British Airways has just updated its policy regarding how passengers can behave onboard flights, as flagged by PYOK, and it’s a sensible change that we’re seeing at an increasing number of airlines.
Continue reading: British Airways Adds Restrictions To Taking Photos & Videos Onboard Flights
Share your questions, experiences, and thoughts below.
I feel like this is an issue that almost every airline could do more. It's 100% possible to create content and be respectful of both crew and other passengers, but I feel like most influencers take the "I paid to be here so I can do what I want" mentality.
KLM is another airline that explicitly mentions their own rule prohibiting photo/video of crew without authorization. Shouldn’t be filming anyone without consent, really. Seems sensible, within reason…
Love this! Hope every other airline out there follows along and, more importantly, enforces it.
I flew 5 flights on KLM and Aer Lingus last week and there was an announcement on every flight that photography was not permitted unless everyone in the photograph consented.
I agree in a private setting such as an airplane which is a bsuiness. Public setting? Asking everyone for consent? Hell no.
"...most influencers take the "I paid to be here so I can do what I want" mentality."
Exhibit A: Sam Chui.
Counterpoint - while ostensibly sensible, could this have a chilling effect on documenting misconduct? Say an airline has another Dr. Dao situation, and decides to use this language from their contract of carriage to ban people who post photos/videos of said misconduct?
While I agree with everything that’s been said, I think the one situation where it might not be favorable for the passenger is if an incident arises on board involving crew and you are recording, it can give them grounds for retaliation, like kicking you off the flight. Even if you’re just a bystander recording.
While I hate influencers as much as the next guy, if "flight attendants are here for your safety" then it only makes sense that these security officers in a public place can be recorded. There is no reasonabl expectation of privacy on a flight.
Comes over in a positive way in the cabin pa - you are welcome to take pictures and record as much content as you want during your flight today, but please do not take pictures of the crew or other passengers without consent.
‘Within reason’ … airplanes and airports are quasi-public settings. It’s nuanced.
Yes. Airlines want to avoid liability and the PR nightmare that United faced after UA3411.
Would that I were an official member, I would heart this. Reckon this is the primary reason behind this language.
Now they can wear political pins and never be accountable for it.
Now they can go on a power trip and never be accountable for it.
Because you can't prove it without a picture anymore. If you snitch, you threatened the crew. BA will ban you for life.
You just gotta love privacy for me and never for you doctrine. It's the NIMBY bible.
If you enjoyed this Dr. Dao-related content, Gary at VFTW recently post about a cell-phone-incident in Miami. Not the same as Dr. Dao, because United was at-fault there; but, it's interesting to see the 'legacy' of Dr. Dao in today's incidents (remove everyone to avoid the PR disaster of bloodying up passengers who do not comply.)
Virgin Atlantic have been making announcements about this for quite some time and I see it’s now in article 12 of their conditions of carriage. The amount of vlogging both on the ground in the lounges and in the air has got out of hand.
British police aren't going to beat the crap out of a passenger. That only realistically could happen in the US, so while your point is valid, it's unlikely to be an issue on BA.
"Now they can wear political pins and never be accountable for it.
Now they can go on a power trip and never be accountable for it."
Would you like a tissue, snowflake?
Canada is "this side of the pond". "behaviour" is spelled this way in all the 23 countries where English is primarily spoken as a native language (including Antigua and Barbuda, Australia, Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, Canada, Dominica, Grenada, Guyana, Ireland, Jamaica, Malta, New Zealand, St Kitts and Nevis, St Lucia, St Vincent and the Grenadines, Trinidad and Tobago and His Majesty's United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. There is one English-speaking country where the "u" is omitted from words like this: USA.
I've got 7 more paragraphs on this, if anyone's interested. Not to be pedantic.
I like this, should extend into general passengers too. Some these social media influencers and content creators totally disrespect people privacy and everybody become their content.
When the one country is USA, that means something monumental.
Like, the USA is the only country without single-payor healthcare... but we also have the best care for those who can afford it.
Canada, I am sorry to tell you, really sucks. I dated a girl from Mississauga who was rude and just a terrible human being whose parents had divorced (that's another huge red flag, but I digress).
I would not equate airports with aircraft cabins here, especially in the BA context.
An airport terminal may be quasi-public, but an aircraft cabin is a restricted, airline-controlled environment, and BA’s own conditions now specifically prohibit filming crew or other passengers without consent.
At check-in, or an announcement at the gate should quickly outline certain standards of behaviour. Including noise.
I was not going to read the link, but was curious. An interesting read that all should take a look at.
I loved this!
"We will allow you to use hearing aids and heart pacemakers". Well.....lol
Without enforcement, these laws, rules, norms are meaningless. I suspect people will continue to take photos or film, especially when there are incidents on-board, regardless. Sure, fine, airlines can attempt to sue/ban them afterwards, and maybe they'll deter, but it's unlikely. This announcement is mostly performative.
