Opinion

Mosaic Journalism

By SCOTT T. HARDS

More and more over the past few years, it has become difficult to turn on television news without seeing someone's face obscured by a computer-generated mosaic or hidden from the camera in some other way. Virtually every interview involving a controversial topic seems to involve this technique. All too common here, the mosaic is seldom seen on television in other nations.

Why does this bother me? First, it creates a lack of accountability, both on the part of the interviewers and of the interviewees. When you see a secret interview, it's impossible to tell if the person speaking is, in fact, who they are supposed to be. It's all too easy for the media to use a member of their own staff to say the words they want to be heard. Though not widespread, this has, unfortunately, happened in the past.

The technique also gives the person being interviewed the ability to speak without taking responsibility for what they say. If their words are true, then there is no reason why they shouldn't be willing to put their name and face on it, unless their life would be jeopardized. In fact, that's the only time I believe I've seen a mosaic, or dark-room interview, on U.S. television — when somebody is revealing details about a crime they were involved in or have knowledge about.

Why then, in Japan, do people who are simply describing what they knew about a neighbor who was arrested, or about the inside details of their company after it has gone bankrupt, need to have their faces concealed? Are they lying? If not, then tell me who you are, or don't bother speaking out in the first place. When the authenticity of their words cannot be confirmed, it makes it far too easy for people to say anything they want.

The other reason that you see mosaics used is to protect people's privacy. The faces of the children of celebrities are blanked out when they are photographed in the park. The license plate numbers of people's cars are blurred. Unfortunately, in most of these cases, this "privacy" is being protected in situations where people didn't have a right to it in the first place, namely, when they are in a public place! If people don't want themselves or a family member to be seen, then they can stay at home, or wear a mask. But people, and that includes the media, have a free right to look at and photograph others in public. The same goes for license plates. Nobody gives you the right to conceal it, or the information about yourself that can be investigated with it. That's part of being a member of the public.

Perhaps the most absurd use I've seen of mosaics is the concealment of the handcuffs on a suspect in police custody. The logic here seems to involve protecting the suspect's human rights. Unfortunately, the media haven't noticed the huge inconsistency this creates. Not only does the mosaic emphasize, rather than conceal, the handcuffs, but showing a suspect in police custody in the first place, i.e. having lost their right to move freely, displays a far greater loss of fundamental rights than showing they have lost the right to move their hands about!

While advances in technology and changes in journalism have created a strong interest in protecting one's rights to privacy, it's important to remember that as a member of a public society, there are things that others do have a right to know about you.

Shukan ST: April 2, 1999

(C) All rights reserved