Editorial: Bats in the belfie

Ballot selfies, or belfies, at heart of freedom-of-speech issue?|

Technically, it’s not a selfie. It’s a belfie.

That’s a better term for the rather unphenominal phenomenon of shooting a cell phone photo of your voting ballot and then posting it on Facebook to show your friends your pick for the sanitary district board.

The issue of ballot selfies, or belfies, came up last week when Sonoma’s 10th Assembly District representative Marc Levine vowed to introduce a bill next year that would allow voters to whip out cameras at the polls and start shutterbugging to the delight of their riveted Instagram followers.

Whether Levine’s bill would include the use of phablets in the legislation is yet unclear.

In explaining his belfie stance, the Democrat from Greenbrae stressed to the Press Democrat the importance of protecting “that political speech” (that meaning ballot selfies) – a speech that has thus far been stamped down by that old electoral bogeyman: voter privacy laws. (It’s also a “political speech” that political campaigns would love to take full advantage of – as posting photos of an appropriately checked-off ballot on election day is a great way to remind a candidate’s many Facebook followers to get out that vote.) Levine admitted that he had posed with ballots in the past, before finding out that such moves were not merely self-aggrandizing – they’re also against the law.

But aside from being another spirit-depleting example of our “Look at me! Look at me!” society, what’s the harm? Well, say belfie critics, the fundamental right to voter privacy would be in jeopardy if polling places turned into social-networking photo shoots – suddenly in the public eye would be visual information on who’s voting, when and where. And then there’s the possibility that pictures of other people’s ballots might show up on someone’s Pinterest pinboard; hopefully the proposed legislation will limit belfies to Snapchat, where they’ll be deleted with the kind of expedience our Founding Fathers originally envisioned.

Perhaps the polling place staff could police any unconstitutional photoblogging, though I’m guessing the election workers at the senior-living center where I vote would prefer to stick with passing out “I voted!” pins.

Critics of Levine say he spends too little time on important matters – state legislature watchdog Gary Cohn argues that Levine has a habit of skipping progressive votes that run counter to big-business donors – and too much time on things like renaming the Waldo Tunnel after Robin Williams.

Committing the time for staff and other legislators to pass a bill on ballot selfies falls into that latter category.

Plus, it runs counter to Levine’s announcement this week that he may introduce a bill making voting in California compulsory – because if voting is political speech, as his belfie reasoning goes, the state can’t mandate it.

Former Santa Rosa school board candidate Omar Medina joined Levine in championing voters rights to belfies, calling it a “freedom-of-speech issue.”

“One should be able to say ... how he or she voted,” said Medina, who, according to the Press Democrat, had joined supporters last year in posting belfies showing they voted for him.

He’s right. And they can. They just have to do via that other freedom-of-speech device – speaking.

Email Jason at jason.walsh@sonomanews.com.

UPDATED: Please read and follow our commenting policy:
  • This is a family newspaper, please use a kind and respectful tone.
  • No profanity, hate speech or personal attacks. No off-topic remarks.
  • No disinformation about current events.
  • We will remove any comments — or commenters — that do not follow this commenting policy.