid by local governments to deal with crowds, the article says.

For years I have written in this weblog, been quoted in the press and spoken at conferences about my fears that people taking camera phone photos and videos of government activities would be killed, maimed and/or jailed.  It has begun to happen.

Prediction coming true

Because camera phones are becoming so ubiquitous, consumers are increasingly likely to record newsworthy events, often before professional journalists and photographers.  Some people will knowingly risk their lives to take photos and videos of government abuses, military actions, demonstrations and other potentially dangerous situations.

The bad news is what I predicted years ago is happening.  Camera phone users are being hurt or killed.  The good news is consumers with camera phones are making it much more difficult for miscreants to hide what they’re doing.

This always-connected wireless imaging revolution is still in the early stages.  We are just beginning to see, for example, live streaming broadcasting from cellular phones, that I’ve written about in my mobile television weblog and in one of my weekly mobile communications “Thinkernet” columns (see below) for CMP’s “Internet Evolution.”

Journalists, bloggers risk prison sending Myanmar protest photos, videos

Bloggers in Myanmar (Burma) are using cellular phones to transmit photos and videos of anti-government protests occurring in that country and risking years in prison because of the government’s strict policies about Internet usage and information dissemination, according to an article in The Age.

As the article says, “The Government heavily regulates every website that carries Burmese news or information, and bars access to web-based email and general internet use.  Mobiles [sic] phones are expensive and difficult to obtain, further limiting communication.”

Aung Zaw, the editor of Irrawaddy, a news magazine for expatriate Burmese in Thailand, says journalists and bloggers who send information to the magazine risk imprisonment so Irrawaddy has to be extremely careful about not putting them in any danger.

I searched YouTube for “Myanmar” and see there are numerous videos about the protest but I can’t tell whether any were recorded by camera phones (see below).

Revolutionary application

One of the reasons I started this weblog and continue to write it is because camera phones are one of the most revolutionary wireless applications I’ve seen in my 29 years of analyzing mobile communications. 

The ability of ordinary people to shoot photos and videos of politically charged events and post them almost instantaneously highlights one of the most important benefits of camera phones to society.

Russian hospital patient's camera phone video highlights "gagged" babies

Russians are shocked over reports of a nurse who put tape over babies' mouths and also taped pacifiers to their mouths to prevent their crying.  The situation is undoubtedly generating more publicity because of a woman patient in the hospital who used her camera phone to video record a baby in a cot with tape over his mouth (see left).

According to the many news reports, some of which posted the video (such as BBC News and CBS), the woman at the hospital in Yekaterinburg (Russia's fifth largest city) heard the muffled cries of babies and went to see what was going on.  When she saw babies with tape over their mouths, she demanded a nurse remove the tape.

The nurse said the crying was disturbing the staff from doing their work and told the patient to mind her own business, according to the BBC News.  When the patient insisted, the nurse removed the tape, but later placed it back on.

Russian hospital problems

Apparently this isn't an isolated incident.  The Guardian reports, "The case has provoked outrage in Russia and drawn attention to the country's overstretched health system.  Nurses are badly paid and are often responsible for large numbers of patients."

The Guardian says the nurse was responsible for caring for 25 babies, many or all of whom were orphans (news reports aren't sure about that).  Hospital officials have said the tape doesn't completely cover the babies' mouths and it's done not to stop crying but to prevent the pacifier from falling on the floor.

The nurse responsible has been suspended, the head of the hospital has been reprimanded and Russian prosecutors are reviewing the situation.

Camera phone's value

As Dan Gillmor, director of the Center for Citizen Media, writes in his weblog, "And once again, we’re seeing the power of the citizen journalist to force things into the open that institutions don’t want to have the rest of us know about."

Also once again we're seeing the power of camera phones -- devices that are affordable for much of the world and that are carried in situations where a regular camera or video recorder would never be available.

Slate examines good and bad aspects of camera phones

Slate has published an interesting article about the history and effects of camera phones, discussing the good and bad, with a slight emphasis on the negative.

A video (see below) also accompanies the article.

Michael Agger writes in the conclusion that sums up the article:  "We'll see the best of things, we'll see the worst of things, we'll see everything."

Good and bad

He discusses the good aspects of camera phones by pointing out, as examples of their use in the London terrorist bombings and helping the police.

"Yet, despite the fun and occasional worthiness, the cell phone camera has launched a thousand jackasses," Agger says.  Another problem is the loss of privacy. 

A two-edged sword is sharing everything we do.  He says, "When a van catches fire in front of our house, we and our neighbors are now out on the lawn recording.

