Open letter to The Camp for Climate Action from NUJ.
National Union of Journalists | 25.07.2008 14:47 | Climate Camp 2008 | Other Press | London
Dear Media Team,
Last year I wrote to you raising our concerns over your restrictions on media access to your Climate Camp at Heathrow Airport.
I am writing to you again, at the request of many of our members, to protest at your arrangements for this year’s Camp at Kingsnorth.
In a similar way to last year’s procedures, you intend to restrict the media to “facilitated tours” of the camp between 11am and 1pm. To limit access in this way severely hampers the ability of the media to provide objective and accurate coverage.
You then go on to state that journalists will be permitted to take part in the camp outside the two-hour tour, provided they sign a code of conduct. You might be aware that journalists are already governed by codes of conduct, including that of the NUJ, which you can read here
http://www.nuj.org.uk/innerPagenuj.html?docid=174
We consider it unacceptable that you should seek to control journalists in this way.
You also intend to issue a “press badge” showing name and affiliation. You should be aware that professional journalists will be able to identify themselves by producing their National Press Card. Many freelance journalists will not have any affiliation, as they are not working on behalf of any particular media company.
As an organisation that espouses openness and transparency, you risk accusations of hypocrisy if you follow such procedures restricting the media.
It is not too late to change this. Would you please reconsider your media access policy while there is still time?
Yours sincerely,
John Toner
Freelance Organiser
National Union of Journalists
Last year I wrote to you raising our concerns over your restrictions on media access to your Climate Camp at Heathrow Airport.
I am writing to you again, at the request of many of our members, to protest at your arrangements for this year’s Camp at Kingsnorth.
In a similar way to last year’s procedures, you intend to restrict the media to “facilitated tours” of the camp between 11am and 1pm. To limit access in this way severely hampers the ability of the media to provide objective and accurate coverage.
You then go on to state that journalists will be permitted to take part in the camp outside the two-hour tour, provided they sign a code of conduct. You might be aware that journalists are already governed by codes of conduct, including that of the NUJ, which you can read here
http://www.nuj.org.uk/innerPagenuj.html?docid=174 We consider it unacceptable that you should seek to control journalists in this way.
You also intend to issue a “press badge” showing name and affiliation. You should be aware that professional journalists will be able to identify themselves by producing their National Press Card. Many freelance journalists will not have any affiliation, as they are not working on behalf of any particular media company.
As an organisation that espouses openness and transparency, you risk accusations of hypocrisy if you follow such procedures restricting the media.
It is not too late to change this. Would you please reconsider your media access policy while there is still time?
Yours sincerely,
John Toner
Freelance Organiser
National Union of Journalists
National Union of Journalists
Homepage:
http://www.nuj.org.uk
Additions
The Climate Camp Media Team's reply to John Toner
26.07.2008 07:51
We'd like to emphasise that the policy is NOT designed to control the media message or prevent critical coverage but to allow camp life to unfold without the continuous pressure of media attention.
Here is our reply to John Toner
Dear John Toner,
Thank you for your letter today. We are sorry to hear that you are
unhappy with the media access policy for the Camp for Climate Action
2008. There are a few things that we would like to clarify.
There seems to be a misunderstanding regarding the daily length of access
for journalists. Journalists have access to the camp 24 hours a day for
the duration of the camp, with the 2-hour media tour being the time in
which they can use photo and recording equipment. As you know, this is a
significant increase in access from that which was provided last year. To
be clear, the access policy states:
"Journalists are welcome to take part in the camp outside the two hour
media tour, for the entire duration of the camp (3 – 11 August inclusive).
You will be asked to register and sign a code of conduct upon arrival at
the gate. The use of cameras or other recording equipment on the site is
not permitted outside the hours of 11am to 1pm, but a comfortable, covered
space, with a good view into the camp, has been provided at the main
entrance for this purpose".
The code of conduct in question (which is attached) is specific to the
camp, and is similar to most access policies that journalists would be
requested to sign up when going into places where people live and/or work.
Regarding your concerns about the press badges: we are aware that some
journalists work freelance, and as such do not have an affiliation, in
which case it is obviously fine to indicate this on their badge.
The aim of the policy is to accommodate the media interest and at the same
time respect the wishes of those attending the camp. We would like to
emphasise that for one week people from all walks of life will come
together to build a sustainable eco-village in a field, giving up their
paid working hours to achieve the camp's aims. That field will be their
home and workspace where they are entitled to the right to go about their
business without lenses trained on their every move, that same right to
privacy we all enjoy in our own homes and workplaces.
We would also like to point out that the climate camp seems to be measured
against a standard of access that is rarely found in the real world.
Journalists do not get to walk into people's homes or workplaces without
an invitation, and when there, they are rarely given carte blanche to
enter spaces considered private or restricted, for whatever reasons, nor
interrupt meeting or disrupt people's work.
Finally, the media policy is not something that the media team is at
liberty to change. As you know, it has been drawn up by consensus over
the period of a year by the 50 - 100 people who attend the monthly
climate camp gatherings. The process is extremely open and transparent,
and involved input from several NUJ members.
We hope that these clarifications will help to alleviate your concerns.
Yours sincerely,
The Camp for Climate Action media team
Here is our reply to John Toner
Dear John Toner,
Thank you for your letter today. We are sorry to hear that you are
unhappy with the media access policy for the Camp for Climate Action
2008. There are a few things that we would like to clarify.
There seems to be a misunderstanding regarding the daily length of access
for journalists. Journalists have access to the camp 24 hours a day for
the duration of the camp, with the 2-hour media tour being the time in
which they can use photo and recording equipment. As you know, this is a
significant increase in access from that which was provided last year. To
be clear, the access policy states:
"Journalists are welcome to take part in the camp outside the two hour
media tour, for the entire duration of the camp (3 – 11 August inclusive).
