| Sign in: |
| Members log in here with your user name and password to access the your admin page and other special features. |
|
|
|
|
|| SportsShooter.com: Member Message Board
Getty/Allsport/NBA deal-Controversy
Rick Rickman, Photographer
 |
Laguna Niguel | CA | USA | Posted: 3:56 PM on 09.12.02 |
->> There's a story in PDN this month about the controversy concerning the NBA/Getty -Allsport business deal. It's a very interesting story and points out a few issues that should have been addressed in this industry long ago.
Some newspapers around the country are refusing to run Allsport images because they see the deal that Allsport has made with the NBA as a potential conflict of interest. The thought here is; that if an individual or group is paid by another group to promote and distribute it's material, they can no-longer claim to be an independent service.
In the case of Allsport, who charges a subscribers fee for use of its image library, I believe that this is particularly true. Charging clients to use their services and then accepting money from the subjects of photographs to promote its brand is the worst case of double dipping and conflict of interest that I personally can imagine. Why this situation hasn't raised eyebrows before now is simply amazing to me.
To be described as an independent news service in a mission statement and then to take money from groups to distribute and promote those groups places Getty/Allsport in a position of agent status rather than independent news service. In my opinion this is similar to this scenario.
If the Washington Post were to go to the white house and cut a deal with the Bush administration to shoot and distribute all the images of what happens in the political arena in the white house receiving for their services a nice annual contract salary, would we still look at the Post as an independent news gathering service. I say we would not. Is it possible to imagine that the white house or the NBA won't make attempts to control distribution of certain kinds of pictures or promote use of their favorite kinds of images. I think it's time we draw some lines as to what we really are. I personally applaud the Detroit Free press and others who are deciding its time to also make those distinctions.
Rick Rickman |
|
Thad Parsons, Student/Intern, Photographer
|
Durham | NC | USA | Posted: 4:53 PM on 09.12.02 |
| ->> Thanks for the heads-up, I am going to talk to the editors at The Chronicle (Duke's Student Paper) and see if we can also not use their images. This is something that a newspaper can actually take a stand on. |
|
Isaac Menashe, Photographer
|
Germantown | MD | USA | Posted: 5:53 PM on 09.12.02 |
| ->> Does anyone know if the NFL made the same kind of deal with Getty-Allsport? I heard (unconfirmed rumor) from a friend that another agency is taking, or attempting to take, the NFL to court over this and over the control of photo coverage and distribution. |
|
Robert Hanashiro, Photographer
 |
Los Angeles | CA | USA | Posted: 10:06 PM on 09.12.02 |
->> As with any journalistic endeavor, ANY appearance of a conflict of interest should be avoided.
The strong stance by the Los Angeles Times and the Detroit News should be applauded. It is up to the individual newspaper to examine its own policies concerning matters of a content provider working for the entity (in this case a professional sports league) that it is "covering".
Running photos from "NBAE/Getty" in essence is like running a "handout" photo from a P.R. firm or movie studio. We do that all the time. So where do we draw the line?
If we consider Getty's distribution of NBA images coverage of a "news" event (and Allsport/Getty has been trying to pass itself off as a "wire service" for several years) then maybe we have a problem.
Allsport/Getty like everyone out there is looking for new revue streams. A deal with the NBA or the NHL or NSCAR does several things, most importantly guarantee access and credentials.
This is certainly a topic that requires a lot of discussion and thought.
I'm glad to see this pop up on the Mighty Sports Shooter Message Board.
Bert. |
|
Phillip MacCallum, Photographer
|
Carleton Place | ON | Canada | Posted: 8:44 AM on 09.13.02 |
->> Getty/Allsport/NHL deal and probably the same controversy. As of last year the NHL and Getty we're working on a deal to be the official supplier of NHL photography, basically taking over the NHL Images racket. (And I do mean racket)
I have asked for details of the agreement between the NHL and Getty but no one seems willing to explain them.
As a representative of the League what restriction will exist on Fight Photos, Bloody Photos, embarassing photos?
I know as a team photographer these photos are frowned upon so how is Getty supposed to remain independant and unbiased???
