Not Insulting nor Offensive for Stock News images?

[meanderingemu]

I am going through all my images to make sure they are compliant, i am still struggling with how far to interpret the  requirement to not be insulting nor offensive, especially as it relates to stock News images.  Are people removing images with signs at a protest that people in opposing views would deem insulting or offensive-  the idea behind many rallies is actually to denounce perceived injustice, so likely the opposite side is to be insulted, i think this is the point. 

[Cal]

29 minutes ago, meanderingemu said:

Are people removing images with signs at a protest that people in opposing views would deem insulting or offensive-  

 

For me, no. My best selling photo by far is one of a certain person at a certain protest that, shall we say, goes against mainstream views. The views don't contribute any of the common 'isms or 'ists but do upset people from time to time. It's editorial photography and serves a very valid purpose in an overall wider ecosystem of the free press. It stays.

 

I think as long as you report your editorial photography in such a way that does not portray bias (which it never should anyway) and isn't overly intrusive/in breach of IPSO etc then there shouldn't be an issue.

Edited June 29, 2021 by Cal

[meanderingemu]

7 minutes ago, Cal said:

 

For me, no. My best selling photo by far is one of a certain person at a certain protest that, shall we say, goes against mainstream views. The views don't contribute any of the common 'isms or 'ists but do upset people from time to time. It's editorial photography and serves a very valid purpose in an overall wider ecosystem of the free press. It stays.

 

I think as long as you report your editorial photography in such a way that does not portray bias (which it never should anyway) and isn't overly intrusive/in breach of IPSO etc then there shouldn't be an issue.

 

 

thanks, great example.  i am still puzzled to what the requirement refers to and this is why i ask other contributors undertaking with it.  I know when i uploaded to a certain micro Agency, they clearly felt an image of a roadkill animal was "inappropriate" , but i still don't know what to make of the requirement. 

I look at the current issue we have with the treatment of aboriginals in Residential Schools in Canada, i hope the images are insulting to some, if not i have pretty much failed.

[sb photos]

20 minutes ago, Cal said:

 

For me, no. My best selling photo by far is one of a certain person at a certain protest that, shall we say, goes against mainstream views. The views don't contribute any of the common 'isms or 'ists but do upset people from time to time. It's editorial photography and serves a very valid purpose in an overall wider ecosystem of the free press. It stays.

 

I think as long as you report your editorial photography in such a way that does not portray bias (which it never should anyway) and isn't overly intrusive/in breach of IPSO etc then there shouldn't be an issue.

I record what I see. I have licensed to Vice an image of a protester holding a placard and written in very large text ‘F**k Nazis’. I did not include ‘F**k’ in the caption or tags. I am holding back another recent image until I decide to upload it or not. It is an image of a wide narrow boat, leading a protest flotilla on the River Lea, band Gator Dogs playing at the bows, but with a large banner arose the bows ‘F**k the F**king F**kers’. I have edited other shots of the band, with only the very top of the banner showing, but that created an odd almost panoramic image. I think I will use those edits, but am still considering wether to use the image of the boat leading the flotilla with the banner across the bows. Currently I’m leaning towards using it. 

[spacecadet]

5 minutes ago, sb photos said:

‘F**k the F**king F**kers’.

I have licensed an image of a narrowboat at Hackney Wick with "Fuck the Olympics" painted on it and  I did put "fuck" in the tags. So off you go.

Edit: Oh look, no NetNanny on the text!

 

Edited June 29, 2021 by spacecadet

[Vincent Lowe]

“If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.” (George Orwell).