I'll check that out @1990.
Jerry - I concur. My concern is if the threat of a ban might have a chilling effect on passengers documenting misconduct, not that officers of the Met might start cracking skulls.
And yet they have opened the gates for pax to accept and make calls. when both acts are just as ridiculous
The FAA law supercedes their terms. Any flight from or to the US, you can film. I would do that just to piss them off.
This is terrible. Airlines are Common Carriers and perform public utilities, and you have rights to document it, just like on a bus or subway.
I hope the EU bans these one-sided clauses in the contracts.
Your're 100% correct.
It only reduces accountability, which is the main purpose.
You love having no proof? Like when they dragged out David Dao on United Airlines?
Wow, a new form of fascism.
This is fair enough. People can take photos of themselves, or their food etc. But don't take photos where others get in the photo. This is reasonable.
I called out sam chui on his channel for just filming another passenger without their consent (maybe 5 years ago). business class, filming a female passenger and how they were served during the boarding process
he just deleted the comment
Incorrect. US airlines may be common carriers, but in many other jurisdictions airlines are not. Virgin Australia’s conditions of carriage, for example, specifically states that,
“We are not a common carrier and, acting reasonably, may refuse to carry any person or Baggage, whether or not a Booking has been accepted or processed by us.”
British Airways has a long, long list of reasons why they can refuse carriage, or ban a passenger from travelling with them again in the future. Refusing to obey a reasonable instruction from crew is on the list.
By your logic, airlines would be unable to refuse boarding to anyone, no matter how drunk, aggressive, uncooperative, or generally disagreeable they are. I’d also suggest that if a crew member of a US airline requests that you stop taking photos you’d be well advised to cooperate.
If people were discreet and reasonable with their pic taking/content making I don't think this stuff would ever be an issue.
As an FA (or passenger) am I particularly bothered if someone's picture or video they are sending to their friends back home has me in the background for a nanosecond? No.
As an FA or a passenger am I bothered if someone making content to upload to god only knows what online platforms sticks a camera directed at me to then later provide the 'narrative' on what happened and can control the start and end of said narrative? Absolutely.
And we are seeing way too much of the latter. Especially crew, just trying to go about their normal duties which yes, occasionally puts them into conflict with customers. The last thing they need is the dialogue being distorted by an 8sec 'reel' posted to all and sundry online.
It is just about accountability really. Am I allowed to do whatever I want on a plane even though it annoys other people? No. Can I be offloaded for being incorrectly dressed? Yes. Can I be offloaded for making inappropriate comments? Yes. So this is just another addition to the long list.
PeteAU and this is exactly the issue we see repeated time and time again around the world - most recently when some American blogger was filming herself crying because she was offloaded from a Ryanair flight after arriving late and causing the gate agent a b*tch.
Individuals who think the world's rules are the same as the country they are from.
Guess what....they ain't Mary.
So BA says no to filming BA when they drag someone down isle to give their seat to someone else. And you think you should ask permission to video that? Stupid
In Defence of Sam Chui.
There have been past comments and those below about the conduct of Sam Chui, which in my opinion are inexcusably inaccurate. We were both passengers on an CX aircraft some years ago, I had no idea who Sam was at that time. It was only after checking out some SeatMaps reviews did the penny drop.
During the flight his conduct onboard was exemplary. He treated his fellow passengers and staff with the utmost courtesy. Those FA’s whom he asked to assist him were more than happy to accommodate his requests.
Why some berate him on this website is beyond my comprehension ….
Could it be jealousy because he is successful?
Could it be racism because he is Chinese?
Or, could it be the fact that he is heterosexual?
There is overriding proof that he is not the offensive blogger which some attempt to paint him …. his ability to position cameras in cockpits should be enduring testimony to his character.
Thank you RB, 1990Bot is simply being pedantic with me. I suppose that I deserve his attempted rebuttal, I was rather short with him following a very near miss frontal vehicle encounter.
What the likes of 1990Bot forget, is the that if it wasn’t for my English forebears he would be speaking French today. The main thing is that Ben, receives two more clicks.
Tell us you're Aero dumb without telling us you're dumb.
"Those FA’s whom he asked to assist him were more than happy to accommodate his requests."
They must be more than happy.
Because they are paid by the same people that paid for Sam.
Also the same people that can write whatever rule they want.
People don't hate Sam.
We just all see through the hypocrisy.
Don't ask me willywiener.
You're thinking with your willy again.
Ask the snowflakes who actually called out these flag pins and all those airlines who yield.
First answer, jealousy because he is successful. Not because he is Chinese or Heterosexual.
I resent anyone who tries to photograph or record me in a public place. I think it is rude and disrespectful.
Of course this was never an issue until smartphones came along.