Phil |
|
Geoff Miller, Photographer
|
Portage | MI | USA | Posted: 11:09 AM on 09.13.02 |
| ->> Not that it's in the same league as the stick-n-ball boys, but in autoracing Getty/Allsport has the same type of agreement with CART. Though it's my understanding, through talking to one of their shooters, that CART can make no editorial restrictions on the images they publish. But then CART isn't an 800 lbs. monkey like the NBA/NHL/Etc. are. |
|
Jed Jacobsohn, Photographer
|
Oakland | CA | USA | Posted: 12:41 PM on 09.13.02 |
| ->> I have shot for Allsport/Getty for almost 10 years now, and not once have I ever heard from any league or from anyone at my work that I should move pictures that only promote the league for which we are working with. I have shot the NBA Finals for the past three years and have always been competeing with the likes of the AP, Reuters and AFP on a editorial level. For example, if I see a picture of an NBA player loosing his cool and he throws a chair at a ref, I am not gong to withhold that picture becasue it makes the NBA look bad. I will move that picture because it is news. That is how all the Allsport/Getty shooters think. Leagues pay us money becasue we have the the best sports shooters, the best staff and technology to process and distribute the best photos in a timely matter. To think that the editorial content of the pictures we move is influenced in any way by the deals we have with different sports leagues is just more plain wrong. |
|
Robert Beck, Photographer
 |
Carlsbad | CA | USA | Posted: 12:58 PM on 09.13.02 |
->> Jed J ...maybe you are pure in wiring out images to the world. But what about when that race car driver was blown into pieces last year (indy racing league or whatever) and Allsport/getty which had the image nailed did NOT wire the image because the IRL did not want them too? That is one instance I know of. How many more are there?
It is a problem. Allsport/Getty is NOT a wire service if it ONLY wires what the league, association or whatever allows them to. A wire service wires what happens. It appears there are instances when Allsport/Getty wires ONLY what their employers ask them to. |
|
Clark Brooks, Photographer
|
Urbana | IL | USA | Posted: 1:28 PM on 09.13.02 |
->> I don't mind that A/G is double dippin' as long as access to events is not restricted to other news/sports photo gathering entities both large and small and the rights publish and market and captured image is not restricted. I don't see a problem if A/G is under contract with NBA or whatever organization.
Limiting access to "vendors" instead of representatives of various media is the organization's right no doubt. However, I do take issue in the fact that such an agreement is an infringement on the freedom we have as independent members of the press to capture and disseminate newsworthy items.
I see an economical solution that won't allow agreements like this in place to stick around for long. If local papers like the ones mentioned above bury NBA stories on the back pages and use no photos in protest that will drive ticket sales and consumer interest down in the teams market. When there are fewer people filling the seats at event, hopefully the NBA will nullify that and similar agreements. The papers should also increase the cost of advertising to team and NBA to recup revenue losses due lower circulation because of the lack of coverage of their sport. The reduction in revenue generated by the team should put at least local daily shooters back where they belong on the sidelines. |
|
Darren Carroll, Photographer
|
Cedar Creek | TX | USA | Posted: 2:16 PM on 09.13.02 |
->> Jed, I'm sure you wouldn't withhold an image. But it's not you (or any other Allsport shooter) that I'm worried about.
Robert is absolutely right-on with his example of the Zanardi crash. Any real "news" organization would have moved that picture, as gruesome as it was, and left the decision of whether or not to run it up to the editors at member/client editorial outlets. Can you imagine the member outcry if Jon Ferrey had been shooting for the AP and the AP folks back in NY decided not to move that image?
The suits back at the office have a vested interest in keeping the contract/retainer money coming in, and they know that casting their clients in a bad light is not going to positively enhance that kind of business relationship. When you consider the fact that Allsport/Getty counts CART (it is Cart and not the IRL, right?), the LPGA, NBAE, and the NHL as *clients,* and that rule number one of any business relationship is to keep the client happy, you're setting yourself up for conflict of interest problems. Yes, I know that Allsport is a wire service. But newspapers and magazines are not its real, bread-and-butter clients. Anything that comes from those editorial-use sales is just gravy on top of the guaranteed money the company gets from being the "official" photographers of entity X. And that's where the decision to run/not run a photo is going to be made--at the corporate level. That is indeed worrisome. |
|
Rick Rickman, Photographer
|
Laguna Niguel | CA | USA | Posted: 2:30 PM on 09.13.02 |
->> Jed Jacobsen wrote:
"To think that the editorial content of the pictures we move is influenced in any way by the deals we have with different sports leagues is just more plain wrong."
I know that you are very true in your coverage of the events that you cover for Allsport Jed. I don't argue with the fact that Allsport employs some of the finest talent in the sports photography arena but, unfortunately you don't make the ultimate decisions of what goes out the door for Allsport and the people who are making the deals aren't including you in their processes either.
Sadly, the instance Robert Beck points out isn't the only situation that has occurred in the past few years. In converstaions I have had with Carmen Romanelli in the past he has told me that he actively lobbies to have the best face placed on the images that are distributed for the NBA. He has told me too, that he always makes efforts to elimante pictures that show the players or the game in a bad light. He maks every effort to stop fight images from being circulated. I know for certain that he applies those pressures to all the "associates" who work with his organization equally.
From personally having had those discussions with Carmen in the past I know that some pressure is exerted by his office. That's his job! It stands to reason that there is some pressure exerted by him towards Allsport as well.
