The video is unclear on this. He never said he didn't comply. He said he was suspicious as to its authenticity, and when he replied he never received a response, so he sought confirmation elsewhere. He then says QR went to YouTube to try to get the video removed. It's unclear if this was simultaneous or he outright refused for an extended period. That we will probably never know. He blurred the original FA from the outset so I don't see why he would have had a problem with it, if he thought the email was genuine.
Why? If consent is obtained what is the problem?
QR cares so much for the privacy of its staff that it fires them after this event? That's just ridiculous. It's obvious this has nothing to do with the privacy of the staff.
As I posted earlier the FAQs specifically list digital cameras as permitted devices, so there can be no confusion over this.
QR doesn't have a policy for filming onboard. You're making up requirements that don't exist. He asked for consent and received it.
That can't be done retrospectively. He asked the crew onboard to film and they permitted him. Sure they could have said no, we don't permit use of cameras in flight. They didn't. They said yes.
As QS pointed out, it mentions portable recorders as permitted devices in the CoC (I missed that one). Seems very clear.