Apologies if I misinterpreted your point. What I’m mainly speaking to is how this article is a call to personal responsibility by asking for restraint from the public (which I don’t see likely to materialize) while maintaining what seems like a sympathetic tone to the couple in question, who did not exercise personal responsibility in their actions by attending a public event where anyone could reasonably assume cameras would be present. In addition, the statement made by the CEO read like a hollow attempt to play the victim. I hate living in a panopticon, too, but we can’t pretend we don’t and then get outraged when things like this inevitably happen.