CNN fires 50 photojournalists and plans to work with photo-hobbyist photogs for 'free' photography.

Bad days for photojournalism... Nowadays anyone can take a picture and they prefer free pictures than good pictures.
It's a shame.

Yep, hobby journalists are not the problem, the problem is them let their work free.

I don't think that AFP, Reuters or AP would do the same, but now they're using a lot of local photographers (great photographers). Maybe in the future...

The answer is partly don't work for free (ever). Yes it is a nice buzz to get your first pictures in print etc but even if you do it once that is game over. These days "everyone" has a camera that takes "reasonable" pictures that are "good enough" for newspapers on their phones. some of the London 7/7 pictures that were on the front page of the newspapers (and TV news) were from mobile phones. If "everyone just does it once there will always be some on there doing it for free.

You can understand CNN in some ways the news from civilians with camera-phones gets the news on to facebook and twitter etc within seconds of it happening. Often the news is on line within 5 minutes of the incident. The chances of having a pro reporter on the scene in under 10 minutes unlikely. Also whilst the time to file stories has gone from hours to minutes the (unregulated and unprocessed) social networks can still do it much faster. They don't have editors, producers, guidelines and checking.

Absolutely right guys, in London on the 30th there were hundreds of togs and it was clear who were prof and who were not. And of course most of the protesters had their phones with them and sending stuff as it happened.

Does not bode well for the future !!!

Pete

Doing this job there is still a vast need for paid images. All this was debated 100+ years ago when the first Kodak came out, and Magnum was a little worried at first.

Changes like this can be good for photojournalists - CNN have clearly seen our model at Demotix. The only mention of 'free' is in the title of that story.

Most major news outlets can twist a persons arm to give the image over for free, most do it. BBC are known for this, as they have a very tight budget. Follow a large unfolding news story on Twitter and you will see news orgs clamouring over one another, chasing local PJ's 'at the scene' for the image. We have lost a few due to this, but also made money for others by licencing. Education is thin at best in regards to a newbie having that ellusive shot of the first alien landing, and then handing it over to Sky for £400 without knowing why? Then realise 20 years later, when its being used in a make up commercial, that they should have licenced it.

Conclusion: You have to keep adapting. You can't 'hope' to be the only photojournalist at the event anymore. Think out of the box with everything. This just goes to show that 'gear' really doesn't mean anything - cheap news organisations will use free low level images over those that are beautifully shot with top of the range cameras. You still have an advantage to move from hobby/amateur to pro. All you need to do is grab a pen and paper and focus on hard research of the subject matter before you go out.

If you photograph the head of a protest march, so will thousands of others. You upload this to Demotix, and we feed to newspapers of that same image. Newspaper staffers and agencies have this image replayed a dozen times, some free others staffed. It will be a tricky sell. So before you left did you plan your route, look for high areas, focus on the core value of the protest (if it is a protest you shoot), or approach it differently? Did you adequatly caption and provide keywords so they scatter widely across the net and within buyers feeds?

You can always tell the images from people who have thought about it, and these sell at a higher rate and have longer legs. Regardless of the CNN staff, who will more than likely join Demotix and sell back to CNN. CNN iReport is not very good as well.

Most people starting out are photographers first, then journalists when writing the story. My hard belief is journalist first, this will provide you with a better understanding to photograph the issue.

Stephen

Stephen

I think you are right and need to look for other angles rather than same as everybody else. Interestingly that is what I did in London on wednesday, due to the volume of togs there, but of course they all got stolen along with all my gear

pete

The problem is some can't write stores... there is one story on demotix that is taken verbatim from Reuters.
http://www.demotix.com/news/940086/lech-walesas-wife-shakes-poland-frank-biography

What happens if Reuters does this in reverse with our pictures?

I always use smaller memory cards and put the used ones in an inside zipped pocket of my jacket said he being wise after the event

@Chris - The problem is not stories. As you know we don't edit or push stories out - and the industry also doesn't want the text.

The issue is reporters need to think laterally. It is always changing. Your eyes should never stray from photography news leaders, twitter and RSS of photography sites. You have to adapt.

It's easy not to adapt and then blame those around for not viewing an issue, or selling. It has to be done differently with compassion in an ever changing environment.

@Pete, I am sorry to hear that - that's not good at all.

Stephen

So it is legitimate to post a complete Reuters story on to Demotix with your own pictures? Reuters are happy with this? What if they start using our pictures (foc) to illustrate their stories?

@Chris - Please start your own thread on it. This is about 'CNN fires 50 photojournalists' and about photography.

