RNLI TV cameras

[boomerangben]

At least generally at sea you won't have the general public filming you on their phones and then up loading it directly to You Tube like they might if you had an accident on land. I can't see what the fuss is about. Rescue at sea is about the only environment these days when you, the casualty, has some say on what footage gets used.

 

[Poignard]

At least generally at sea you won't have the general public filming you on their phones and then up loading it directly to You Tube like they might if you had an accident on land. .

Well anyone who does that deserves to have his phone broken - on his teeth. What sort of sick creep wants to film other people in trouble for no good reason, or watch it?

 

[awol]

Well anyone who does that deserves to have his phone broken - on his teeth. What sort of sick creep wants to film other people in trouble, or watch it?

I seem to remember Jeremy Beadle making quite a career out of buying such videos for £200 a pop and putting them on the box.

 

[emnick]

Cameras

You shouldn't even be asking the question because you shouldn't be thinking of invading people's privacy in the first place. You are a rescue service - not part of the entertainment industry.

+1

 

[rotrax]

Well, I don't give a flying f**k. If and when I need extracting from the excrement I will be happy to see a rescuer with the ability and wherewithal for my extraction and if he brings a whole tv production team with him, I don't care. If you guys don't want to be on the telly, either don't get into the proverbial or just drown like gentlemen.

+1!

 

[Poignard]

I seem to remember Jeremy Beadle making quite a career out of buying such videos for £200 a pop and putting them on the box.

It still goes on - there's a bald-headed bloke with a big shirt collar on TV every weekend showing videos of people injuring themselves.

 

[Seajet]

Yes I'd rather 'drown like a gentleman' but my crew may feel differently and I'd think it unsporting to force the decision on them.

The thought of a replayed video loop at the club bar of one in trouble is hardly likely to encourage calling for help; and 'distress' means a lot of different things to people of varying experience.

What's next, 'Has British Talent Got Flares' with marks out of 10 for the firework display ?!

 

[rotrax]

Yes I'd rather 'drown like a gentleman' but my crew may feel differently and I'd think it unsporting to force the decision on them.

The thought of a replayed video loop at the club bar of one in trouble is hardly likely to encourage calling for help; and 'distress' means a lot of different things to people of varying experience.

What's next, 'Has British Talent Got Flares' with marks out of 10 for the firework display ?!

I suspect that your very strong feelings on this matter are clouding your judgement. I am certain that the fact that some RLNI rescue craft are fitted with cameras would not be a factor in you- or any other sailor- calling them if a vessel or lives were in danger. I take an opposing view, and we are both entitled to so do. As far as I am concerned its no big deal. It has been made very clear that no recordings would be released or broadcast without permission. That will do for me.

 

[awol]

Like most sailors I spend a fair amount of brain time on the "what ifs" hopefully with the result that my actions may be vaguely appropriate if/when the "what if" actually occurs. Reading about what to do and watching training videos is great but the real-life RNLI rescue videos add another dimension. Being able to draw a parallel between the mess I'm actually in and others' situations might, I hope, make my decision making better. Vicarious learning from such incidents, even if tinged with schadenfreude, is reason enough to encourage wider use of cameras.

 

[Sybarite]

Well anyone who does that deserves to have his phone broken - on his teeth. What sort of sick creep wants to film other people in trouble for no good reason, or watch it?

This reminds me of the people who upload fight films.

Somebody did it in France. The result was that it provided the proof of the aggression which sent the aggressor to jail. His friend, filming, was also sent to jail because there is a crime in France called "non-assistance to a person in danger."

By law you must help people in trouble.

 

[chanelyacht]

I am not surprised by 'head cams' on self agrandaising police, but I hope I never see an ambulance Paramedic filming my girlfriend when she's lying unconscious after a car accident with her skirt up, for fundraising, showing to his mates or Youtube.

My sister is a paramedic in London, and she does wear a small camera.

The reason is simple - it helps prosecute the people who think it's fair game, to, to date, punch her in the face (twice), kick her in the back whilst she's attending to someone, and throw bottles at her. This is a normal Saturday night, not a riot.

The crews have no access to the footage.

 

[Sybarite]

the harsh reality is that the RNLI is effectively in competition with every other charity for donations, there is only so much money available, and it is important to keep its activities in the public eye.

Video and photos has proved to be a very cost-effective way of doing so.

Juan Twothree

(a volunteer lifeboat crewman, as you may have gathered)

[/I]

I have every respect for the bravery and dedication of lifeboat volunteers.

However as far as finances are concerned maybe somebody should compare the RNLI with the French model.

The first thing to notice is that in terms of boats, crews and rescues the two services are in the same ball-park.

At the end of 2010, the RNLI had reserves of £550m - these increased by £25m in the year.

The RNLI have more people earning over £60k pa than the total number of permanent employees in the SNSM, most of whom are lifeboat service mechanics. Six people (RNLI) earned over £100K and pension reserves totalled £38m.

