# Those Black "Censored" Rectangles......

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/those-black-censored-rectangles/66717>\
**Category:** Factual Questions\
**Created:** [May 28, 2001, 12:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/those-black-censored-rectangles/66717 "2001-05-28T00:06:48Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 8\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Quasimodem](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/e274bd/32.png) [@Quasimodem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Quasimodem)\
**Post date:** [May 28, 2001, 12:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/those-black-censored-rectangles/66717/1 "2001-05-28T00:06:48Z")

</div>

…over they eyes and private parts in some magazines. WTH?

If I came to work naked, except for some electricians tape over my eyes and groin area, people would still know it was me, I suspect. So what’s the deal? I _know_ it was to protect privacy, but come on, did someone _really_ believe this would fool someone familiar with the subject, and has it ever failed, i.e., gone to court because someone was recognized?

Thanks

Quasi

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Quasimodem](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/e274bd/32.png) [@Quasimodem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Quasimodem)\
**Post date:** [May 28, 2001, 12:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/those-black-censored-rectangles/66717/2 "2001-05-28T00:08:11Z")

</div>

Lapsed into blues-speak for a moment there, sorry! :o

Quasi

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![sjc](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e5b9ba/32.png) [@sjc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sjc)\
**Post date:** [May 28, 2001, 12:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/those-black-censored-rectangles/66717/3 "2001-05-28T00:17:06Z")

</div>

Perhaps this is a legal thing more than anything else. That is, they cover their eyes (or whatever) because the person filmed wanted to remain anonymous or they didn’t have permission. This way they could say they concealed the identity and still show the clip.

I also think that in most cases of the ‘strip-in-front-of-eye’ censoring I’d have a hard time recognizing the guy if I had never seen him before I saw him on teevee.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Swede\_Hollow](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/3bc359/32.png) [@Swede\_Hollow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Swede_Hollow)\
**Post date:** [May 28, 2001, 4:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/those-black-censored-rectangles/66717/4 "2001-05-28T04:03:29Z")

</div>

The strips over the eyes (and privates) would protect the identity of the person from the average person on the street. It may not help much with close friends and family but the other 99.99999% of the population wouldn’t recognize the person in any other context.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Wyvern](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/ebca7d/32.png) [@Wyvern](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wyvern)\
**Post date:** [May 28, 2001, 4:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/those-black-censored-rectangles/66717/5 "2001-05-28T04:36:36Z")

</div>

It has been a while since I’ve seen the black strips used on faces and unmentionables. Recently, I’ve been seeing blurry areas over stuff like that. Maybe someone did sue over the black strip. I mean, the strip may cover the eyes but not, say, a noticable tatoo or birthmark.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Quasimodem](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/e274bd/32.png) [@Quasimodem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Quasimodem)\
**Post date:** [May 28, 2001, 4:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/those-black-censored-rectangles/66717/6 "2001-05-28T04:42:04Z")

</div>

> [@](#):
>
> \*Originally posted by Quasimodem \*  
> \*\*I _know_ it was to protect privacy, but come on, did someone _really_ believe this would fool someone familiar with the subject, and has it ever failed, i.e., gone to court because someone was recognized?  
> \*\*

Please re-read. I believe I stipulated the fact that it was done for privacy’s sake, but then I went on to ask if the device had ever failed and someone **familiar** with the subject recognized them and was there ever any litigation because of this?

Mods, if this doesn’t make sense, please delete. Maybe I’m just having a bad brain day. 😃

Quasi

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\
**Post date:** [May 28, 2001, 4:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/those-black-censored-rectangles/66717/7 "2001-05-28T04:53:11Z")

</div>

It’s not as hard to fool people as it looks. Clark Kent did it for years at the Daily Planet and all he did was wear a pair of glasses.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Shortie](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecd19e/32.png) [@Shortie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shortie)\
**Post date:** [May 28, 2001, 10:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/those-black-censored-rectangles/66717/8 "2001-05-28T10:39:07Z")

</div>

Reminds me of an old joke:  
Supposedly there used to be a tradition that Oxford dons would swim naked in the Isis in particularly nice weather.  
One year a group of girls cam by in a punt, and while most of the dons tried to cover their privates, one covered his face instead. When asked why, he said “I don’t know about you, but my students recognise me by my face.”
