Qatar Airways bans Youtuber

[justinbrett]

You aren’t addressing the issue of whether cabin crew are able to give consent on behalf of QR for commmercial filming purposes.

QR does not have a filming policy, so you're making that requirement up.

They may give personal consent to being filmed, but I’m not sure that gives consent on behalf of QR’s CoC where it says you must ask permission of Qatar Airways to operate electronic equipment.

QR already say portable recorders, and specifically digital cameras, are permitted.

At the very least, once Mr Cahill had decided the content of his review was negative, he should have explained this to the crew and asked them again if they consent. This might have allowed them to consider the consequences of a negative review, and the impact on their jobs.

That's the worst suggestion yet.

 

[Quickstatus]

They may give personal consent to being filmed, but I’m not sure that gives consent on behalf of QR’s CoC where it says you must ask permission of Qatar Airways to operate electronic equipment.

Bottom line : QR withdrew consent as per Contract of Carriage.

It is up to each person to consider how they view the airline in light of that. I suspect most won't care as price, schedule and itinerary are the primary motivations to choose a particular airline.

 

[justinbrett]

Bottom line : QR withdrew consent as per Contract of Carriage.

That section in CoC relates to use of electronic equipment, not filming.

For these clauses it relates to the conduct of filming (ie, use of the device) and not use of the footage. This can't be withdrawn after as the filming ceased at the end of the flight.

Notwithstanding individuals should be able to ask for their image to be blurred at any time after. The airline as a whole can't use use of electronic devices retrospectively to have the footage removed, when the crew did permit the filming to occur.

 

[p--and--t]

@dajop encapsulated it perfectly



There are hundreds of Instagram feeds with flight crew filming each other and passengers and making some questionable comments, largely without permission ignoring privacy including in both unsafe and distasteful situations.

YT flight reviewers include the range of egotists underhandedly taking money for “embellishing” flight experiences misleading the public through to egotists feigning horror and carping on about minor first world problems of variations to service levels.

No two flights are the same. No two planes, pilots, crews, weather conditions, passengers expectations and more importantly passengers frame of mind to generate a subjective opinion at any one point in time are exactly the same.

I caught the same flights every week on the same sectors on the same airline on the same days with the same flight number, often in the same seat and same crew for some 18 months or so.

I admit readily 100% if I was asked for a review of each flight it would have been all over the place for a myriad of reasons both associated with the flight itself and my frame of mind caused by external factors going on in my life not associated with the flight whatsoever but being human may have blamed it on a crew member not smiling at me the “privileged passenger” enough to my liking.

A total storm in a teacup exacerbated by the egos of the YTer and the CEO of QR.

 

[Quickstatus]

That section in CoC relates to use of electronic equipment, not filming.

I interpret the first part of the 12.3 differently. While certain electronic equipment can be used Qr reserved the right to stop the passenger using it.

I think both JC and QR have escalated this. But I don't think anyone cares TBH.

 

[justinbrett]

I interpret the first part of the 12.3 differently. While certain electronic equipment can be used Qr reserved the right to stop the passenger using it.

I think both JC and QR have escalated this. But I don't think anyone cares TBH.

Yes, they can stop the passenger using the device. They didn't.

They can't do it retrospectively, no more can they ask you to delete the word document you wrote on your laptop during the flight.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

QR does not have a filming policy, so you're making that requirement up.



QR already say portable recorders, and specifically digital cameras, are permitted.



That's the worst suggestion yet.

The use of electronic devises supercedes any filming policy. You don't need a filming policy if you can control any equipment used!

The list of PEDs is in an FAQ, not the CoC. The CoC can impose further conditions, as it does because you can be asked to put phones in airplane mode.

 

[justinbrett]

The use of electronic devises supercedes any filming policy. You don't need a filming policy if you can control any equipment used!

The list of PEDs is in an FAQ, not the CoC. The CoC can impose further conditions, as it does because you can be asked to put phones in airplane mode.

He asked the crew for permission, and it was given. CoC specifies portable recorders in the same sentence as pacemakers.

But then you go off and talk about a commercial filming policy which doesn't exist.

Yes - the crew can limit the use of devices onboard - but they didn't. End of. They're only upset now because of the negative publicity, not the use of the device.

Cameras have been allowed on airliners longer than mobile phones have existed.

 

[Captain Halliday]

Anyone else for popcorn?

 

[jase05]

I guess at the end of the day it’s up to people voting with their feet as it’s pretty clear that QR will continue to do as they please. We can either accept it or fly with someone else.
The whole thing hasn’t been handled well but I doubt it will stop people from choosing what I consider as one of the very best airlines going around

 

[ols]

People will still fly with them and personally this incident wouldn’t stop me flying with them either

Ban some punk Youtuber.
You've got my business

 

[MEL_Traveller]

He asked the crew for permission, and it was given. CoC specifies portable recorders in the same sentence as pacemakers.

But then you go off and talk about a commercial filming policy which doesn't exist.

Yes - the crew can limit the use of devices onboard - but they didn't. End of. They're only upset now because of the negative publicity, not the use of the device.

Cameras have been allowed on airliners longer than mobile phones have existed.

Errr... back then cameras weren't electronic.

You keep focusing on the crew, who may not be able to speak for Qatar, and almost certainly did not consent to the outcomes of the video.

