The Need for Visual Information Policy

Abstract

This paper briefly maps the tension between doctrine and practice surrounding visual evidence and the necessity to consider images as a mode of information relay on their own terms. In doing so, it argues that visual information policy is becoming an important area of study for scholars working at the intersection of media, communication, information studies, surveillance studies, and the law.

Eyewitness Video’s Role as a Policy-Oriented Mechanism for Human Rights

“…It precipitated a shift in the role and scope of visual evidence not only in the law but also across journalism, political advocacy, and human rights practice. Yet U.S. courts still lack unified guidance for the use of video as evidence (Feigenson & Spiesel, 2009;Ristovska, 2020), and back then there was a hesitation about the power of such videos even in the journalistic community. According to one journalist at the time, eyewitness images were sensationalist, valuable in local news only when depicting "fires, car crashes and other minor disasters" (Cobb, 1995: n.p.).…”

Interpreting Police Video: A Pilot Study

“…Research from a variety of disciplines has started to examine the use and interpretation of BWC footage as visual evidence (see, e.g., Bailey et al, 2021; Adams et al, 2020; Gates, 2020; Ristovska, 2020; Kalle & Hammock, 2019; Birck, 2018; Fan, 2017; Culhane et al, 2016; Boivin et al, 2016; Blanchette & Becker, 2018). Some of this research suggests the presence of bias in the interpretation of video evidence in a variety of contexts (Granot et al 2017), including with BWCs (Culhane et al, 2016) and videotaped police interrogations (see e.g., Lassiter & Irvine, 1986).…”

“…Importantly, misconceptions about the objectivity and self‐evident nature of video evidence has the potential to impact judges, juries, and other groups of individuals tasked with interpreting video evidence of crime or police (mis)conduct, and likely also impacts public perceptions of policing within communities after instances of on‐camera police‐involved violence (see, for example, work on cultural cognition and cognitive bias by Kahan et al, 2012; Kahan, 2009, 2013). “Justice may need to be seen in order to be done” (Ristovska, 2020, p. 420)—but what does it mean to see evidence captured on video? Reaction to these videos is driven by the information gained by the viewer—that is, how the viewer interprets the events and makes judgments about the appropriateness of the depicted officer conduct.…”

Psychological perspectives on the presentation of video evidence: How perceivers weight what is seen and unseen

“…Beyond the information it provides, however, video lends a sense of veracity to information because it ostensibly approximates for viewers a firsthand experience of events. Relative to photographs, video seems to convey an unmediated depiction of events, yet courts tend to treat these forms of demonstrative evidence interchangeably (Mnookin, 1998;Ristovska, 2020). Viewers may be particularly vulnerable to bias when considering video evidence; they tend to be naïve realists, believing, often inaccurately, that their visual experiences completely and truthfully represent reality (Feigenson and…”