Cameras at the Big Debate

Just finished watching the live TV coverage of the Presidential candidates
debate, and I noticed that all the audience members at the end were taking
pictures of the protagonists with what appeared to be identical yellow
digital cameras. Do you suppose these were handed out as a security
precaution, or was there some commercial reason for this? (I don't know who
makes yellow cameras, but Kodak springs to mind!)

Paul

On Wed, 8 Oct 2008 15:55:54 +1000, "Paul Bartram" p.bartram AT OR
NEAR mysoul.com.au wrote:

Just finished watching the live TV coverage of the Presidential candidates
debate, and I noticed that all the audience members at the end were taking
pictures of the protagonists with what appeared to be identical yellow
digital cameras. Do you suppose these were handed out as a security
precaution, or was there some commercial reason for this? (I don't know who
makes yellow cameras, but Kodak springs to mind!)

The audiences at the debates are not allowed to bring in cameras or
cell phones. Note this comment by one person attending:
http://www.middletownjournal.com/hp/...testudent.html

"Those who scored tickets were asked to leave their cameras and mobile
phones at home and arrive at the Curb Event Center via shuttle four
hours before the debate with photo identification and, if necessary, a
small purse."

I think that disallowing personal cameras is a reasonable security
precaution. We don't know, in this day and age, what a small
electronic device contains. Also, it would have been distracting to
have people standing during the actual debate in order to get a better
camera angle. The disposable cameras were probably handed out at the
end of the debate. It would have been foolish to allow a camera with
flash to be used during the debate.

Disallowing mobile phones is a requirement that I think should be
extended to far more situations than political debates.

Before the anti-censorship comments start, attendance at a debate is
by invitation and not by right. If you are somewhere by invitation,
the host should be able to dictate the rules.

It is somewhat amusing to me that the handlers of the two candidates
settled on a 31 page document setting down the rules of the debates
including such things as how much range each candidate had in moving
around the stage. Score one for McCain and the need for
"pre-conditions". Probably the only point McCain scored last night.







--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

Paul Bartram wrote:
Just finished watching the live TV coverage of the Presidential candidates
debate, and I noticed that all the audience members at the end were taking
pictures of the protagonists with what appeared to be identical yellow
digital cameras. Do you suppose these were handed out as a security
precaution, or was there some commercial reason for this? (I don't know who
makes yellow cameras, but Kodak springs to mind!)

Interesting. Could have been a freebie offered for those entitled
(sorry, invited) to attend...


--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
-- usenet posts from gmail.com and googlemail.com are filtered out.

On Wed, 08 Oct 2008 11:40:18 -0400, Alan Browne
wrote Re Cameras at the Big
Debate:

Interesting. Could have been a freebie offered for those entitled
(sorry, invited) to attend...

...entitled to attend?
...invited to attend?

How about condemned to attend?

On Wed, 08 Oct 2008 09:03:08 -0400 tony cooper wrote:

| Disallowing mobile phones is a requirement that I think should be
| extended to far more situations than political debates.
|
| Before the anti-censorship comments start, attendance at a debate is
| by invitation and not by right. If you are somewhere by invitation,
| the host should be able to dictate the rules.

Yes, in the invitation situations, disallowing mobile phones is reasonable,
provided they do so IN ADVANCE with sufficient notice to allow people to
leave them at home OR if they don't do that, provide a means to SECURELY
check them in at the entrance so they can get them back on the way out.

But if it is a public event, with no advance notifications given in a
reasonable way, they must either allow them in (inspections OK) or provide
a SECURE check-in.

By SECURE check-in, they are liable for loses, too.

Telling people to take phones and cameras back out to the car is NOT an
acceptable alternative unless they ACCEPT LIABILITY FOR THEFT in the car.

Basically, anyone wanting to do an event where things like this need to be
restricted need to do their planning appropriately.