Mr Cahill complains when crew interpret the rules around safety yet doesn't question when crews interpret the rules in the conditions of carriage.

Odd to pick and choose.

 

[LostRedditor]

Finally got around to watching the whole video. The silliest thing he mentions, in my opinion, is how making this video might "put him at risk" because Qatar "is a giant and they're capable or anything, I'm risking my life here". Come on, man...

 

[BAM1748]

Message to Qatar Airways, I'm banning you from my airlines to fly list. (but being who they are they weren't on it anyway)

A bit dumb of them not to just take it on the chin and forget about it, less people probably would have heard of (and watched) the Youtuber had they done so.

 

[elanshin]

Finally got around to watching the whole video. The silliest thing he mentions, in my opinion, is how making this video might "put him at risk" because Qatar "is a giant and they're capable or anything, I'm risking my life here". Come on, man...

Actually, this is one area I wouldn't underestimate. It is completely within their powers to make him disappear. Whether they actually do it, who knows. There's no regards for human rights in Qatar for many things they deem necessary.

 

[justinbrett]

Errr... back then cameras weren't electronic.

They've had electronic cameras since the 60s

You keep focusing on the crew, who may not be able to speak for Qatar, and almost certainly did not consent to the outcomes of the video.

Mr Cahill complains when crew interpret the rules around safety yet doesn't question when crews interpret the rules in the conditions of carriage.

Odd to pick and choose.

The crew can speak for what is permitted on the flight. You're completely making up this whole secret filming policy that's embedded in the section that restricts use of certain devices on flights. By default, cameras are permitted. No further permission is required, unless the crew tell you that you can't use it; not only did they not do that, they explicitly gave consent.

Anyway I think you're just trolling now so I'm out.

 

[eastwest101]

I watched the original offending video which was actually a 2-parter CMB-DOH and then the DOH-LHR sector, both Y class reviews.

I have not seen any of this YTer's previous videos, but have seen similar ones by Noel Phillips and others. Overall I thought the content of the videos was a bit biased, but unsure why this review elicited such a reaction from the airline, but am not fully au-fait with all the subsequent back and forth between the airline and the content creator about permissions/privacy/fair use of footage etc etc that seemed to snowball after the review was put online and in some ways have even superseded the original issues with the review.

I will say a few things that did stick out to me though from Part 1 of the CMB-DOH review:
1. A 17yo A333 is not a clunker or a "dinosaur" and many older and much more tired-looking aircraft are in mid-haul international service worldwide (looking at certain other airlines closer to home ) so Cahill was off the mark there right away, and that particular aircraft presented quite well for its age, and for me as a first-time viewer, this detracted from the rest of the review.
2. Some precious comments about cabin crew in the galley having their backs turned towards some customers were a little over-the-top in my own opinion, flight is being loaded and catered and flight attendants are busy at this time. Not a big deal to me and I'm wondering if there was more context of more interaction between the cabin crew member and the YTer about the use of the mobile steady-cam as its a bit more obvious than handheld use.
3. The review was of a Y-class product and maybe the expectations were a bit on the high side? Every airline claims to be the best in the world but when you are down the back in Y all you really need is competence and cleanliness as a bare minimum.
4. Mis-catering or catering stuff-ups are not a new or unique thing - we've seen many other examples post-Covid real catering stuff-ups from solid airlines like BA MH SQ QF & OZ among others. The food looked fine to me but lack of choice can be annoying to some.
5. The bathroom floors and cleaning might be the reason for the termination of some employees but again, unfortunately, the Covid emphasis on cleanliness and hygiene has now been lost by other post-Covid workforce shortages/cost cutting/low crew morale beancounter related issues that are widespread across the industry, this is not unique to QR, and is industry-wide so maybe the intent is to show how widespread this issue is?

I didn't see anything in the B773 review out of the ordinary or especially good or bad, and I suspect whatever issue the reviewer had with the airline and its service maybe flowed through from the previous flight. It looked like a bog standard mid-haul Y-class flight to me.

 

[doctorstrangelove]

Finally got around to watching the whole video. The silliest thing he mentions, in my opinion, is how making this video might "put him at risk" because Qatar "is a giant and they're capable or anything, I'm risking my life here". Come on, man...

Oh I don't doubt it! Currently unable to watch any videos here in Doha over the WiFi due to the connection going at a snail's pace. Most likely deliberate by QR to prevent Cahill's truth reaching the masses! They've gone Scorched Earth with this! Someone must let him know!

 

[p--and--t]

4. The bathroom floors and cleaning might be the reason for the termination of some employees

My worst experience in this regard was EK pre covid. Not serviced at all during the flight. No toilet paper in two of the loos and not replenished for entire flight despite being pointed out to the crew. Floor covered in water, tissue and the other “fluid”. After meal service crew disappeared and were not to be seen until the next meal service. No water offers, no cabin checks. Never experienced this bad before on any of my travels on dozens of airlines not even on LCC.

 

[moa999]

A bit dumb of them not to just take it on the chin and forget about it, less people probably would have heard of (and watched) the Youtuber had they done so.

Exactly and would have though his response was fairly predictable and would spread the video even further.

Maybe a few less in Qatar's media department.


Interesting also in the context of Qantas's new rules where filming anyone (including other passengers or crew) without their express permission beforehand is now banned.

Staff can seemingly give permission, but stops incidents being filmed.