Eating establishments have frequently been the victim of
flame wars. A part-time worker at a convenience store posts a picture of
himself in a cooler to Facebook, and they get flamed. That convenience store
has temporarily closed. A part-time worker at a steak chain posts a picture of
himself in the freezer and they get flamed. That store had to close their doors
and is now looking into how to seek reparations for the damage done to their
business.
There are also cases that involve customers. At a gyoza
(dumpling) shop in Kanezawa, a picture emerged on the net of a nude customer
sitting at the counter. The store went out of business and is now seeking
reparations. The police have arrested two people on charges of forcible
obstruction of business and public indecency. It’s
not just a civil case; it’s now become a criminal case.
Japan is a country of flame wars. It must be addressed in
policy.
How much of this problem can industry be blamed for? Because
of something perpetrated by an employee, a store can be forced to close. How
can reparations be made in cases like this? Also, how about cases caused by
guests? How can business be held responsible?
It might be possible for large chain stores to absorb this “risk.” However, the other day an employee at
a privately-owned soba restaurant posted a picture of himself in the freezer
and it forced the store to close. The risk is much too high for individually
owned stores.
I believe that it’s an
overreaction to cause the closing of a store over a picture of an employee in a
cooler or freezer. However, more than the attitude of business, the feelings of
the consumer and net users are more important. They will not permit the
existence of stores that do not reliably guarantee safety and security.
On the other hand, as the result of a single tweet, an
employee could be looking at not only being fired, but being held responsible
for reparations as well. In some of the cases that I described, figures like 20
to 50 million yen have been thrown around, which is somewhat unreasonable.
In Europe, the “Right to be
forgotten” is being argued. It’s
a new way to deal with the preservation of privacy on the net. It could be time
for Japan to consider such measures.
On the other hand, if flame wars continue like this it doesn’t necessarily rise to the level of privacy infringements, better yet
“flame crimes.”
Industry needs to be able to “prevent” and “extinguish”
flames. To prevent, it’s important to be educated and
literate. To extinguish, they must take rapid action. In all cases, measures
should be taken by our Newmedia Risk Association.