Even subtle pressure on any level affects pure thinking and creates the presents of "Conflict of Interest." Particularly if an organization takes money from the people they photograph on a contractual level.
Is it resonable to believe that the potential loss of hundreds of thousands of dollars annually won't affect someones judgement or perspective. I don't think so.
If an orgainzation is going to claim independence then it's important to be independent. If an organization is going to be a news gathering service then they have to have the ability to do that news gathering totally unencumbered. No Exceptions! Not even one!
Robert Beck is right! This is a problem! A problem both of perception and reality and it's high time people face up to it. I'm hoping awareness continues to grow and we finally can stop pretending these kinds of arrangements are OK from a news gathering point of view.
Rick Rickman |
|
Robert Hanashiro, Photographer
|
Los Angeles | CA | USA | Posted: 4:13 PM on 09.13.02 |
->> A couple of points and a follow up:
- As a Syracuse University journalism grad Jed, I am sure you heard this many times: "it is not only actual impropriety but the appearance of impropriety" that we must avoid. As journalists we operate in the public trust. So to maintain that trust, we must insure that we do not have associations that could be construed as hindering our reporting of the news.
- I've known Jed for many years and am sure that he (as well as most of the Allsport/Getty staff) would not knowingly hold back an image that might be damaging to a client for financial gain.
- Allsport/Getty puts out on its wire not just its photographers' images, but those employed directly by the league and its teams. There is no checks and balances to be sure that these photographers put out all note worthy photos, whether they are damaging to the image of their employers or not. Without this guarantee that ALL of the photographers whose images are sent out on its wire service have the same ethical standards as the All/Sport Getty staff, there will be questions.
- Make no mistake, Rick is right: the NBA's major sake in this is not just financial but one of CONTROL as well. I too have witnessed conversations with the NBA where they have intimated that its goal is to exercise more control of how and where their image is distributed and how it is used.
- The original source for this debate is a Photo District New on-line article. It can be found here: http://www.pdnonline.com/news/index.html#3.
- - And lastly, from the Society of professional Journalists code of ethics:
Act Independently
Journalists should be free of obligation to any interest other than the public's right to know.
Journalists should:
* Avoid conflicts of interest, real or perceived.
* Remain free of associations and activities that may compromise integrity. |
|
Jed Jacobsohn, Photographer
|
Oakland | CA | USA | Posted: 4:29 PM on 09.13.02 |
->> Since the Allsport/Getty has had a deal with the NBA, I have been directly involved with covering NBA games for my company. As long as that has been going on (and even covering games before the deal), there has NEVER been an instance where Carmen Romenelli or anyone else from the NBA has said to me or anyone else shooting for Allsport at a NBA game, “don’t move that picture.” That has simply not happened. The coverage that the Allsport shooters do at NBA games and every other sporting event is unbiased from any outside influence and is in the same style of shooting as AP, Reuters and AFP. Never have I felt “even subtle pressure” from anyone influencing my editorial decisions on photographs.
Rick wrote: “Unfortunately you don't make the ultimate decisions of what goes out the door for Allsport and the people who are making the deals aren't including you in their processes either.”
What do you know? When I am working an assignment I decide what is moved and what isn’t. There is no editing done other than what the photographer or editor decides at an event.
The crash picture was a unique situation. The horrific nature of that picture affected the decision to release the shot. If you look at our coverage of CART, you will see plenty of “crash” pictures that have been moved that might not make CART “look good”, but were moved anyway. I can’t think of a situation were this has occurred before. And to base all editorial judgment for an entire company on one photograph that wasn’t released is not fair.
One point the Rick has failed to make throughout the years of writing about Allsport/Getty is this: As staff photographers working for a salary and not on a per picture or assignment basis, we are less likely to be influenced by outside forces. My worry is not about money, but about getting the best picture. Unlike a freelance photographer who, as Rick has so eloquently written about over the years, is half businessman half shooter, we at Allspor put 100% of our energy into photography and getting the best possible picture, and not into hustling to get paid. This shows in our photography. I think this is an important and positive fact of being a staff photographer in general.
For better or for worse, we live in a Capitalist society were the credo is “ Provide the best product for the least amount of money.” For better or for worse, this is the American way. This is what we do. If you don’t like it I heard there are plenty of job openings in China. |
|
Robert Hanashiro, Photographer
|
Los Angeles | CA | USA | Posted: 4:49 PM on 09.13.02 |
->> And here's more food for thought:
The Associated Press has a contract to supply photos to Major League Baseball's Internet projects. |
|
Rick Rickman, Photographer
|
Laguna Niguel | CA | USA | Posted: 9:05 PM on 09.13.02 |
->> It's interesting that the chinese employment possibilities came up because if you think about it, there will be a lot of job opportunities there just prior to 2008. I probably will see many of you there. Thanks for the reminder.
