United Airlines Covers All Cameras On Its Seatback Screens Following Outcry

United Airlines "has covered all the cameras in entertainment systems embedded in the backs of the airline's premium seats," reports BuzzFeed News. In a statement, a United Airlines spokesperson said: "As with many other airlines, some of our premium seats have in-flight entertainment systems that came with cameras installed by the manufacturer. None of these cameras were ever activated and we had no plans to use them in the future, however we took the additional step to cover the cameras. The cameras are a standard feature that manufacturers of the system included for possible future purposes such as video conferencing." United will continue to cover the cameras as it adds premium seats on additional aircraft, the spokesperson said....

A viral photo showing a camera in a Singapore Airlines in-flight TV display sparked an uproar online. After that, BuzzFeed News reported that some seatback screens on American Airlines, United Airlines, and Delta flights included cameras too.

American Airlines and Delta did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
The Verge adds that Panasonic executives claimed the cameras "could one day provide improved entertainment features like seat-to-seat video calling and even gaming.

"United claims it did not specially order its screens with webcams."

Re:

[b0s0z0ku]

You can generally opt out, though that will get you a groping from a TSA smurf. Don't shower that morning, act like you like the groping and smile, make them feel dirty for a good day afterwards. Contribute to professional disaffection.

Re:

[fluffernutter]

To me, having a camera in my pocket and having a camera I don't control trained on my face 100% of the flight are two completely different things. It concerns me what the possible use for this may be. if I fly coach I give up my right to NOT have a camera in my face?

Re:

[b0s0z0ku]

As long as it remains in your pocket, you're controlling what it sees, which will mostly be a muffled, vague circle of light.

Video conferencing?

[peragrin]

Well that is the biggest bullshit answer I have heard. People can't stand phone conversations on planes do idiots who built it think video conferencing would work?

Even in first class with some space between people there isn't enough space to do that.

Re:

[Dunbal]

Yeah, better things to do, like sell your biometrics to facial recognition and eye movement/ad-tracking companies. Without your consent, or even telling you. I am totally going to chip in that airlines that are paranoid to a matter of a few OUNCES on an entire aircaft are going to say "nawww, we're going to take the cheaper, lighter version without the camera" when ordering them.

Re:

[Dunbal]

I guess you've never had to share an office with one of those screaming tele/video conference people who everyone in the next building can hear, but apparently not Miguel in Peru. No one cares about other people who use their telecoms provided they do it in a reasonable volume of voice. Some people just can't. And they give everyone a bad name.

Re:Video conferencing?

[PsychoSlashDot]

As someone who flies a ton for business, I can't wait for us to get over this ridiculously antiquated resistance to using phones on airplanes. The science shows that they are safe and that they don't interfere with navigation/etc, so let's get on with it. The danger thing is just a lame excuse at this point to keep phones silent.

I would love to get on a plane tomorrow and be able to video conference for a few hours. Or make a few business calls and get some shit done while flying. Don't like it, put some fucking headphones on and get back to your ham and egg life. It's really not that hard.

The amount of lost billable time on airplanes, considering all of the flights across all of the country 365 days a year is just staggering.

Found the sociopath.

Look, anything that encourages, enables, or empowers people to make more noise in an enclosed space shared with a couple hundred other people is a Bad Thing. This isn't about some sort of fear that the technology is dangerous. It's about Shut The Fuck Up. Yes, people can - and do - talk to one another while on planes, but everyone around them wishes they wouldn't.

Your desire to maximize your "billable hours" shouldn't force me to wear headphones. You can bloody learn and do a text-chat since it's YOUR desire to do business in the flying tin can, not mine. We don't need to accommodate you... you're the irritant.

Re:

[PsychoSlashDot]

Do you also bitch when you go out to lunch at a restaurant and people all around you are talking, laughing, and otherwise living their lives within earshot?

Depends. Are those people engaged in activities inappropriate to the venue? As in, are the conducting business in a place that is not a place of business? If so, yes.

No I suppose you don't.

Oops.

You tune it out. And you'll learn to tune this out as well.

Nope. In a place of recreation such as a restaurant I accept that I am in a shared venue designed for social interaction, and that people will therefore do that. I don't tune it out; it's still annoying, but I recognize an equality of rights and an appropriateness of action. In other places, such as a movie theater, I don't tune it o

Re:

[sysrammer]

You're a funny psycho. One of my favorite kinds of psychos.

I 'specially liked "dozens of people drowning your kind in the washroom".

I can just see a gaggle whispering at the back of the plane, then the athletic one yells "Let's Roll!" and they all swarm the video conferencer, each stabbing him with their plastic knife.