"We e-mail this to our friends, who testify to the enormity of the event, and then we all await the next sensation.  This impulse can be positive, but it also fuels the increasingly destructive American habit of oversharing."

Fostering aggressiveness

Camera phones have also made us more "aggressive" in situations where we are "insecure."  If we see a celebrity with his children, we're more likely to take a photo to sell to Scoopt than to than ask if we could a photo posing with him.

"No wonder famous people don't want to hang out with us," Agger says.

New York City wants camera phone system for emergency, non-emergency purposes

New York City wants to enable residents to be able to transmit camera phone photos to the E911 system for emergencies as well as to the new 311 system for non-emergency purposes, according to an article in Newsday.

New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg in his State of the City Address (see left), said yesterday, "This year, we'll begin a revolutionary innovation in crime-fighting:  Equipping 911 call centers to receive digital images and videos New Yorkers send from cell phones and computers something no other city in the world is doing.

"If you see a crime in progress or a dangerous building condition you'll be able to transmit images to 911, or online to NYC.GOV.  And we'll start extending the same technology to 311 to allow New Yorkers to step forward and document non-emergency quality of life concerns holding City agencies accountable for correcting them quickly and efficiently."

The city has not yet signed a contract for the camera phone system., Newsday reports.

Emergency + non-emergency uses

John A. Feinblatt, the mayor's criminal justice coordinator, says in Newsday, "Information is the bedrock of good law enforcement.  The more information that the police have and the more quickly that they get it, the more likely that they are going to fight a crime."

Using camera phones for these purposes -- emergency and non-emergency applications -- isn't new but New York would be at the forefront, especially if it integrates its 311 system.  That system is designed as a single telephone number for residents to call to contact city services.

Many cities, including those in Japan, accept camera phone photos relating to crimes, automobile accidents, for example.

London's non-emergency project

Although cities in the United States and abroad are looking at camera phones more for emergency purposes, I know of at least on municipality that uses camera phone photos to help remove graffiti.

As I wrote two years ago, Lewisham, a borough of London, has been asking residents to send photos of graffiti in the area.  The graffiti would be removed and the residents notified.

Update (2/2/07):  I just checked the Lewisham Web site and the camera phone project is still going strong.  In fact, people aren't transmitting photos of just graffiti but also are sending images of potholes and garbage and refrigerators dumped in the area (see below).

Perhaps New York City should contact Lewisham to learn about its experiences in anticipation of expanding the camera phone effort to non-emergency 311 situations.  New York planners will need to determine what type of non-emergency photos they will accept.

Support for New York's plan

An article in The New York Times reports enthusiasm for the plan.  Jerome M. Hauer, an antiterrorism consultant in Washington, D.C. who was director of emergency management under Mayor Rudolph Giuliani, says in the article, "Anything you can do to advance the information flow is good.

"Imagine someone caught in a hostage situation transmitting pictures or video.  It’s just an incredible amount of information that can be gathered from fairly simple technology."

I've written frequently about the use of camera phones for public safety and other security applications.  For example, in August 2006 I wrote about PowerPhone that offers a system for integrating camera phone photos into E911 systems. 

Perhaps that's one of the company's New York will consider for its camera phone initiative.

PowerPhone

Update:  When I was writing this article I didn't realize that PowerPhone has issued a press release proclaiming that it offers a system for integrating camera phone photos with E911 networks.  Strike while the iron -- or Bloomberg speech -- is hot!

CNET News wrote about PowerPhone in its article about New York's plan. The article says PowerPhone's camera phone module for its main emergency software package is used in several cities including Douglas County, Colo.; Seward, Alaska; Tolland County, Conn. and Dade County, Miss.

As CNET News reports, the procedure isn't a one-step process.  When a caller dials 911 and says he has a photo or video to send, he then has to hang up and wait for the 911 dispatcher to transmit an SMS asking for the image.

Callers cannot transmit an image while also speaking with the 911 operator.

$10,000 license

CNET News notes that PowerPhone camera phone module isn't inexpensive.  A license costs $10,000 so if an emergency center has four dispatchers, that cost is $40,000.

"At a time when many call centers are struggling to find enough money to upgrade their systems to handle enhanced 911 calls from cell phone callers, accepting video and photos may be low on their list of priorities," the article says. 

PowerPhone is trying to get grants from government and industry to help pay for its camera phone module.

Customer education

Update (2/2/07): I am quoted in an Associated Press article about the New York camera phone project and I was interviewed today by WCBS Radio in New York.  After speaking to WCBS I called back the reporter to emphasize the importance of customer education.

It's important for New York to post information about the procedures for transmitting camera phone photos for 911 and, eventually, 311 applications.  Consumers need easy-to-understand information about how to transmit camera phone images to the 911 system and what images are appropriate.