Rick Rickman |
|
Robert Beck, Photographer
|
Carlsbad | CA | USA | Posted: 10:18 AM on 09.14.02 |
| ->> I have never heard the credo "provide the best product (picture) for the least amount of money." That may be Allsport/Getty's motto but it is not mine. To be honest, that is what irks people the most about Allsport/Getty. Sure, the client would like to PAY the smallest amount of money for the best picture but that does not mean we (photographers in whatever capacity) should sell our best pictures for the least amount of money. Unfortunately, until we unite and get our asses out of the kettle at the same time we will continue to be boiled to the bone for our hard work. Very few photographers receive fair market value for their efforts...Almost none in our line of business. Time for a new credo ladies and gentlemen. |
|
Howard Curtis Smith, Photographer
|
Baldwin | NY | USA | Posted: 1:53 PM on 09.14.02 |
->> I may be off base, but something about this deal makes my head hurt.
If the NBA wants a distribution channel for NBA produced photographs then why does it have to pay? If the deal is as cut and dry as it sounds that means that the distribution of the photographs is more valuable than the photographs themselves since the NBA is paying Getty. Getty should be thrilled to get high quality photographs that it can resell with no production costs on their part. If Getty insists on getting paid just to market these photos, then why has the NBA not used AP or another widely used, established company to distribute it's photographs? AP distributes hand out photographs all the time. There has to be more to this deal and similar deals that Getty has with other leagues than meets the eye. The NBA has to be getting more than distribution for the money it is spending. The NBA is big business. It is not going to spend money without getting something in return.
Mr. Jacobsohn, non of this is directed at you. It must be hard seeing people question the business dealings of your employer and not take it personally. There may be a simple explanation for this. I hope someone at Getty comes forward with an official statement that addresses our concerns. Getty does not have a legal obligation to explain their business to us. They do have a moral obligation to avoid appearances of conflict of interest if they wish to be viewed as an independent news service.
I have one scary scenario that has popped into my head. What if these distribution deals go well and everything goes back to business as usual. What would stop the bean counters at Getty from deciding that their photographers are redundant since they are getting photographs from the league. They could save a lot of money by not sending anyone to the games and just distribute the league's photographs. It sounds a bit far fetched, but so did the contracts that most of us labor under when they were first proposed a few years ago. We work for businesses, and ethics sometime suffer when it comes to boosting the bottom line. The accountants may not realize when a proposal to increase profits crosses an ethical line, just as we are unaware of many of the rules of accounting. Let's hope I am wrong here.
Just thinking out loud.
Howard Smith |
|
Tony Donaldson, Photographer
|
Sherman Oaks | CA | USA | Posted: 4:26 PM on 09.14.02 |
->> As a freelance photographer with a successful business, I come up against people who undercut me all the time. It bugs me and it drives down the overall worth of photography, making it harder for us all to earn a living. The A/G shooters are making somewhere around $250 a day, and their images may not be used at all or may be used in an ad that will make Getty $40k, but no matter what, the photographer makes the same $250.
A couple of years ago the camera stores sued Costco for selling film below thier own cost. Monopolies are challenged when they start forcing other legitimate businesses out, makes you wonder if this might happen here.
-Tony |
|
Robert Hanashiro, Photographer
|
Los Angeles | CA | USA | Posted: 6:09 PM on 09.14.02 |
->> I think we're getting a little out of the lines here on what Rick started as a topic ... the apparent conflict of interest of the NBA - Getty/Allsport contract and the photo agency's insistence that they are a wire service.
Debating Allsport/Getty's pricing scheme and what they pay their staff and contract photographers begins to fall into a whole different area.
I'd like to see this thread stay within the topic of conflict of interest and whether a content provider can maintain an air of independence and credibility while having a financial arrangement with a sports league they cover.
If you want to question Allsport/Getty's business practices with regards to its pricing structure and treatment of photographers, maybe you should take it up with Allsport/Getty directly rather than post bitching & moaning here.
I would like to see this message board not sink to the level of a "bitch site."
Most of the posts here have been thoughtful and very intelligent in debating the issue of the appearance of conflict of interest and whether newspapers should run Allsport/Getty NBA images.
I don't want Brad, Grover or myself to have to become a moderator for this message board. So let's stay professional on topics like this ... and have fun on the topics that are such.
Thanks everyone for your understanding.
Bert. |
|
Tony Donaldson, Photographer
|
Sherman Oaks | CA | USA | Posted: 6:42 PM on 09.14.02 |
| ->> Sorry, Bert. I'll keep my thoughts on this to myself. |
|
Delane Rouse, Photographer
|
Philadelphia | PA | US | Posted: 10:21 PM on 09.14.02 |
->> Bert-
First of all...this is not my site...and I'll let you censure anything I say because I respect you guys the site just that much.
