During my tour guide training, Vice President for Student Affairs Celestino Limas spoke about the body camera conversations happening with the Office of Campus Safety. Limas explained how Campus Safety had requested body cameras during their union negotiation with the school this summer. During his talk, I witnessed other students becoming uncomfortable and confused at the thought of Campus Safety having cameras. The whole conversation raised questions and concerns for me, both about how body cameras would be implemented and how the captured footage would be handled. It also raised worries about what this means for the future of campus social life at Kenyon. 

Cameras could be great for limiting hostility between Campus Safety officers and students, but may also create extra distrust and stress for those who might be recorded. As Limas explained to the Enrollment Division, there are two types of cameras that officers could be equipped with, each with their own benefits and drawbacks. The first kind must be turned on and off by the Campus Safety officer wearing it, meaning recording only happens when intended. But if an officer forgets (or “forgets”) to turn it on, the camera fails to accomplish its goal. The second kind is always running, meaning videos are constantly filmed and stored on a server. This option raises concerns about Kenyon becoming a “surveillance campus.” To his audience of student workers, Limas quoted an unknown student by labeling this particular fear the “James Jackson paradox,” where students fear retroactive consequences for every action or infraction that is caught on camera. For example, that game of beer die you weren’t supposed to be playing on the NCA lawn is now under investigation because you’re in a video from an unrelated incident. Although cameras might protect students from escalations, I’m worried about how effectively and ethically this could impact the community. How could constant recordings be used, and what form of surveillance is next? Will our every action be monitored?

Limas did not describe a plan for the implementation or use of cameras. I believe, though, that many concerns can be alleviated by drawing up thorough guidelines and regulations. These devices can be used in ways that protect all parties without nasty side effects. 

For example, if officers wear body cameras that are always recording, then restrictions on how those recordings can be used retroactively by the administration must be drawn up. Footage should only be used to handle reports of hostile confrontations during interactions between Campus Safety and students. The College needs to show students that it does not intend to use the footage otherwise. Likewise, if applicable, officers should be required to turn cameras on during any interaction with students and should be questioned if they fail to do so. Such guidelines must be drawn up with proper dialogue between all affected groups across the student body and the College, especially minority groups most commonly affected by offices analogous to law enforcement. These conversations would strengthen the trust that cameras could threaten. 

Importantly, Kenyon is full of college students making choices the administration is not naïve about. Similarly, Campus Safety is tasked with making choices that should protect students while also, as Director Michael Sweazey describes to first-years during Orientation, allowing students to be college kids, rule-bending and rule-breaking choices included. Truthfully, I find the dynamic between Campus Safety, students and the administration to be a healthy one. All groups allow each other to function in their own spaces and in their own ways. Students generally develop a robust relationship with Campus Safety, recognizing the sometimes-frustrating-but-usually-necessary role they play in keeping campus safe but lively. As long as clear guidelines are in place, cameras can in fact bolster that relationship by protecting all parties from hostile encounters. However, if implemented without the proper conversations, these cameras will break down the delicate trust that exists between students and Campus Safety, turning Kenyon into a panopticon. Distrust destroys the healthy rivalry between rules and fun, which is paramount to promoting community and maturity. Cameras can mitigate hostility, but can also foster it. Keep us safe, but let us play without fear. 

Charlie Menzel ’28 is a religious studies major from Greencastle, Indiana. He can be reached at menzel1@kenyon.edu.