Recently I was contacted by someone writing for the Daily Telegraph online. Somehow they had come across my images of the Norwegian freedivers, and now they wanted to do a story on me and my underwater photography. Sounds nice, right? I'll admit it is flattering to be "discoverd" by foreign media like that, wanting to focus on me and my work. But flatter doesn't pay my bills. Getting paid does! So I mention this awkward little thing called "payment". Well, well, well..wouldn't you know: there goes the Daily Telegraph, bye bye! Apparently "no budget" for pictures.
Caramba!? What is this? At least the Daily Telegraph journalist admitted her request was paltry. I agree! So it would seem she knew right from wrong, though she admitted this to us, rather than telling her editor like she should have: It is paltry to expect photographers to fill your newspaper with free content while you expect make money off their work.
As I am writing this I receive this on Twitter: marc_vallee"I’m a Photographer, Not Free Content!", http://bit.ly/43rZD @guardiannews @guardianeco
Marc rightly calls out the Guardian for asking the public" to help document the 2009 Camp for Climate Action" by submitting images to their Flickr group.
Again, what is this? Are photographers and the public is expected to work for free, to sponsor the Scott Trust and the Barclay Brothers (BB's 2007 estimated wealth: £1.8 billion)?
Nancy was right: JUST SAY NO!
0 kommentarer:
Post a Comment