But...this seems like a GREAT place for a TON of freelance photogrpahers to discuss Allsport/Getty. When I was breaking into the business (still), I thought the best thing in the world was Allsport? Was I wrong? I had no idea what fair rates were, no idea what a "good deal" was for a killer image...nothing, nada, I didn't know a thing. I was an Engineer for a Fortune 100 company with "disposable income" and I loved sports photography.
Would this not have been a great place to come to find out about Allsport/Getty/ANY COMPANY's business practices with regards to its pricing structure and treatment of photographers? I'm not advocating bitching. Just discussion.
Is it because the discussion is about Allsport/Getty, commercial vs. editorial sports photography or because the thread lost the original focus?
Just wondering? |
|
Delane Rouse, Photographer
|
Philadelphia | PA | US | Posted: 10:30 PM on 09.14.02 |
| ->> By the way, I do think the deal is a conflict of interest, at least the appearance of a conflict of interest. BUT, if it was my studio with the same deal, I would think it was a good business deal. |
|
Robert Hanashiro, Photographer
|
Los Angeles | CA | USA | Posted: 10:59 PM on 09.14.02 |
->> Again ... the ORIGINAL focus of this thread was on the coverage of the NBA by Allsport/Getty and the story on PDN's web site about newspapers considering it a conflict of interest.
I have in the past seen way too many lists, forums, message boards and personal e-mails to me where discussions have disintegrated into people just complaining about Allsport/Getty selling photos "too cheap".
If you want to discuss that fine. Start another thread on that topic.
I saw this particular discussion heading south into complaints about Allsports/Getty's dealing with photographers and not keeping with the topic at hand.
I will say this on that topic: If you have a complaint about a company's relationship with photographers, take it up with them first BEFORE splashing rants on messages boards like this one. As I said, I don't want to police messages boards ... I had to do waaaaay too much of that on the RobGalbraith.com Forum.
We would like to keep this as professional as possible and keep threads from going off onto tangents.
So Delane and Robert if you think I am attempting to censor you, fine. I am trying to focus the discussion on the topic at the top of this page.
Grover and Jason have made it very easy to start a new topic on this message board. So please be our guest!
Hanashiro. |
|
Grover Sanschagrin, Photo Editor, Photographer
|
Albany | CA | USA | Posted: 11:15 PM on 09.14.02 |
->> Bert - you just beat me to it. I was just about to encourage the birth of new threads for new topics.
-- Grover |
|
Zack Uribe, Photographer
|
Santa Clara | CA | USA | Posted: 2:34 AM on 09.16.02 |
->> Earlier on this topic Clark Brooks said"I don't mind that A/G is double dippin'as long as access to events is not restricted to other news/sports photo gathering entities "
I believe this has already happened, and I would not be surprised if it does in the limited press areas of the NBA.
As I understand it, Allsport is the official photographer of MLS. At Spartan Stadium, the ONLY photographers who have access to shoot from the sidelines are the Team or League photographers, the rest of us are limited to the area behind the goals.
Just my $.02.
If any of this is incorrect, please correct me. |
|
Clark Brooks, Photographer
|
Urbana | IL | USA | Posted: 10:45 PM on 09.16.02 |
->> Zack:
Someone, and I can't for the life of me remember who, said they tried to get creds to an MLS game recently and was denied. The PR contact told him that Allsport was the official league photographer and, in so many words, don't bother to apply again.
I didn't believe him at first, but if what you say is true I owe the guy, whoever it was, an apology. Perhaps he got in at the start of this new agreement.
Like I said fine if ya double dippin' - that's good business practice, but for the leagues to restrict other shooters then it is a problem. It looks as if A/G has taken lessons form Mr. Billy Gates in attempts to squash competition. At least they are still letting some shooters in. The question is when will they stop letting shooters for pubs and mags in? |
|
Steven E. Frischling, Photographer
 |
Amherst | MA | USA | Posted: 12:55 PM on 09.17.02 |
->> My personal opinion is that Getty/AllSport is a wire service, and a wire service should not be the primary editorial content outlet for a private entity. Once the independent news service has a financial incenstive to protect or promote the private entity it is covering, it is no longer an independent news service. As a former newspaper chief photog who had to select images nightly, I'd never use a non-independent news photo, any photo which was distributed by an entity with an interest in the subjects of the photo were marked as "HAND OUT", and the caption reflected that the image was provided by the folks in the image.
If I was using Getty Images photos I'd have to mark the images as supplied by the NBA. I'd also not pay for images which were being used as PR for the NBA, since the images are independently shot.