It also would be useful for New York to post screen shots of camera phone menus so users may see examples of transmitting photos to 911.  When you're in an emergency situation where you want to send a photo it's a lot better to know how to do it in advance.

When the city is ready to promote the 911 camera phone system, it also should publicize the exact URL of its Web site section that includes this type of information for consumers.

Second camera phone video appears showing Saddam Hussein's condition after the hanging

A second camera phone video showing Saddam's condition after he was hanged -- including showing a close-up of a bloody neck wound (see left) -- has appeared on the Internet, according an Associated Press (AP) report on CBS News. 

I have watched the video and it's posted on LiveLeak.com. 

Compared to the first camera phone video that shows Saddam's execution, this one, I think, is much more gruesome.  I purposely clipped a still frame for this weblog article that is blurry. 

As I mentioned, the video has a close-up of that neck wound.  If you didn't want to watch the first camera video you definitely will not want to see this second video.

Utilize caution

If you try to see the video by going to LiveLeak.com's home page, when you click on the link to the video you should see a warning about the graphic content and you are asked to click again to view the video.  However, the first link I posted goes directly to the video.

My business is U.S. and overseas wireless data consulting, with an emphasis on camera phones (among other wireless multimedia applications) and it's important for me to understand the dynamics and social ramifications of camera phone videos.  We have all seen grisly special effects in the movies, but this is reality (at least I assume this camera phone video is genuine, but that will be determined).

So, please be very sure you want to see this before you click on the link.

Describing the video

The 27-second video was first posted on an Iraqi news site that supports the former dictator's outlawed Baath Party, the article says.  The video seems to have been taken soon after Saddam was executed and then placed in a white shroud and on a gurney, AP reports.

The video begins panning the body of Saddam that's covered with the shroud.  When the video reaches his head area, the shroud is pulled back to show his head and neck, AP says.

"His head is unnaturally twisted at a 90 degree angle to his right.  It shows a gaping bloody wound, circular in shape, about an inch below his jaw line on the left side of his neck.

"His left cheek is marked with red blotches, and there is blood on the shroud where it covered his head," the article says.

The AP description is accurate.  Think before you decide to see the video.

Video's audio

According to AP, voices are heard on the video and AP translates them into English from the Arabic.

The article says, "As the shroud is pulled back, one voice says, 'Hurry up, hurry up.  I'm going to count from one to four.  One, two....

"'Hurry up you're going to get us into a catastrophe.'

"Then another voice, apparently the man taking the pictures, says, 'Just one second, just one second, Abu Ali.  I'm about finished.'

"Then a third voice says, 'Abu Ali, you take care of this.'"

Does NBC's Brian Williams understand ramifications of camera phone videos?

I like Brian Williams, the anchor of NBC's "Nightly News," and he does a good job.  But I wonder if he truly "gets it" when it comes to camera phones.

Here's why:  In Williams' lead in (see below) to a report about the uproar over the camera phone video of Saddam Hussein's hanging he characterizes it as a "grainy, poor quality cellular phone video." 

Williams' statement is completely true, and you may see that for yourself by viewing the video by following the link in an article I wrote on Saturday.  (I don't know if there's a direct link to Williams' lead in, but you may go to the "Nightly News" site and look for the video "Saddam supporters march in outrage" (see below).

It is indeed a poor quality video compared to a regular video camera and even compared to what you can get from many camera phones.  (I have a Nokia N93 camera phone, that Nokia has given me to test, that can shoot videos at 30 frames per second.)

Importance, not quality

But so what?!  It's not the quality of the video that's important but its newsworthiness.  And boy is it newsworthy.

The execution video has produced a firestorm in the Muslim community around the world and has major political ramifications.  Unlike the official Iraqi government video -- that ends with the noose being placed around Saddam's neck -- the camera phone video records the sectarian taunts of Saddam's executioners and/or witnesses before he was hanged.

CNN reports Munqith Faroon, the chief Iraqi prosecutor during Saddam's trial, says all witnesses were searched and had to place their cellular phones into a box before the execution.  He says he doesn't know why people had phones (see below).

However, he says two Iraqi officials in the room kept their phones.

Just who is humiliated?

Mowaffak Al-Rubaie, the Iraqi national security advisor, told CNN that there was no "humiliation" of Saddam during the execution (see below).  But he said this before the camera phone video was released.

Now, because of that camera phone video, we know the truth of what happened.  The irony of the situation hasn't escaped the world:  The brutal dictator seems to be the most dignified person in the room.

What's deplorable?