--
|WARNING: Due to extreme spam, googlegroups.com is blocked. Due to ignorance |
| by the abuse department, bellsouth.net is blocked. If you post to |
| Usenet from these places, find another Usenet provider ASAP. |
| Phil Howard KA9WGN (email for humans: first name in lower case at ipal.net) |

On Wed, 08 Oct 2008 11:42:51 -0500 Caesar Romano wrote:
| On Wed, 08 Oct 2008 11:40:18 -0400, Alan Browne
| wrote Re Cameras at the Big
| Debate:
|
|Interesting. Could have been a freebie offered for those entitled
|(sorry, invited) to attend...
|
| ..entitled to attend?
| ..invited to attend?
|
| How about condemned to attend?

I wouldn't have wanted to be there with that "no booing and hissing" rule.

--
|WARNING: Due to extreme spam, googlegroups.com is blocked. Due to ignorance |
| by the abuse department, bellsouth.net is blocked. If you post to |
| Usenet from these places, find another Usenet provider ASAP. |
| Phil Howard KA9WGN (email for humans: first name in lower case at ipal.net) |

On 9 Oct 2008 08:10:07 GMT, wrote:

On Wed, 08 Oct 2008 09:03:08 -0400 tony cooper wrote:

| Disallowing mobile phones is a requirement that I think should be
| extended to far more situations than political debates.
|
| Before the anti-censorship comments start, attendance at a debate is
| by invitation and not by right. If you are somewhere by invitation,
| the host should be able to dictate the rules.

Yes, in the invitation situations, disallowing mobile phones is reasonable,
provided they do so IN ADVANCE with sufficient notice to allow people to
leave them at home OR if they don't do that, provide a means to SECURELY
check them in at the entrance so they can get them back on the way out.

But if it is a public event, with no advance notifications given in a
reasonable way, they must either allow them in (inspections OK) or provide
a SECURE check-in.

By SECURE check-in, they are liable for loses, too.

Telling people to take phones and cameras back out to the car is NOT an
acceptable alternative unless they ACCEPT LIABILITY FOR THEFT in the car.

Basically, anyone wanting to do an event where things like this need to be
restricted need to do their planning appropriately.

What has this to do with the debate in question? The members of the
audience were notified in advance that mobile phones and cameras were
to be left at home.

http://www.middletownjournal.com/hp/...testudent.html



--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

wrote:
On Wed, 08 Oct 2008 11:42:51 -0500 Caesar Romano wrote:
| On Wed, 08 Oct 2008 11:40:18 -0400, Alan Browne
| wrote Re Cameras at the Big
| Debate:
|
|Interesting. Could have been a freebie offered for those entitled
|(sorry, invited) to attend...
|
| ..entitled to attend?
| ..invited to attend?
|
| How about condemned to attend?

I wouldn't have wanted to be there with that "no booing and hissing" rule.

Interesting. Do you hiss and boo a lot?

--
john mcwilliams

"tony cooper" wrote

What has this to do with the debate in question? The members of the
audience were notified in advance that mobile phones and cameras were
to be left at home.

http://www.middletownjournal.com/hp/...testudent.html

Well that seems pretty clear. I didn't realise it was a lottery-type
selection, I assumed the audience was selected much the same way a
high-profile jury is, with challenges from both sides. So it was really
fortuitous that an ex-marine got to be seated at the end of the front row
where McCain could do his comrade-in-arms thing with him and score points
(what are the odds?) :-)

But getting back to my original comments, if the debate was indeed shown
live and without in-built production delay, they must have handed out those
complimentary cameras pretty damn quick - they seemed to be everywhere
immediately after the forum was closed.

Paul

On 10/10/08 12:52 AM, in article
, "Paul Bartram" p.bartram
AT OR NEAR mysoul.com.au wrote:


"tony cooper" wrote

What has this to do with the debate in question? The members of the
audience were notified in advance that mobile phones and cameras were
to be left at home.

http://www.middletownjournal.com/hp/.../2008/10/08/hj
n100808debatestudent.html

Well that seems pretty clear. I didn't realise it was a lottery-type
selection, I assumed the audience was selected much the same way a
high-profile jury is, with challenges from both sides. So it was really
fortuitous that an ex-marine got to be seated at the end of the front row
where McCain could do his comrade-in-arms thing with him and score points
(what are the odds?) :-)

McCain was Navy.