 

[topline]

As a serving crew member i must say the last thing i need to think about when launching to someone in distress is have i turned the camera on!

The RNLI expects more and more of its volunteers every year, the last thing i want to do when having already spend a few hours on a service call, washed and refuelled the boat, repaired any damage and filled in the service report is to sit in front of a commuter editing the footage so it can be distributed around the world.

In my mind - Waste of money (something the RNLI is very good at) and time (the RNLI is very good at waisting Volunteers Time)

rant over time for coffee

 

[Mudisox]

I have every respect for the bravery and dedication of lifeboat volunteers.

However as far as finances are concerned maybe somebody should compare the RNLI with the French model.

The first thing to notice is that in terms of boats, crews and rescues the two services are in the same ball-park.

At the end of 2010, the RNLI had reserves of £550m - these increased by £25m in the year.

The RNLI have more people earning over £60k pa than the total number of permanent employees in the SNSM, most of whom are lifeboat service mechanics. Six people (RNLI) earned over £100K and pension reserves totalled £38m.

+1

 

[Poignard]

I have every respect for the bravery and dedication of lifeboat volunteers.

.

+1

and also for those who collect on RNLI's behalf.

The RNLI is very good at collecting donations. I have just been down to our local Waitrose and, standing outside in the rain, is a man collecting for the RNLI. Little old ladies are putting cash into it. Who on earth do they think it's for? I wonder if they would be so generous if they knew the money might be used to rescue the likes of me (staggering under the burden of the quails' eggs, anchovies and champagne I had just bought) from my luxury yacht after I had got myself into difficulties through failing to take account of the weather or other incompetence.

 

[Deleted member 36384]

I don't have an issue with it if consent is required for public viewing. I see it as a modern way of capturing information that would be very useful in a post rescue analysis. I assume that such an analysis is currently carried out in the form of a written report where details are transcribed from memory or a written log from the lifeboat boat. Now, the RNLI have the ability to video and extract data from that. It appears to me to be a very useful modern aid.

On a personal note I would not give consent for my personal details or vessel details to be made public via the RNLI or anyone else if I have a choice in the matter.

 

[Seajet]

My sister is a paramedic in London, and she does wear a small camera.

The reason is simple - it helps prosecute the people who think it's fair game, to, to date, punch her in the face (twice), kick her in the back whilst she's attending to someone, and throw bottles at her. This is a normal Saturday night, not a riot.

The crews have no access to the footage.

Seems to me this is fair enough for use in evidence if tightly controlled, especially for a woman doing that job; not however when plastered on the BBC & Youtube showing the boat name etc.

 

[Indie ILB]

Are the independant lifeboats doing the same? Hullo Coastguard we are sinking and want to negotiate a non "YouTube" rescue!

Stepping into a sensitve thread and hope my answers give a little understanding to the Independent Lifeboat servicies out there.

There are some whom use on-board camera's, these however are not the £2,500 ILB or £7,000+ camera's as used by the RNLI, the service I know of has sponsorship from a camera company and thus did not occure costs to the funding of / from their station.

The reason they took the view point of using an on-board camera was 6 years ago, when they noticed the RNLI footage was becoming stronge in the world and was placing them to keep with trends of the world.

'ALL' camera's that they have used have been sponsered and can not see how the RNLI would be able to match an agreement for their fleet, Independent service = one station.

The Independent Lifeboat operates the same ethics, request permission, if the request is 'not to be used', then the footage is never seen outside of the station - as used for training aid.

They have been contacted by news agencies to have footage released, but never have to this day due to the request of not to be used and respected that request.

They also use then same thinking pattern, when to film and when not to also.

The Independent Lifeboat is lucky to have their sponsorship with the camera company (different from the RNLI) and are greatful for the companys support.
But an agreement like that on a huge scale would never work and thus the RNLI have to purchase their equipment.

Thats the bug bear and understand that, the costing is massive and the equipment is some what dated, the camera's used are custom built by the RNLI and could be cost effective if thinking was chaged - it would save £2,000 off the costing for an ILB give or take - also a better image and audio as well.

But the main point is cost and the matter of permission.

Permission should be requested again after the rescue, to give the person(s) time to reflect and also to make sure that the permission of use is understood.

I dont see RNLI recues on Harry Hills program and dont think we ever will

Also, as comments on here suggest, its an awareness tool, what they do and how your support assists them to help save lives at sea, be it the RNLI or Independent Lifeboats, they do things that people never see if the camera was not there, yes they have got this far without them, but what about the future, people like to see where their donations go and how it helps those in their moment of need.

It is not to make people feel silly or take a look at what these lot done - but more of a look, here is what we do out there, away from you safe and warm in your house.

Costings will always be there and is a matter of how well the money is spent on the equipment and its future use.

Independent Lifeboats have the same questions, good tool or bad tool, its weather they can arrange an agreement to save or get sponsorship.

The thread could go on for a long time, but really is down to cost and not that of permission worries as that is fully covered to all who are assisted.