Community members across Bendigo say their photographs and cultural images have been duplicated and repurposed without permission, raising urgent questions about who controls local visual identity.
4 min read
Residents from Bendigo's Kangaroo Flat and Long Gully neighbourhoods are among those raising concerns after discovering their photographs — including images of family members and culturally significant sites — had been reproduced without authorisation in materials linked to publicly funded local projects. The issue, which affects both Aboriginal community members and non-Indigenous residents, has prompted calls for a formal review of how images are sourced, stored and reused across council-funded and regional arts initiatives.
The concerns come at a pointed moment. Victoria's Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006 places specific obligations on organisations handling cultural material, and Bendigo sits within Dja Dja Wurrung Country, where protocols around image use carry particular weight. With Bendigo Health's capital expansion program drawing fresh attention to the city's public identity and La Trobe University's Bendigo campus running community-engagement photography projects, the question of image consent has moved from abstract policy into daily life for some local families.
Community members who spoke to The Daily Bendigo described discovering their images — or those of deceased relatives — appearing in brochures, digital displays and promotional materials they had never approved. Several said they only found out when acquaintances recognised the photographs at public venues, including displays inside the Bendigo Art Gallery on View Street and printed materials distributed through the Bendigo Community Health Services network on Presentation Road in Epsom.
The Dja Dja Wurrung Clans Aboriginal Corporation, which operates under a Recognition and Settlement Agreement covering much of central Victoria, has previously outlined community standards around the reproduction of images depicting Country, ceremony and community members. Those standards make clear that consent is not a one-time transaction — permission granted for one use does not automatically extend to derivative or duplicated applications. Community members say that principle is not consistently understood by the organisations they deal with.
One concern raised repeatedly involves archival photographs. Images digitised from collections held at institutions such as the Goldfields Library Corporation on Hargreaves Street have, in some cases, been incorporated into new promotional material without fresh consultation with descendants or community groups. The library holds substantial photographic records dating to the 1850s gold rush era, and the line between public record and community-controlled cultural property is genuinely contested.
A 2023 report by the Australian Centre for Excellence in Local Government found that fewer than one in three regional councils had a standalone visual-media consent policy that covered third-party and archival image reuse — a gap that advocacy groups say leaves communities like those in Greater Bendigo exposed. The City of Greater Bendigo's own Cultural Heritage Policy, last updated publicly in 2021, addresses heritage objects but does not include explicit provisions governing the duplication of photographic images sourced from external collections.
The regional arts sector has flagged the problem too. Creative Victoria's 2024-25 regional funding round included $2.4 million allocated to central Victorian projects, several of which involve community storytelling and documentary photography. Advocates say that without clearer consent frameworks attached to funding conditions, the risk of inadvertent image duplication will grow as more projects come online.
Residents are being advised to document any instance where they believe their image or a family member's image has been reproduced without permission, and to lodge a formal complaint with the relevant organisation in writing. The Victorian Equal Opportunity and Human Rights Commission accepts complaints related to privacy and cultural rights. The Dja Dja Wurrung Clans Aboriginal Corporation is the appropriate first contact for community members with concerns about culturally sensitive material. For non-Indigenous residents, the Office of the Victorian Information Commissioner can advise on rights under the Privacy and Data Protection Act 2014. The City of Greater Bendigo's Community Partnerships team, based on Lyttleton Terrace, is also available to facilitate discussions between community members and organisations where images appear in council-associated material.
Spread the word
About this article
Published by The Daily Bendigo
Daily brief
Free, in your inbox before 7am. Weekdays.
