It's fair to be concerned about the impact of ubiquitous surveillance and how as a society we hate and love it at the same time. But two points:

- community enforcement of social norms through pointing & laughing, scolding, or even shunning & kicking out is as old as humanity, it's the scale that has changed over time

- to many of us, the more important norm violation is someone having a romantic relationship within their workplace chain of command (potential for favoritism, harassment, etc.) rather than marital infidelity

...going to a ColdPlay concert.

[disclaimer: I quite like ColdPlay myself, but I'm aware of the stereotypes: cf. Phill Jupitus on QI a few times]

As one wag put it on LinkedIn: imagine being married to someone for 20 years and then finding out via the Internet that he likes Coldplay.

Workplace affairs have existed forever, long before HR policies and power imbalance language. Now, strip away the HR talk and a lot of the outrage boils down to: 'I wouldn’t do it, but I’m angry someone else did and got ahead.'

Is that if they'd just reacted like normal people when they found themselves on the big screen, they would have escaped scrutiny. It is only the way they reacted immediately covering faces and crouching down as if they were on the FBI's most wanted list that made people notice it. That's why Chris Martin called them out, and why people who happened to have recorded that on their phones would have bothered to upload onto social media and why people who saw those posts would have looked to see if it was someone they recognized. And why that recognition became an instant huge internet meme rather than just gossip among their friends or co-workers. Well that and him happening to be the CEO of a billion dollar company no one has ever heard of.

I was "caught" on a kiss cam with my girlfriend once. We were kind of embarrassed when we saw ourselves not because we were doing anything wrong (no affairs or HR violations) but just being on a big screen in front of so many people caught us by surprise. If someone happened to have recorded us, and given the size of the crowd (not as big as that Coldplay concert but still very big) that's almost a given, it either was never posted on social media or if it was no one recognized us and alerted us about it.

Like I often tell my kids (and myself) if they're in an embarrassing situation: ACT confident -- parallel to "fake it 'til you make it" -- but quietly, without drawing attention. Don't act flustered, don't rush, don't draw attention, just be forgettable.

It's like Men in Black but without need for a Neuralyzer, since any group/audience usually has a significant Someone Else's Problem (SEP) field up. The SEP field is useful for blocking truly strange and remarkable things, so UNremarkable things are ignored by default. And exuding a quiet confidence only amplifies the effect. Like so many political aides who can zip in and out of frame while being ignored/forgotten.

(Once a year, I run the A/V for a live show of sorts for 5 nights, with much of the content created from scratch. No matter how panicked I am about the content, audio volumes, show flow, mistakes, etc., I have to put on my "game face" and confidently maintain control of myself and the show. Pretending I'm in charge of the whole room* helps me focus on nailing every cue. *Because I kind of am -- the visuals include "cue cards" to the stage and they'd be lost without me! And I'm never sorry for cueing a sound effect when I feel it fits -- most everyone loves how I bring the whole package. But if I let myself get nervous, then I might screw up and everyone would notice big time!)

1. The "Kiss cam" is not there to surveil, but as a service to highlight couples, as a kind of positive reward. It was not secret, Byron knew it existed and was watching the screen in real time even, but never guessed it would zoom in on him.

2. The bad side of surveillance is not that cheaters are caught, it is that that information is used for blackmail or to force the cheaters to do more bad things, especially politians. This incident has no overlap with that - quite the opposite.

Exactly. If you're going to snog your mistress in public you have to accept the risk that someone will see you. For some people, that's the rush, until they get caught. It really doesn't matter if it's a papparazo, a private eye, or a roving camera at a concert, it has nothing to do with an imagined surveillance state.

It’s not a ‘reward’, it’s a weaponised vibe check for normative couplehood. If you’re not smiling, kissing, or part of the spectacle - you’re the lesson.

Comment section so far just backs up the article.

My wife kept talking to me about this story, and some of the memes, but my response was "I just don't care about two people i've never heard of, having an affair". I just wish that was more peoples opinion too.

This is much more a study on how animals react when cornered. Fight or flight - or ignore.

During intermission between Metallica and Guns 'n Roses at the Superdome, it was an amateur upper-deck stripper cam.

Any technology is always a mix of good and bad.

It is useful to have cameras to records the misdeeds of those in power and authority, although governments are capable of protecting themselves...mostly. You may remember Matt Hancock kissing his aide on camera. What has been seen, etc. "Cabinet office minister Julia Lopez said that as a rule “there are not cameras sited within ministers’ offices”." [Guardian] Presumably so they can get away with stuff. Hancock was just unlucky.

Cams can be widely beneficial. I speak as a victim of crime who would have liked the perpetrators to have been caught on camera. Dashcams protect innocent people from road ragers and other criminals. Uniform cams protect workers, and women can use cams to protect themselves against abusive behaviour by providing irrefutable evidence. Cheating on your partner is a crappy thing to do and nobody is going to weep for you if you get caught.

But there are downsides. Upskirting. Voyeurism. Stalking. All of which carry penalties which are easy to impose as those responsible usually save (and back up) the evidence against them.

It is more concerning when police forces or retail stores use third rate AI with cameras. To deal with that we need very large automatic payouts for whenever they get it wrong. Large enough to focus minds, so that they do the hard work rather than pointing and clicking away a presumption of innocence.

We need to adapt, are and will. I'm sure El Reg's readers do not post on social media that they are on their hols (and so their house is empty), and only go dogging where there are no cameras. Survival of the fittest, etc.

One solution is for blokes to disguise themselves as women on the way to the shops and change back on their way home. After doing this regularly for a bit, you may begin to enjoy it. The silky underwear, mastering walking in heels, the glances your figure gets, the joy of a new frock. You are connecting with your inner femininity. Before you know it, a new you!

And come the glorious day, cams and cam monitoring facilities will always be primary targets when citizens rise up to overthrow their oppressors, in Tooting and beyond. Power to the people!

...but 404 media's hits a lot harder and goes more into depth about the issues around the tech.

https://www.404media.co/the-astronomer-ceos-coldplay-concert-fiasco-is-emblematic-of-our-social-media-surveillance-dystopia/