He has a profound understanding of GDPR regulations and did so when he wrote that tweet on the 14th of October. That's why he used a photo of his own children.
Except just over a week later on the 21st of October he's justifying the use of photos of real people because "We show that illness for what it is not what people choose to see". This is all whilst using the photo of the poor man who he filmed on camera saying "Oh god no" when James asked if he consented to having his image used as his profile picture for his account with 40K+ followers.
Archive.
So are you showing the reality or do you have a profound understanding of GDPR? Which is it? If you have a profound understanding of GDPR why did the ICO have to intervene this year?
PS. You're lucky my lunch break is over Jimmy, I stumbled across you scamming by misrepresenting pictures of your own children. I wonder what else lurks in the thousands of archived tweets.
Except just over a week later on the 21st of October he's justifying the use of photos of real people because "We show that illness for what it is not what people choose to see". This is all whilst using the photo of the poor man who he filmed on camera saying "Oh god no" when James asked if he consented to having his image used as his profile picture for his account with 40K+ followers.
Archive.
So are you showing the reality or do you have a profound understanding of GDPR? Which is it? If you have a profound understanding of GDPR why did the ICO have to intervene this year?
PS. You're lucky my lunch break is over Jimmy, I stumbled across you scamming by misrepresenting pictures of your own children. I wonder what else lurks in the thousands of archived tweets.