user generated news

[bitch one]

http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/article/020805/broadcasters_slammed_for_irres ponsible_use_of_mobile_phone_p ics

are broadcasters taking the piss?

[Paddy]

link aint workin beeyatch.

[bitch one]

this dam board inserted a line break in my url. so i've made it txt.

bloody journos and their stupidly long urls. still not working. oh well , fuck it.

[Patrick]

In answer to your question, yes they are taking the piss.

Article :
Media use of amateur bombing pics "irresponsible" and "dangerous"

Published: Tuesday, August 2, 2005
By Dominic Ponsford

The use of amateur mobile phone images by the media in the aftermath of the London bombings has been condemned as "totally unacceptable" and "bordering on the irresponsible".

The Chartered Insititute of Journalists has particularly singled out London News Tonight which has regularly made appeals to viewers with mobile phone cameras.

The broadcaster has said: "Register with us, so we can contact you when a news story breaks in your area, because we want you, the viewer, to feel a part of the exciting world of newsgathering".

But in a letter to Press Gazette this week the CIoJ said: "What happens if a viewer is seriously injured whilst taking part in ITV’s ‘Exciting world of newsgathering?’. Will ITV be there to pick up the pieces and pay the medical bills?

"To add insult to injury, on its website appeal for pictures, ITV states: ‘By sending us your video footage/photographs/audio, you agree we can broadcast, publish and edit the material and pass it onto others for similar use in any media world-wide, WITHOUT ANY PAYMENT BEING DUE TO YOU'."

The CIoJ has also slammed the BBC for "grabbing" the rights of pictures and footage sent in by amateurs.

The CIoJ said: "In each of these cases, the broadcasters seek the right, which could be extremely lucrative, to license, syndicate or otherwise make the material available to other broadcast and publishing organisations around the world, keeping all profits for themselves and without even guaranteeing the contributor that they will see their name credited in print, or hear it broadcast." T

The union said that US-based broadcaster CNN "takes the prize" for "sheer effrontery". On its website CNN tells those who send in material: "You agree to indemnify defend and hold harmless CNN, its parent and affiliated companies, its and their licensees, successors and assigns, and each of its and their officers, agents and employees from all liabilities or losses, including, without limitation, reasonable attorney’s fees".

The CIoJ said: "These TV companies deserve condemnation for their outrageous demands and their disregard for the danger they may be subjecting their viewers to in their attempt to obtain picture material. Just in case anyone thinks these dangers are exaggerated, remember that two Press Photographers in recent times have met their death while attending major news stories in London alone. One killed by the IRA Bishopsgate bomb blast in the City of London, the other during rioting in Brixton.

"We, at the Chartered Institute of Journalists recommend that non-professionals should not send in material to these above mentioned TV companies while they continue to exploit and denigrate news photography and their potential contributors, both professional and non-professional, in this way."

[wheezer]

What can I say, if you're so fucking stupid to supply media big wigs with free content, my hat goes off to you

[grobelaar]

I remember hearing somewhere that the person who shot the Rodney King beating made no money from the footage, because it was evidence in a trial.

Whereas the person who shot the footage of the truck driver being hauled from his cab and being beaten up in the subsequent riot made hundreds of thousands of dollars from his footage.

So remember, go to the networks first and the police after...