@Marc - You are right in what you say, AFP, Reuters or AP would not do the same. This proves a challenge for us Demotix leaders in educating the masses to hold fire on that 'amazing' image. A big industry will be able to throw £2000 at a single image, and it may be hard for an amateur photography to say no to that.

One of the first books I read when getting started - The Photographer's Guide to Negotiating
http://www.amazon.com/Photographers-Guide-Negotiating-Richard-Weisgrau/d...

Stephen

I did start this thread... My re stealing Reuters copy only needed a yes/no answer. Still want an answer to that.

It is all part of the same thing. Using work for free....

Re the book... it is over 6 years old and that is the 6 years where the photography industry changed completely. In fact the pro photographers forums are awash with discussions on how much the industry has changed and payments and contracts in particular.

In the last 5 years the local newspaper has "let go" all 5 of it's staff photographers and will not pay for any images it has not commissioned. Usually on the 30GBP half day rate.... you pay your own expenses.

As for stories... it depends where Demotix is intending to go. As it is editors search for images to go with stories they already know. Demotix could generate the stories they don't know about.

My question re stealing Reuters copy only needs a yes/no answer

BTW I did start this thread and it is all linked.

It is true what Stephen says about working smart, but also my highest paid images (three figures) were taken with dozens of other pros and amateurs around me. Just make sure you upload your best on Demotix.

Chris is right about having stories lifted - it is bad enough with photos, but with text it can easily be done in no time at all. This is my experience from the past so why should someone research a story if they are not going to be paid or at the very least protected. And it ties up with this discussion because serious work has to be paid for if only to cover expenses never mind earning money. In any case, lifting someone else's story is unacceptable and unethical - Period.

It was the whole story complete with links to the Reuters story!

Hi Chris Just put the first paragraph of said story, without the agency name, between quotes in Google and got 9030 hits!! Lawrence

IT is interesting that neither Tom or Stephen will comment on the use of a complete Reuters story on Demotix. by a Demotix contributor.

With a policy on Demotix to not edit the description (story), or push it on, it has no bearing what-so-ever on 50 journalists being let go by CNN as the theme this thread is about.

I'm sure going along the lines of 6 degrees of separation you can find a relation, but there really isn't one between stealing a story, and journalists being let go because it is cheaper to get citizen photographs as this thread deals with. This isn't a thread about morals.

It is also best, as Stephen suggested, to start a new thread if you want to address a different theme.

If you read what CNN wrote, and not going by the extremist reactionaries that picked up the story centering on only a small part of the reason for a few of those let go, you will understand it was more a case of redundancy than moving wholeheartedly to a format of citizen journalists supplying the major portion of the news. Read what CNN wrote, and it is not as the extremists would have you believe.

There has been a huge change in all avenues of journalism in the last few years, with many budget cutbacks, and some big newspapers going completely out of the printed business.

In the news business, as in most businesses now with how the laws are, it is much much cheaper to hire private contractors than employees to do the work. It is cheaper to hire a contracted photographer than a staff photographer (even though they both do the exact same quality job, and in allot of the cases are the same person after he was let go, and re-contracted as a private company instead of an employee) because of insurance requirements, unemployment, tax liabilities, and a few other expenses a business incurs with an employee that it does not incur with a contracted worker. This has been a big shift in business for a number of years now.

The shift to citizen journalists is just starting to gain ground in recognition of the quality that they do turn in. Sure you have to weed through the chaff to get to the good grain, but you have a choice, and volume to find quality work, and at a much cheaper cost than seasoned journalists work for.

In business it is always the oldest, highest payed employee that is at the highest risk of job loss. This is how business cuts cost, and continues to operate. You can always find someone new to do the same quality work, at less money. Citizen journalists are now the ones filling these spaces, and on a new pricing structure.

The stock photography market was the first to see the big influence of citizen photographers, and now it is finally spilling over big time into the mainstream photojournalist field, and growing.

With regards to other agencies besides CNN doing this (moving to more reliance on citizen journalists), yes they are. but not in as direct a way as CNN.

Corbis owns AP, and has a solid relationship with Demotix. Is this the same? I think so, but in this case there is payment, and not relying on free citizen content. There is another major news service that does this too (paying for contributor content), but I'm not naming them here, and it is not easy finding your way into their portal.

When Stephen talked about doing your research, I feel he wasn't talking about the research required to write a good story, but the research you need to do to get top quality pictures of whatever event you are covering.