Jed said"The crash picture was a unique situation. The horrific nature of that picture affected the decision to release the shot. :
Unique situations are what photo editors and page editors are looking for. Why is to say that there might be a terrible injury on the b-ball court (player flips backwards after a slam and breaks his spine for example) and Getty would hold the image because the NBA would not allow Getty to release the image.
There are way to many grey areas for Getty/AllSport and the NBA to slide by without honest coverage. |
|
Robert Oliver, Photographer
|
San Diego (Oceanside) | CA | USA | Posted: 8:42 PM on 09.17.02 |
->> Bert's right.
Anybody have Mark Getty's email or mailing address? While we're at it, how about Bill Gates contact info.
RO |
|
Steven E. Frischling, Photographer
|
Amherst | MA | USA | Posted: 8:50 PM on 09.17.02 |
->> Robert:
No e-mail for Bill Gates, although you should contact Steve Davis or Brian Storm regarding Corbis issues.
As for Getty/AllSport, you can try the following info:
Mark Getty
C.E.O
Getty Images
601 N. 34th Street
Seattle, WA 98103
mark.getty@gettyimages.com |
|
Rick Stewart, Photographer
|
Canandaigua | NY | | Posted: 5:17 AM on 09.18.02 |
->> Okay, I said I wouldn't but I'm gonna anyway. For those of you that don't know me, I've been a contract photographer for A/G since they purchased Focus West (remember, Beckman??) in 1988. This is my 21st year making a living as a sports photographer....
I am NOT posting this as support of Getty, cuz I don't agree with some of the stuff they do either. But they don't consult me before making a big deal either. Go figure. Getty's a good target for most of you cuz you don't know squat about how they do business...good and bad.
First, NONE OF YOU (except maybe Jed) know the verbage of these marketing arrangements and that is what they are. Don't try to speculate. If you had the resources to do it, you'd be doing it too. Both Getty and non-Getty photographers have benefitted from these deals. Some photogs get hosed. If you're an organization with one of these deals, you have to take the bad with the good pics. If you don't want to use them, fine, but somewhere Getty may want to distribute it to their clients at THEIR discression. I have been told "I don't want to see that in the paper tomorrow".... I was doing a figure skating event when a French pairs team was skating. During a twisting move, the women's breast popped out of her skating garb.....twice. Well, my contact at the site didn't see it in the paper the next day....cuz she wasn't in Paris where it ran full page! What gets run has been controlled by photographers, editors and publishers for generations, and many times the decisions are made with moral and/or FINANCIAL motives in place. Go figure. We've ALL done things we may not have agreed with to satisfy a client. Be real!
Second, Many of you seem to be of the opinion that Getty (or anyone else) can't or shouldn't do two things at once......service a client (NBA,NHL,CART,IRL, IOC) and service live wire clients as well from the same event. Well I got news for ya boyz, A/G has been doing that for YEARS, and doing a good enough job with it to stay in business AND make a profit. It works, and makes sense. They're not hiding behind the guise of being "non Profit" either.....although I wish they'd share some more with me. Sorry, Robert. The point here is that this is not 1975. If you think our business is all in a black and white box.....think again. In Fact, you'd better start thinking outside the box. ALL of the wire services and a really well known sports magazine are in the business of selling "Stock" now. They weren't fifteen years ago. This is 2002. You can and probably have to do it both ways to survive.
Third, this is between Getty's clients and Getty. The suits. I can't understand why all of a sudden this is an issue when the co-credit arrangements are going into their second year or more. You Just noticed??? Duh. No wonder you're a subscriber. I wonder what evidence there is that the Free Press and/or the Times is getting hosed. There may be evidence, but that's for the suits to decide. Perhaps it's a warm-up for contract negotiations.......HMMMMMM???
Fourth, perception can be part of the problem. It's a problem if you don't like the perception. Getty, the NBA, NHL, et al don't care what our perception is. And in reality, if you don't like it, don't participate. It's funny to me that there's a few guys talking in this forum that HAVE participated in unethical practices NUMEROUS times, but have the gall to whine about something that doesn't fit into some idealistic cookie cutter idea of what being a "journalist" is or was. Everybody's HEARD OF this and that. Bull. What do you know to be fact. Everybody's entitled to an opinion thank god, but if its based on perception instead of fact, its not worth much. A little snipit story in PDN isn't a very comprehensive source, but sure makes for good message forum banter.
Fifth, If you're working for a team or organization that has policies of picture usage and you don't agree, DON"T WORK FOR THEM. Better yet, try to convince them otherwise. Photographers are great whiners. It interesting though, that everytime sports photographers have tried to organize over the last twenty years, you can't get enough to stand up for their "Beliefs". Perhaps you younger guys can turn the tide in the future.
