In the early days of widespread remote work, cameras were on. People dressed for video calls. They arranged their backgrounds. They maintained eye contact with the camera. The video call was a performance of presence.
Then, gradually, the cameras went off.
Why cameras went off
Fatigue. Maintaining the performance of presence on video is more tiring than being present in person. The sustained eye contact, the awareness of your own image, the effort of appearing engaged — these add up over a day of back-to-back calls.
Privacy. The home background reveals things about a person's life that the office did not. A camera-off norm removes the pressure to manage what is visible.
Practicality. When cameras are off, you can attend a meeting while doing other things. This is either a feature or a problem, depending on your perspective.
Social permission. Once enough people turned their cameras off, it became acceptable for everyone to do so. Norms are self-reinforcing.
What is lost
Non-verbal communication. The ability to read the room. The social connection that comes from seeing faces. The accountability of being visibly present. These are real losses, particularly for relationship-building and for meetings where reading the room matters.
What is gained
Reduced fatigue. More privacy. The ability to attend meetings from locations that are not camera-ready. The freedom to take notes, drink coffee, or manage a minor distraction without it being visible to the entire meeting.
The hybrid problem
In hybrid meetings — where some people are in a room together and others are remote — the camera-off norm creates an asymmetry. The people in the room can see each other. The remote participants are invisible. The meeting naturally gravitates toward the people who are physically present.
The norm: Camera-on or camera-off is a team norm, not a universal rule. The most useful approach is to be explicit about expectations rather than leaving individuals to guess what is appropriate.