If you are covering a demonstration, you want to know their route by heart, and where you should be to get the best pictures in your style. You want to know where the police typically intercept them at, if in fact they do, and where to be to get the best shots of the confrontation (without being directly involved).

If you are covering an official event, you want to know beforehand the press location, and how soon you should be there to get a front row position, not having to reach over heads for the shot. You also want to scout out beforehand if there will be better shooting locations open that are not going to be filled with the rest of the press corp. Is there a shop owner along a route that will let you shoot from their open window above the street? Have you asked anyone living in the area if you can shoot from their window (maybe doing a quick natural light portrait shoot for their trouble)? Do you need to bring a ladder with you? Will you do better in a situation if you bring an assistant? Checking out where you will be, and what you will need beforehand can pay off in the long run, and just might get you those unique shots that a buyer can't pass over.

There is, like any other full time job, work that needs to be done all the time to ensure you are getting the best pictures you possibly can. It is not enough to just go to an event, and expect to always get that lucky shot. You have to do your work beforehand, just like any other job. You can only depend on luck if you do not want to make money, because luck does not happen that often. If you already know where you should be to get the "lucky" shot then you have done your work.

There has never been a working pro worried about the new competition if they have been doing their work. Sure many of them have had to adapt to the changing conditions, and they do this constantly, but the ones that work at doing it stay in business. The ones that quit working, and rest on their reputation are soon out of a job.

There are exceptions to this, as there are in everything in life, but those exceptions are at the extremes, and not something you can count on consistently.

Steve,
Plagiarism and lifting stories from somewhere else is always relevant and it is relevant in this discussion and any other discussion, forum, website, country, continent, world, solar system, the galaxy, the universe and beyond. JOURNALISTS DO NOT LIFT OTHER PEOPLE'S WORK - PERIOD.

Lawrence

One of the main reasons why Demotix developed into a photo wire was because checking text against everything that's out there is nigh-on impossible. Short of introducing some checking technology (either purchased at great expense or hurriedly cobbled together in-hosue) or asking our publishing team to Google every single sentence (time consuming beyond belief) there's little we can do.

We already inform users that everything they upload has to be their own original work - and we also point out to visitors that we can't be responsible for everything contributors upload.

When we're receiving this much material on a daily basis, our stance has to be reactive rather than proactive - if people bring issues to our attention or complain, then we can take down copyright-infringing material. We can't possibly filter everything for illegal content, or we wouldn't have any time to actually do our jobs.

The story posted at
http://www.demotix.com/news/940086/lech-walesas-wife-shakes-poland-frank-biography

Was a complete Reuters story as below. I email both Tom and Stephen for comment on this before raising the matter in a forum. As Demotix edits and publishes and it can also remove things I think you will find Demotix is responsible for content.

This is what was posted as a Demotix story exactly as it was posted with the link to Reuters....

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/11/22/us-poland-walesa-book-idUSTRE7AL19H20111122 :

Lech Walesa's wife shakes Poland with frank biography

WARSAW | Tue Nov 22, 2011 9:36am EST

(Reuters) - The wife

{SNIP].....

ations, even with my wife."

(Reporting by Gabriela Baczynska, editing by Paul Casciato)

Tom, I totally agree with you that it is probably impossible for Demotix to check everything especially text - but on the other hand you have many eyes viewing reports who can flag issues. Which brings us back to the anonymity issue QED. Which brings me to the story itself - anything that is text can easily be lifted and maybe translated, so it might be a bit counter productive for photographers to spend much time on text which seems to have little value in the scheme of things. Whether we like or not text based stories with images as support, have to be treated differently. Not to mention that Demotix really needs to find a way for us to upload orphan editorial stock. Best Lawrence

[quote]
CNN fires 50 photojournalists and plans to work with photo-hobbyist photogs for 'free' photography.
[/quote]

I cann´t believe, that they´ll really enjoy that decision. Years ago the Springer-edition-house, located at Hamburg and Berlin, invented the "readers-reporters" and provided them a phone number to send pictures taken by mobiles directly onto the editor table. Some other german newspapers followed, but terminated the projects after some time again.

Why? The answer is simple: these hobbyists didn´t have any journalistic skills and of course no newspaper and no picture agency was willing to provide instructions.
Because there grew up also some picture agencies, who wanted their piece of the cake, it was possible to look inside the works of these hobbyists. They didn´t know anything about keywording and they didn´t have any idea, which kind of content is required. There were a collection of pictures with titles like "a man looking out of a window of a ship" or a women standing in the floor of a house - and it was hardly obvious, that the gender of the person, standing about 50 meters away, is female.

