Peter McCabe wrote:
Unfortunately Stacey it is not about freelancers abusing, it is more along the lines of too many photographers at a venue crowding out those who have been sent by mainstream and more accredited services, (not implying you are with an UN-accredited service) also there is a newer (actually not that new) attempt to control and monitor, the amount and use of images of events, and when loads of freelancers arrive they loose that control. i have been a freelancer for a while now and if i am not asked to go somewhere i just don't go
A slightly different take on "too many photographers" crowding out the mainstream and accredited services.
I have been covering the Northern Gateway pipeline issue in northwest BC for two years now. At many of the smaller local events, only local reporters (one print, one online, one TV) show up as well as myself. At the big events, however, it isn't "freelancers" who show up, it's activists. I covered the anti-tankers rally in Prince Rupert last month for CP and Global. I knew most of the other journalists there and there were all those other cameras and the regulars were asking "who are all these people?" The traditional opening ceremony when the Tsimshian elders in Rupert welcomed the Gitga'at from Hartley Bay (the Gitga'at were sponsors of the rally) had a line of professional cameras like you would see at a Red Carpet event in Toronto. Major media with cameras were myself, a crew from CTV, local TV CFTK, the local paper The Northern View and the hyperlocal Terrace/Kitimat Daily sites. All of the rest were activists. In the afternoon, the local internet cafe, the only really good connection in town, was crowded with people uploading video and images to various sites.
An interesting sidelight. My sources with First Nations leaders say that they made an offer to the major media to pay for flights to Rupert so they could cover the rally. All the media refused, citing the usual ethical reasons about not taking money for that sort of thing. Yet at least three major media outlets used still images from one well-known activist group, a couple using name credit, but no acknowledgement that the photographer was from that activist group. Several used Youtube video supplied by the PR people for the same First Nations that offered to cover travel costs, again without acknowledging the original source or in a couple of cases not even giving a Youtube credit.
While often the activists or pro photographers affiliated with activist groups do behave professionally, many shooters are not, thinking their "cause" gives the right to push things or just from lack of experience or training. At one rally two years ago, one woman, loaded down with gear, seemed completely unaware (or uncaring) that she was always getting everyone else's shot and also getting in the way of the audience, which made them pissed off at all photographers. Unlike an aspiring or rookie professional, where someone can take them aside and quietly say, this is how to do things so you can do better in the future, many activists seem to be in their own world.
So like Peter McCabe, unless I get an assignment, I don't go, especially with the distances and travel costs here in the northwest. Covering an event, especially if it starts early in the morning, means overnighting in a hotel, whereas in more populated areas with lots more photographers, there is usually always a local freelancer available who doesn't need those expenses covered. And after two years I accept that I am in competition with the activist groups who supply images, it is part of life in the modern digital era. But perhaps if the media uses the activist images, they should be more forthright in completely acknowledging the source. If visuals from the Middle East are either credited to an activist group or labelled "unsourced" or "unverified" why not here?
Topic: Accreditation and Freelance (Read 6350 times)