REUTERS FIRES THEIR PHOTOJOURNALIST OF OVER 30 YEARS

Richard S. (rich815) · Apr 1, 2014

http://www.diyphotography.net/reuters-fires-photojournalist-30-years/

MDR · Apr 1, 2014

Reuters is mostly a propaganda agency these days and therefore doesn't need good photojournalist who still might have an iota of integrity. They prefer one sided reports best made by one side of a civil war or political party. Knowledge, moral and integrity in these days are a hindrance to business and that's what reuters is.

Dr Croubie · Apr 1, 2014

I do hope that's just because it's today...

snapguy · Apr 1, 2014

daid

Reuters pretty much died when news services stopped using semaphores to keep up with what Napoleon's armies were up to.

canuhead · Apr 1, 2014

The article is not entirely accurate. They didn't lay off all their sports photographers. What they did was to change their freelance sports assignment procedure. They now use USA Today Sports Images for ALL North American sports. Cheaper assignment rates and no expenses paid. So yeah, lots of photographers lost a huge chunk of their income but they did not lay off all their sports photographers.

Read this for more inofrmation…. https://nppa.org/node/66076

benjiboy · Apr 1, 2014

I can't help wondering what sort of sports photographs you can take with an iphone ?.

canuhead · Apr 1, 2014

From what I understand and hear from friends who know the details. Some of these "photographers" have day jobs that basically support their playing at 'sports photographer'. That they can drive around 300 kms round trip, not get reimbursed for parking and mileage and end up with, let's say $75 for 3 - 5 hours of work, speaks volumes. SCrew these bottom feeders…

-that number is a guess taking in mileage and parking.

SebastianKrauss · Apr 1, 2014

At sports events like Olympics hundreds of photographers shoot more or less the same images. (been there and done it) In fact one of the big agencies would be enough to cover these events and I completely understand that Reuters licenses the pictures instead of sending own photographers for more money to receive (more or less) the same images. We might not like it, but it's business.

canuhead · Apr 1, 2014

No, what they are doing in NA is not using their better paid, very experienced (as in excellent photographers) freelancers and going with those who aren't fully vested in the business (see day jobs) and will file 'useable' photos. I know that in Toronto, very few freelancers if any, can touch Mark Blinch's sports photography. None. It's gamble that may cost them clients in the end so poor decision imo.

juan · Apr 1, 2014

This is just continuing the downfall of the mainstream media as the view their people - reporters, photographers, copy editors, etc. - as expenses rather than assets.

resummerfield · Apr 1, 2014

juan said:
This is just continuing the downfall of the mainstream media as the view their people - reporters, photographers, copy editors, etc. - as expenses rather than assets.

Yes. But the root cause is the acceptance by the public of lower quality work.

analoguey · Apr 1, 2014

MDR said:
Reuters is mostly a propaganda agency these days and therefore doesn't need good photojournalist who still might have an iota of integrity. They prefer one sided reports best made by one side of a civil war or political party. Knowledge, moral and integrity in these days are a hindrance to business and that's what reuters is.

+1

Sent from Tap-a-talk

analoguey · Apr 1, 2014

resummerfield said:
Yes. But the root cause is the acceptance by the public of lower quality work.

Sorry, but blaming consumer for screwing up is not the right approach.
Newsmedia imho has gone down the drain because they havent cared enough to report what people would rather read or see

Sent from Tap-a-talk

billbretz · Apr 1, 2014

analoguey said:
Newsmedia imho has gone down the drain because they havent cared enough to report what people would rather read or see

What is the basis for this opinion?

pentaxuser · Apr 2, 2014

resummerfield said:
Yes. But the root cause is the acceptance by the public of lower quality work.

The public may have little choice in the matter. Isn't it the classic case of the producer tail wagging the consumer dog. The producers( paymasters) of photographs decides that a better standard isn't needed for Mr Average who quickly becomes used to a lower standard.

pentaxuser

REUTERS FIRES THEIR PHOTOJOURNALIST OF OVER 30 YEARS

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency