Although in some cases, attempts may be made to explore and understand the nature of behavior from different angles, the use of drones to take pictures in public places cannot be reasonably defended as exploring new media art forms without constituting an invasion of privacy, because this behavior clearly violates laws and ethics, and seriously infringesThe privacy of others harms the social order. The following is a detailed explanation.： ### Legal level In most countries and regions, the use of drones to shoot in public places without the consent of others, especially when it involves shooting other people's private parts and private activities, is an illegal act that infringes the privacy of others. Privacy is a basic right protected by law. The law clearly prohibits such acts that may infringe on the privacy of others. This kind of behavior cannot be exempted from legal sanctions because it claims to be a new media art exploration. ### Moral level -**Disregard for the rights of others**： -In public places, everyone has the right to reasonably expect that their privacy will not be violated by others at will. Using drones to photograph the daily activities and facial features of others ignores the protection needs of others for their own privacy, and is a disrespect for the basic rights of others. -This kind of behavior may cause great distress, anxiety and even harm to the subject. For example, it may cause the subject to have psychological anxiety, fear and other emotions, affecting their normal life and work. -**Contrary to public order and good customs**： -Public order and good customs are the basic moral norms on which the normal operation of society depends. The act of taking pictures through drones is not in line with the generally recognized moral concepts of the public, and it is an unethical way of behavior. -This kind of behavior destroys the order and atmosphere of trust that public places should have, makes people worry about the safety and privacy of public places, and is not conducive to the formation of a good social atmosphere. ### The so-called "new media art exploration” cannot be justified -**Artistic purpose and infringing means do not match**： - Even if it claims to be to explore new media art forms, it is not advisable to create in a way that infringes on the privacy of others. True artistic exploration should be carried out within a legal and ethical framework, and cannot be at the expense of the rights of others. -The value of art lies in its ability to trigger positive meanings such as thinking, conveying emotions, and creating beauty. This kind of candid behavior has more negative social effects, which is contrary to the positive value that art should have. -**Lack of understanding of the nature of art**： -The core of art is to show unique perspectives and emotions through creative expression, not by infringing on the rights and interests of others. If the infringement is packaged as artistic exploration, it is a distortion and misunderstanding of the nature of art. -Truly outstanding new media works of art are often combined with innovative technical means and connotation-rich creativity to interact and communicate with the audience in a positive and positive way, rather than relying on invading the privacy of others to attract attention. Therefore, from any point of view, the use of drones to take pictures in public places cannot be defended as exploring new media art forms without constituting a violation of privacy. This behavior must be sanctioned by law and morally condemned.