Speaking of the truth, I'm not exactly sure what John Prescott, Britain's Deputy Prime Minister, meant when he told the BBC Radio 4 "Today" program about the video.  Prescott says, "I think the manner was quite deplorable really....

"Frankly to get the kind of recorded message coming out is totally unacceptable and I think whoever is involved and responsible for it should be ashamed of themselves."

I read the quotes in the BBC News article and I also listened to the audio file of the interview that accompanies the article.  I can't determine whether Prescott is upset because the camera phone video was released or because Saddam was taunted.

Confusion

I wasn't going to mention Prescott but I read that one London Times writer also is confused.  Rosemary Behan writes about Prescott's statements, "So was he attacking what happened, or the leaking of what happened?  Worryingly, his words suggest the latter."

Whoever interviewed Prescott on "Today" should have asked him to clarify his remarks.  [This is my comment.]

(Update:  The New York Times reports Prescott's comments referred to the taunting.) 

The headline of Behan's commentary is, "Without that shaky video we'd still be in the dark."  And that is the crux of the matter.

Knowing the truth

The world knows the truth because of the camera phone video.

As Behan writes, "Even more chilling than the actions of Saddam’s guards is the thought that without the escape of this amateur video we would still be in the dark about what really happened, and about the true and apparently now official nature of the sectarian forces driving Iraq. 

"In that we must be thankful for the truth, however sordid it is."

The Guardian "gets it"

Dan Glaister, a writer for another British newspaper, The Guardian (that I quite enjoy for its technology coverage), also understands the importance of the camera phone.  Indeed, he writes that while major news organizations debated whether to show any part of the camera phone video, it was being uploaded to many Web sites.

"Like so much footage shot on the ubiquitous mobile phone, from acts of police brutality to misbehaving politicians, the raw information had circumvented the traditional instruments of control," Glaister says.

He also writes what many broadcasters know, "The amateur quality of the video, with its inadequate, green-hued light, erratic audio and jerky camerawork, seem to add to its authenticity." 

The public not only will accept poor quality video but sometimes perceive it to be more "real" -- just as we listen to poor quality audio and watch shaky, pixelated video of satellite feeds from foreign locations and think, "hey, the correspondent really is there!"

As for Williams....

Personally, I'm not sure if it's, well, decent, to broadcast Saddam swinging with his neck broken in the noose.  But as for broadcasting the taunts, even major media outlets are showing that.

So....to come back to Brian Williams.  The lead in to his report seems to me to demean the camera phone video rather than highlighting its importance.  And because of that, I think he made a mistake.

Perhaps I'm being much too picky.  Perhaps Williams understands the power of the approximately one billion people who have cellular phones that can take photos and, for a sizable percentage of the phones, also record videos.

Perhaps he realizes that a poor quality camera phone video can be as important as a professionally shot video.  (Frankly, I can't imagine that he doesn't understand.)  Perhaps he just messed up and would realize, with hindsight, that his lead in didn't provide the correct emphasis.

Or, as I said, perhaps I'm being too picky.

Iraqi prime minister investigates camera phone video leaker, taunts

The camera phone video of Saddam Hussein's execution (as I wrote on Saturday) that is circulating around Iraq (as I also wrote) has become a cause celebre around the world as thousands of Muslims protest the taunting of Saddam by executioners and witnesses during his final moments.

Iraq's Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki ordered an investigation to determine who leaked the video and who among the witnesses to the execution taunted Saddam, according to an Associated Press (AP) report. 

AP quotes Sami al-Askari, a close al-Maliki political adviser, as saying al_Maliki had "ordered the formation of an investigative committee in the Interior Ministry to identify who chanted slogans inside the execution chamber and who filmed the execution and sent it to the media."

Officials had phones

Although cellular phones were supposedly taken from witnesses before they boarded the helicopter to fly to the execution site, some people did have phones, AP says.  Munqith al-Faroon, an Iraqi who prosecuted Saddam during the trial, says "two top officials...had their mobile phones with them."

Houston health policy director suggests taking camera phone photos for anti-smoking ban

Houston's mayoral health policy director, Elena Marks, suggests that consumers who would see people breaking a proposed anti-smoking measure could take camera phone photos for evidence, according to an article in the Houston Chronicle.

The draft measure would ban smoking from bars in restaurants and in freestanding bars.  The measure would require bar owners to post no-smoking signs and ask customers to stop smoking.

However, the proposed legislation doesn't require owners to ask smokers to leave.

In the article, Marks puts at least some of the onus on camera phone users.   She suggests they could file complaints and provide proof by taking photos of smokers and also trying to obtain their identification.

[Sent via TypePad wireless e-mail with RIM BlackBerry 8700g]