A little Sunday brunch on the Riverside Line

Kid with bagel on the Green Line

A roving UHub photographer spotted a young nosher on the Green Line this morning.



Free tagging: 


Eating on the T

By on

A small child having a snack on the T is cute. Adults, on the other hand, eating what appear to be full meals, Chinese takeout orders in styrofoam containers, pungent orders from Chipotle, and other sloppy things dripping dressing and lettuce shreds...not so cute.

Be careful...

By on

I'm included when saying most parents would be creeped out if someone photographed their child and then posted the photo. I hope you received permission.

I'm not trying to be a jerk, just pointing out something that isn't realized unless you have children.

Courtesy? Perhaps. The law? Not at all.

By on

Kids have no more of an expectation of privacy out in public than do their parents.

As this is editorial use -- the photo's not being used to, say, hawk a bagel store -- no permission or release is needed.

It seems you missed the point

By on

I don't really see anywhere in my first comment where I said anything about any laws being broken. Social/professional courtesy. How hard is it to just say "Hey, do you mind if I take your little kid's photo?" I don't feel it's asking much.

You implied that the

By on

You implied that the photographer needed permission to take this photo and send it off to a news blog.

But no such permission is needed.

He's a child in a stroller;

By on

He's a child in a stroller; to say that a child should have no expectation of privacy in a public place is ridiculous. He's a kid and cannot understand and agree with or disagree with his image being used by a stranger. And that's the ambivalence that makes some people uneasy. And the ambivalence has nothing to do with the very slight risk that some pervert may be taking the picture. But has everything to do with respecting people who live among us with diminished mental development and determining how we interact and use them for our own selfish reasons.

I have a child

By on

And while I didn't ask the photographer the circumstances under which he took the photo, I do know he deals with photo permissions as part of his professional life, so I doubt he was doing anything surreptitious.

I have raised two children

And I would have no problem with someone taking a picture of my child in a public place and publishing said photo. It's kind of what news photographers do.

That's fine ...

By on

I just feel you should know about it.

Hope the photog knew the child

By on

I would be irate if someone took a picture of my kid in public and posted it online. Cute, sure, but there are too many weirdos out there....


By on

Explain. What are you afraid of? Or are you just entitled to be indignant?

Custody Issues?

By on

Some people have deranged exes who have been denied visitation and prefer to not have evidence out in the world of where their kids are. I know with my Girl Scout troop, part of the annual permission form is a media release and I have had parents in the past opt out.

Different issue

By on

Camps, schools, etc. get photo releases to post pictures, because that creates an obvious record of where the kid is on a regular basis and people through whom someone could locate a child. It would be fairly easy for a parent who felt they were wrongly denied custody but isn't a pathological stalker to swing by the YMCA afterschool program and be like, oh, yeah, you got the note that kiddo is going to my house tonight, right? These things are fairly common, so there are protections against them.

It poses extremely minimal risk to a child for someone to know that s/he was in Boston at one point. So so so few people are compulsive stalkers who would start hiring private detectives and such once they knew that a child was in Boston one day. The risk is just so minimal. It's much more likely for a child to be harmed by a parent, teacher, relative, babysitter, coach, etc. People's energy would be better spent monitoring and teaching around these hazards, rather than banning photography in public places because they think their child is in danger if a former perp or noncustodial parent knows what city the kid was in last week.

Also, statistically, there are many more adults who might be in some danger if someone knows where they are. Why no outrage when people post photos in public that include adults?

Oh, right, because our society just likes to overblow the "random perv in the bushes" mentality.

Calm down

By on

Just because you don't agree, it's not quite so black and white

Calm down, indeed.

I'm not the one saying that I would be "irate" if someone published a photo taken of my kid in a public place.


Are weirdos bound to their computer screens? They can't see your child in public? Maybe just lock little Johnny up inside his room until he's 18 -- better homeschool him, too.

High egos=low IQ's. I bet

By on

High egos=low IQ's. I bet the fighters here are the same people who honk their horn before realizing the car in front of them are stopping for a person in the crosswalk.