Re:

[cthulhu11]

I stopped trying to get work done on airplanes years ago:

o There really isn't room to safely open a device, especially when the dbag in front of you may recline without notice at any time. I very nearly had a laptop screen snapped because of this, that was the last straw.

o It's a work-hostile environment anyway: cramped and noisy. I'm skeptical that people are able to get much/quality work done.

o In restaurants, people talking are one thing. Loudmouths yelling and bellowing are another entirely. But unl

Re:

[omnichad]

The nonstop noise from the aircraft itself forces most people to wear headphones.

Which is yet another good reason that we won't be having video conferencing on airplanes.

Re:

[kingbilly]

The parent and "ham and egg life". I just had a ham and egg sandwich.
If the parent likes video conference so much, why are they even flying to begin with? Hopefully it is absolutely needed, otherwise it is likely the same as many businesses who send employees around the world just to associate a face with a spreadsheet.

I agree, found the sociopath.

Re:

[b0s0z0ku]

At least in a train or coffeeshop, you can step onto the end platform or outside to make a call.

Re: Video conferencing?

[Zero__Kelvin]

You are a selfish idiot. Phone conversations on a plane are bad for the same reason they are bad in restaurants you self-centered disrespectful prick.

Re:

[JustAnotherOldGuy]

I would love to get on a plane tomorrow and be able to video conference for a few hours. Or make a few business calls and get some shit done while flying.

No one cares about your workaholic lifestyle. Most of us would love to get on a plane just to get away from pricks like you. You're the kind of person most of us secretly dream of smothering with a pillow.

Re:

[b0s0z0ku]

Don't smother them with a pillow. Just listen to their conversations and use them to insider trade.

Re:

[_merlin]

It's cheaper for Panasonic to make a single hardware model that supports all possible feature sets and get that certified to fly with combinations of plane, airline and jurisdiction. They just enable or disable features in software. It would be far more expensive to certify and manufacture a bunch of different hardware variants. CMOS camera modules with plastic lenses are dirt cheap now anyway, so it wouldn't be a significant part of the cost.

Also, you can't upsell a feature to an airline if the hardware

Re:

[Try_Nice]

I agree. Surveillance in a PUBLIC place like an airplane (that somehow feels private even though it isn't) would be helpful. Obviously no one's sitting there watching all 200 cameras. But being able to review security footage--and criminals and perverts knowing they're being recorded--would be a benefit and protection. And would assist prosecution of bad actors. Sadly these cameras are being removed, I would prefer it was extended throughout all cabins, whether in seatbacks, or overhead, or whatever (with

Re:

[b0s0z0ku]

Better some level of crime and a free society, than a perfectly safe one. Don't be a coward.

Re:

[Try_Nice]

I agree. Absolutely. That doesn't change anything I just said. :-)

That doesn't sound like much to me

[damn_registrars]

as it adds premium seats on additional aircraft

That is a pretty important caveat, there. This could be something they will only do for premium seats. Does that mean that those of us who fly only in steerage class might still be targets of future camera monitoring? And what about existing premium seats?

Another "NO THANK YOU" feature

[JustAnotherOldGuy]

Panasonic executives claimed the cameras "could one day provide improved entertainment features like seat-to-seat video calling and even gaming.

I really can't think of a feature I'd want less than "seat-to-seat video calling". Except for creepers, who wants some random stranger being able to call you from another seat on the airplane?

I can see where it *might* be useful for family members who aren't able to sit together, but the actual utility of this seems very low. I mean, you're in the same airplane a fe

Re:

[b0s0z0ku]

What if it's opt-in and you have to select which seats are allowed to call you before they can call you? Though actually, this seems like the perfect use case for an app that creates a peer-to-peer WiFi or Bluetooth network (no airline WiFi needed) for short-distance video calls on airplanes.

Re:

[retchdog]

"This is likely for the drones who text each other from across the dinner table. Yes, people do that and it always seems sad to me. They're 36 inches away, can't you just, I dunno, look up and talk to them?"

yeah but then the others can overhear what you're saying, which is not always desirable. i'll leave the details to your imagination.

Re:

[JustAnotherOldGuy]

yeah but then the others can overhear what you're saying, which is not always desirable. i'll leave the details to your imagination.

If you want to have a private conversation that you don't want someone else to hear, maybe don't have it at the dinner table when they're sitting next to you?

If we're all sitting together, anything I say will be intended for everyone there to hear.

New addition to my carry-on flight bag...

[QuietLagoon]

,,, Post-It notes. So I can cover the camera in the seat-back in front of me.

Re:

[b0s0z0ku]

Scotch tape. Clear enough to be invislble to cleaners, hard to remove, non-transparent enough to block a camera's vision.

Mmm hmmm

[Rick Zeman]

"United claims it did not specially order its screens with webcams"

Either there was no screen without webcams, the webcam option was cheaper, or some ordering manager needs to be fired.