Coming back to the inventor of the idea Springer, I´ve to say, that they paid used pictures very well. Their point was not to save money, but get content about events, which weren´t covered by professionals. A clash in a metro station, an accident somewhere on a street ... As a result many people are using know their mobile at first not for calling the police, but to take a picture ...

[quote]
If CNN does it will Reuters, AP AFP etc be next?
[/quote]

Surely not. The content for free became established, as many yellow-press-like internet-pages are hosting videos sent by people all over the world to services like Youtube. You can enjoy there someones cat, but You will see hardly something, which complies with the pretentions of Reuters.
Photojournalism remains a hard job and hobbyists are willing to visit any event without paying entry, but they aren`t willing to work there and to send the pictures in time, instead of enjoy it.

peter unless people are paid real money for real reporting the person with a new camera will soon tier out. those who still continue either do it for personal reasons -like myself- or places like demotix are just another place to upload photos for them.

Lawrence JC Baron said:

"unless people are paid real money for real reporting the person with a new camera will soon tier out. those who still continue either do it for personal reasons -like myself- or places like demotix are just another place to upload photos for them."

**********************************************************************************************************************************

Sorry, but I didn´t understand You really and Google - of course - didn´t make You clearer for me.
Seems, that my post wasn´t clear enough. The mayority of german newspapers, who installed the "reader-reporters", terminated this project soon for two reasons:

1.
People sent a lot of pictures without any news value. If You get pictures captured like "a man looking out of a window" or "a woman standing in a house floor" what will You do?
2.
People didn´t know anything about tagging. So it was nearly impossible to separate the once wheat-grain from the tons of chaff coming in.

So it remains true: they´ll get, what they´ll pay for.

peter, we agree with each other. however I was thinking in general terms whilst you.re referring to a specific case. as I said a person must have good reasons to go out and look for real news, tag and caption properly not to mention being well informed on the profession of journalism. it seems to me there are two reasons for achieving this - money or personal reasons. having a camera let alone a good camera is not a reason for being a photo journalist.

Lawrence JC Baron wrote:

"peter, we agree with each other. however I was thinking in general terms whilst you.re referring to a specific case."

*******************************************************************************************************************************

Hm, I doesn`t think so.

Lawrence JC Baron continued:

"as I said a person must have good reasons to go out and look for real news, tag and caption properly not to mention being well informed on the profession of journalism. it seems to me there are two reasons for achieving this - money or personal reasons."

*******************************************************************************************************************************

That`s right, but not the point. The people suppliing pictures and reports for free, doesn`t spend time and money for catch the breaking news. They stumble over something and look for a opportunity to exploit it. What means either make some bucks or - if they do not dare to ask for money - to became famous for five minutes. That was also, what the german newspapers looked for: to get the snaps, which anybody can took, who´s just passing a newsworthy happening.

Unfortunately for the newspapers a great part of people misunderstood that. They read, that there`s somebody willing to pay money for newsworthy pictures, took their camera and sent in pictures about a cat crossing the street, because that was the most newsworthy event they stumbled over meanwhile their sunday stroll. Short said: great part of contributors aren´t looking for work, but for donated money.

If CNN abdicates professional photographers, so they get enough content from suppliers, who look for glory or who whant to get their affairs published, but not at the advertising section. And the shrivelled editorial offices imbibes nearly anything, which doesn`t cost them time and money.

Hi,

Last week here there was a horrific traffic accident involving a van carrying migrant workers from Peru. In all, 11 people died in the accident, and some of my/our colleagues that were on the scene quickly described it as horrific, with victims strewn across the ground.

The dimensions of the accident, and the involvement of the Peruvian workers made this an International story, with coverage by all the major agencies.

I bring this up in the context of this discussion because of the discussion that is taking place locally after the incident, and it's relevance to the role of "Citizen Journalists".

This is a piece that was on the CBC's web site shortly after the incident:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/story/2012/02/09/toronto-hampstead-crash-passersby-recording.html

To summarise, it relates the story of the man that lived in the house where the vehicles came to rest, and his frustration with "gawkers with camera phones" not helping the victims.

I'd like to juxtapose that with the views of the professional photojournalists discussing the issue on the News Photographers Association of Canada (NPAC): http://npac.ca/forums/index.php?topic=4802.0

What is becoming clear is that while there is a role for the pictures taken by those who happen upon the scene of news, ultimately the quality, ethical and professional standards of a Photojournalist are going to be required to cover a large story.

Victor