Sweet Square
ˈkämyənəst
Although it resulted in one of my favourite pics of 2024

Reading some Reddit comments about this(So could be bollocks)and it’s all a bit of a mess.
Both the piano player and the Chinese group are right and wrong. Apparently you can film with iPhones in public spaces(As long you aren’t harassing anyone which is a high bar to reach)but you need to get permission if making a commercial content. This guy is massive YouTuber who is making commercial content but using a iPhone.
So yeah it’s all very strange. Although the answer is people shouldn’t be arseholes. The group of Chinese people should have said they weren’t comfortable with getting filmed and the piano guy should have agreed(without saying all the bigoted commie stuff) to stop filming until the group have moved on. Plus hitting the keys so hard is really fecking up that piano.
So yeah it’s all very strange. Although the answer is people shouldn’t be arseholes. The group of Chinese people should have said they weren’t comfortable with getting filmed and the piano guy should have agreed(without saying all the bigoted commie stuff) to stop filming until the group have moved on.
Well I think if he's making commercial content he probably should have a way to blur their faces before uploading it if someone requests it, even out of common courtesy.
However, I saw him being interviewed and he pointed out their issue wasn't a personal one. They were filming an ad/commercial of some kind themselves and were filming him, which you can see in the video. They had some kind of disclaimer stating nobody could film them in the station and that seems to be the piece of paper the first lady has and what she was saying initially. I'm not sure how legal that document is or that is even possible to enforce such a thing in a public place like that.
I am losing sympathy for him though after seeing him bang on about virtue signalling etc when he went on Piers Morgan.
Would be interesting to know how legitimate that disclaimer paper was. Seem very strange.However, I saw him being interviewed and he pointed out their issue wasn't a personal one. They were filming an ad/commercial of some kind themselves and were filming him, which you can see in the video. They had some kind of disclaimer stating nobody could film them in the station and that seems to be the piece of paper the first lady has and what she was saying initially. I'm not sure how legal that document is or that is even possible to enforce such a thing in a public place like that.
I had no idea about this. Although predictable he would go gone down this route. It’s a very daily mail outrage story.I am losing sympathy for him though after seeing him bang on about virtue signalling etc when he went on Piers Morgan.
This one is going around a bit recently. Bloke has been doing piano videos at St Pancras for years. A group of British-Chinese?* people in the video don't like being filmed and tell him they don't want it shared or posted anywhere, he tells them we aren't in communist China now and it's a free country...British-Chinese? person says it's become racist now and cue police involvement.
*Not sure what nationality they are as they say British/Chinese in video at different times and might also be part of other groups.
This one is going around a bit recently. Bloke has been doing piano videos at St Pancras for years. A group of British-Chinese?* people in the video don't like being filmed and tell him they don't want it shared or posted anywhere, he tells them we aren't in communist China now and it's a free country...British-Chinese? person says it's become racist now and cue police involvement.
*Not sure what nationality they are as they say British/Chinese in video at different times and might also be part of other groups.
They were filming an ad/commercial of some kind themselves and were filming him
"arrested on what charge? Filming the Chinese? Filming the succulent Chinese people?"
I watched the stream the day (or 1 day later) it happened. I'm not buying that those people were filming anything there. They didn't want evidence of them being there that day going around on the internet, for whatever reason, and went about it in the worst possible way.
I watched the stream the day (or 1 day later) it happened. I'm not buying that those people were filming anything there. They didn't want evidence of them being there that day going around on the internet, for whatever reason, and went about it in the worst possible way.
I watched the stream the day (or 1 day later) it happened. I'm not buying that those people were filming anything there. They didn't want evidence of them being there that day going around on the internet, for whatever reason, and went about it in the worst possible way.
Yeah I think it's reasonably to expect not to be the center of whatever a person is filming, but being in a shot of someone else filming themselves while in public is a bit much.Which is fair enough tbh. The only mystery is why they didn’t just walk away from the person they knew was filming something to go on the internet. Such an odd decision to try and make him stop filming.
I watched the stream the day (or 1 day later) it happened. I'm not buying that those people were filming anything there. They didn't want evidence of them being there that day going around on the internet, for whatever reason, and went about it in the worst possible way.
Watch it back. You can see that they were filming. The guy in white who can be seen at about 5:20 has a camera and appears to be filming the piano player. He wanders into the shot again at 6:18 and you can see it in his right hand.
I meant filming (themselves) for some sort of commercial or other professional production. I should have been clearer reading my original post now.Watch it back. You can see that they were filming. The guy in white who can be seen at about 5:20 has a camera and appears to be filming the piano player. He wanders into the shot again at 6:18 and you can see it in his right hand.
Yeah I think it's reasonably to expect not to be the center of whatever a person is filming, but being in a shot of someone else filming themselves while in public is a bit much.
Agree to everyone saying he's a bit of a knob head. However I'd argue that that fact doesn't really make a difference to the fact that they had no business telling him to stop filming.
That’s what I thought too.
But, bottom line, he’s a nuclear level throbber. Disaster of a human and a raging bigot.
He was asked very politely to not use any content of them. He caused a scene and uploaded the whole thing to the internet.
Also… sunglasses on inside when it’s -4. Prick.
It was a live stream so it was on the internet regardless of the Chinese group being there or not.
I've seen his stuff before and he's an odd bloke but they should have just... moved away. They weren't the centre piece of the video, they were just in the background and it would have remained that way if they just fecked off to another part of the massive station.
It was a live stream. I think he might have been alright if he had just brushed it off after the incident, but all the Talk Tv coverage that he courted made it a much bigger incident than it needed to be. It's coming back to bite him in the balls.Well I think if he's making commercial content he probably should have a way to blur their faces before uploading it if someone requests it, even out of common courtesy.
However, I saw him being interviewed and he pointed out their issue wasn't a personal one. They were filming an ad/commercial of some kind themselves and were filming him, which you can see in the video. They had some kind of disclaimer stating nobody could film them in the station and that seems to be the piece of paper the first lady has and what she was saying initially. I'm not sure how legal that document is or that is even possible to enforce such a thing in a public place like that.
I am losing sympathy for him though after seeing him bang on about virtue signalling etc when he went on Piers Morgan.
anyone producing any content for youtube should just get in the effin sea.
Islington cancel their semifinal match with MHFC - when they discover the MH actually stands for Munter Hunters and that their social media content matches their name.
anyone producing any content for youtube should just get in the effin sea.
Islington cancel their semifinal match with MHFC - when they discover the MH actually stands for Munter Hunters and that their social media content matches their name.
Islington cancel their semifinal match with MHFC - when they discover the MH actually stands for Munter Hunters and that their social media content matches their name.
Don’t see a lot wrong with that, I’ll be honest!
I’m surprised the league even allowed their registration with a name like that. They can’t just be called MHFC surely? They’d have had to submit their full name.Absolutely. From my perspective, it's more a demonstration of why it's still necessary to protest about fundamental principles. I should have made that clearer.
Far from political correctness going mad - it's a reminder of how far we are from "respect" being a minimum expectation.
Incidentally, the clubs are back in the news again today with Camden and Islington United (Candi) refusing to play MHFC in the QF of the Cup. Candi are the current Cup and League title holders.
Initially they were told they'd be disqualified from the competitions for refusing to play, that's now been revoked during "the investigation" into MHFC. What that investigation entails other than looking at the screen captures of their social media accounts, I'm not quite sure
https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...ott-second-fixture-against-mhfc-over-misogyny