We're not going to cover every idea on this subject here in this forum, but thanks for considering my POV. |
|
Rick Rickman, Photographer
|
Laguna Niguel | CA | USA | Posted: 6:39 AM on 09.18.02 |
->> I feel like to be clear with this issue it’s important to delve into a little history. Before I do that however I have to say that I had a conversation with a good friend of mine who works for Allsport. During this conversation it became clear to me that my friend at Allsport didn’t really know where all this conflict of interest discussion was coming from. He kept asking me whyI was trying to make the photographers at Allsport look bad.
I thought about this conversation for several days. I decided that it was important to express to everyone that I have some very strong feelings about the importance of this issue. I believe strongly that one of the most important freedoms we have in this country is a free press. It’s truly one of the things that sets us apart from almost every other country in the world.
I spent nine years in the newspaper industry. Four of those years were spent at the Des Moines Register. The Register was an institution of exemplary ethical behaviour. They had some of the most stringent rules regarding what was and what wasn’t considered a conflict of interest. Pulitzer prize winning journalists cut their eye teeth at this institution and the editors of this paper were the names in the who’s who of journalism.
Those years were my formative ones in journalism and I came away from that experience with a clear understanding of the importance of a free, unencumbered press. I learned the importance of the perception of non bias. Most importantly, I learned that what each of us does as ajournalists affects the public perception of our integrity.
There are news gathering institutions in this country like the LA Times that won’t allow it’s photographers to freelance while they are paid members of a staff because in that act of freelancing the paper feels that one day a photographer “migh”t do a freelance job for someone who they later may have to cover for a news story and that may be problematic for that photographer to remain neutral after having done work for that same institution in another capacity.
Bob Deutch of USA today told me that they cannot take gifts from companies who they may have to cover because that simple act of taking a gift “may” affect their ability to cover a story from a neutral standpoint. Many newspapers will terminate an employee for the slightest hint of impropriety regarding conflict of interest.
Why do independent news gathering organizations feel so strongly about this kind of perception? Because everytime a reader hears about some kind of conflict of interest on the part of a news gathering organization it calls into question the credibility of our free press. The last thing we as journalists need is another reason for the public to wonder about the ability of independent news gathering organization to do their jobs without potential bias.
If a group wants to claim news gathering or wire service stature there is a responsibility that that association requires. One of those responsibilities is presenting an unwaivering ability to cover news and events totally without bias. If anyone questions the ability of that group to report fairly because of certain affiliations then that has created a question that should never have been raised in the first place.
My personal belief is that Allsport has tried to have it both ways now for a long time and has finally been called on this issue. What they choose to do to rectify this perceptual issue will be interesting to see.
Rick Rickman |
|
Howard Curtis Smith, Photographer
|
Baldwin | NY | USA | Posted: 12:10 PM on 09.18.02 |
->> Probably nothing.
Unfortunately.
Howard Smith |
|
Alicia Wagner Calzada, Photographer
|
San Antonio | TX | USA | Posted: 12:35 PM on 09.18.02 |
->> In response to this last post I have to agree, and wonder we are being blindsided by these trends in our industry.
We are extremely sensitive to "freedom of the press" as it relates to government intrusion, but it seems like the greatest threat to this is often corporate intrusion. With corporations like NBA exerting control over media outlets, who is really blocking free and unbiased coverage?
Tribune owns both the Chicago Tribune and the Chicago Cubs. Is that any different than the AG/NBA issue. Maybe this is a different thread, but there is conflict of interest all over the place now that most newspapers are controlled by huge corporations- and they are after all, a business.
-Alicia Wagner Calzada |
|
Shelly Castellano, Photographer, Assistant
|
Huntington Beach | CA | USA | Posted: 1:53 PM on 09.18.02 |
->> This issue has become very important to me recently being an NHL shooter. I chatted with Rick yesterday, pending a response for a season credential. I was told today by a PR rep for a local team that if the publication that I am credentialed with does not want to run a "great" shot that I am NOT allowed to send it anywhere else especially a "wire service" because they are credentialing AP for this reason and its their job not mine. The team has been told to follow Allsports NBA guidelines eventhough they are four or so years behind.
Need I say more??? |
|
Jed Jacobsohn, Photographer
|
Oakland | CA | USA | Posted: 8:46 PM on 09.18.02 |
->> Rick R. wrote: "My personal belief is that Allsport has tried to have it both ways now for a long time and has finally been called on this issue."
First of all, nothing has ever been hidden about any of our dealings with any of the leagues. While your personal belief may be that Allsport photographers are not reporting the news/sport in a true way, and that is your right to voice your opinion, it has no basis in reality. I’m sure it would fit better into YOUR view of the world, if Allsport photographers were mere button pushers for the different leagues, only reporting what the league wants. But this is not the case. Everyone I work with are not only outstanding journalists, but true artists as well, something which is unique, and has made Allsport so successful since its’ creation.
I am proud of the work that is done from, the photographers and editors, to the account executives that have worked hard to form association with the top sporting leagues in the world. We are able to provide, as a whole, a group of the finest sports photographers from all over the world, with the best technology and delivery system, able to provide to a wide variety of clients. Other sports agencies have tried to form models of business similar to Allsport, but have ultimately failed. Unfortunately, we have become the obvious target because of our success. |
|
david burnett, Photographer
|
Arlington | VA | usa | Posted: 8:32 AM on 09.19.02 |
| ->> There is no doubt that a large part of the problem with questions of Conflict of interest have to do with what the suits have wrought. Time AOL Warner Madonna CNN Life Inc. (or whatever it is this week) owns sports teams, and as do other major media outlets. Its part of the "confluence" strategy which did such wonderful things as sell Time to AOL ... the idea that we can make big bucks for the parent company, and the top guys will duke it out to see if they ride in GIV's or G V's to the company retreat in Telluride... at some point, all lines became blurred. Certainly a TIME sports writer (not that there IS one now.. i think the position is in Hiatus) wouldnt think he would be influenced by the overriding corporate structure, but the sad fact is, the real issue, to me, is whether or not, having made favorites with One photo agency, a League decides to tell everyone else to stuff it. If you are the person handing out passes, and dealing with hundreds of media requests (ever count the number of photogs on the sidelines of a Class IIIb football game?... okok.. i MADE up IIIb..)... it cannot be easy to decide who is "legal" and "deserving" when you have so many potential bodies in the way. As a free lancer who likes to take odd ball pictures which I seldom am assigned to do, I would like to still be able to go to a football game, hockey game, whatever, when the game/moment/style was right, assuming I could make my case. But the worry is that when ONLY inside-contracted folks get the good spots, then the real treatment of freelance/photo agency folks like me -- being told No, dont bother applying -- "XXX' is our agency of choice, buy your pictures from Them....... That is the worry. |
|
M. David Leeds, Photographer
|
New York | NY | USA | Posted: 9:28 PM on 10.03.02 |
->> Ok, so my eyes are now bleeding as I've just read the entire history of these posts...
After seeing the PDN issue that prompted Rick to start this thread in the first place I was interested in seeing what the scope of Sports Shooter opinions would be. Being in the somewhat unique position of having been an Allsport staff photographer and having been laid off along with many other people in August '01, thus having both an inside and outside knowledge of the situation, I would like to contribute my thoughts.
First of all, I can tell you from having worked events with most of the current Allsport staff photographers during the past four years that it is their professionalism and their ethical and tireless work practices and more importantly their being genuinely nice people that made me proud to be a member of that "team" of photographers. I think, however, that the problem, or potential problem, in the relationship with the NBA and Allsport/Getty lies not so much with the Allsport (I refuse to call them Getty) photographers, but potentially with some of the NBA photographers whose work is transmitted on a nightly basis through Getty during the NBA and WNBA seasons.
Now, I am hesitant to burn bridges here as I do work on a freelance basis for both Allsport/Getty and the NBA, but I am compelled to site the one example of this potential conflict that I witnessed first hand. I was at an NBA game last season on behalf of the NY Times, and during the game Jason Kidd got into a shoving match with a member of the Celtics.. While transmitting after the half, I was sitting next to an assistant for the photographer that was covering the game for the NBA and who was sending photos to Getty.. (I'm not going to ID the photographer except to say that he's NOT an NBA staffer) Anyway, the point of this is that I asked the assistant how the shove looked as I was on the wrong end of the court, and he said "It looked good but, I was told not to move it".
GETTY CANNOT DECIDE WHETHER OR NOT TO POST SOMETHING THAT THEY NEVER RECEIVE. THAT IS THE PROBLEM.
Rick, Jed, and Rick, I know, respect and like each of you very much and I think you're all correct in certain respects. I don't think, Jed, that you or the other Allsport photographers are having their ethics questioned but that the suits are. The problem is that while Getty's effort on one hand is to be a news/wire service, the NBA's is not and has never been, they're now sleeping together despite the fact that they have contradictory objectives and that's where the line becomes muddy and inherently a conflict of interest arrises. I trust that my friend's at Allsport would be sending a photo of a fight, puking player, or streaking fan without hesitation - the problem is that A/G is not in control of what the representatives of these other entites are transmitting and the NBA makes no appologies for their practices nor should they.
I think the bottom line is NOT that the Allsport people are being told what to do, but that it seems to some that they could be.
Respectfully and truthfully yours,
M. David Leeds |
|
Return to --> Message Board Main Index
|