You will be asked to register and sign a code of conduct upon arrival at
the gate. The use of cameras or other recording equipment on the site is
not permitted outside the hours of 11am to 1pm, but a comfortable, covered
space, with a good view into the camp, has been provided at the main
entrance for this purpose".
The code of conduct in question (which is attached) is specific to the
camp, and is similar to most access policies that journalists would be
requested to sign up when going into places where people live and/or work.
Regarding your concerns about the press badges: we are aware that some
journalists work freelance, and as such do not have an affiliation, in
which case it is obviously fine to indicate this on their badge.
The aim of the policy is to accommodate the media interest and at the same
time respect the wishes of those attending the camp. We would like to
emphasise that for one week people from all walks of life will come
together to build a sustainable eco-village in a field, giving up their
paid working hours to achieve the camp's aims. That field will be their
home and workspace where they are entitled to the right to go about their
business without lenses trained on their every move, that same right to
privacy we all enjoy in our own homes and workplaces.
We would also like to point out that the climate camp seems to be measured
against a standard of access that is rarely found in the real world.
Journalists do not get to walk into people's homes or workplaces without
an invitation, and when there, they are rarely given carte blanche to
enter spaces considered private or restricted, for whatever reasons, nor
interrupt meeting or disrupt people's work.
Finally, the media policy is not something that the media team is at
liberty to change. As you know, it has been drawn up by consensus over
the period of a year by the 50 - 100 people who attend the monthly
climate camp gatherings. The process is extremely open and transparent,
and involved input from several NUJ members.
We hope that these clarifications will help to alleviate your concerns.
Yours sincerely,
The Camp for Climate Action media team
Climate Camp Media Team
Homepage:
http://www.climatecamp.org.uk
Summary of the camps media policy
26.07.2008 09:54
MEDIA ACCESS TO THE 2008 CAMP FOR CLIMATE ACTION
We welcome journalists to the 2008 Camp for Climate Action. Facilitated tours of the camp will be available each day (3 - 8 August inclusive) from 11am to 1pm. A member of the camp media team will explain how the camp functions, provide interviews or find people who can answer specific questions. While participating in the tour you are welcome to film, take photos and use recording equipment.
Journalists are also welcome to take part in the camp outside the two hour media tour, for the entire duration of the camp (3 – 11 August inclusive). You will be asked to register and sign a code of conduct upon arrival at the gate. The use of cameras or other recording equipment on the site is not permitted outside the hours of 11am to 1pm, but a comfortable, covered space, with a good view into the camp, has been provided at the main entrance for this purpose. While on site you will be asked to wear a press badge showing your name and affiliation.
For the duration of the camp the site is people's home and workplace, so please respect participants’ right to privacy. For obvious reasons, some spaces such as the medics, well-being and legal support tents, as well as some neighbourhoods, are off-limits (see code of conduct for a list). The media team will aim to facilitate interviews with people working in these spaces if needed. When attending workshops, it is up to the facilitator to decide whether or not to allow journalists to attend.
Please note that journalists are welcome to participate in the camp in a personal capacity without registering, as long as they do not publish or broadcast reports about the camp. Journalists found to have done so without having registered will not be welcome to attend future Camp for Climate Action events.
CAMP MEDIA TEAM
The camp media team works to ensure that timely information about the camp and associated actions reaches the mainstream media. They also assist journalists on site and provide or arrange interviews on request. Each day there will be training (check the media tent for times) for anyone who would like to learn about working with the mainstream media.
CAMP DOCUMENTATION GROUP
To ensure that the camp is well documented, there is a group of people providing a daily pool of content for the camp website, TV, radio and future publicity projects. A limited number will be working at any one time, and they will wear a badge identifying them as part of the documentation group while working.
BE THE MEDIA
Grassroots media is an essential counter-measure to the often simplistic and conflict-based accounts presented in the mainstream. The true story of the camp is a rich and diverse exploration of positive action on climate change, and it doesn't get told enough – so campers are invited to tell their own stories under the banner 'Be the Media'.
Write reports or a daily blog, publish your photos, collaborate on video coverage or get involved with the radio team that will be putting together daily audio reports to be broadcast during meal times. Help to ensure that the workshops, plenary sessions and all the collective processes and infrastructure that make the camp possible are well documented – but please respect people's right to privacy in the process.
Always get the consent of those who will be clearly identifiable in your photos or recordings. Please only film or record between 11am and 1pm, or join the camp documentation group. If you want to record or film a workshop, please first ask the facilitator if it is okay to do so.
The 'Be The Media' space is open to everybody who wants to be involved in grassroots media production and documentation of the camp. There will be a series of training session and discussions (see workshop programme) along with plenty of other opportunities to learn from and work with others. Facilities include internet access points, a photo desk to help you get images off your camera, along with space and equipment for video and audio production.
During the days of action, please phone in reports so that the camp media team, websites and radio can be kept up to date (come to media tent for reporting line details).
When you go home, don't forget to continue to 'Be The Media', adding your experiences into global conversations on the most important issues of our times.
fair do
Comments
Hide 3 hidden comments or hide all comments
Camp for Climate Action and Media Manipulation...again
25.07.2008 15:37
PhotoRights
Homepage:
http://photorights.org
Here we go again 'Dear John'
25.07.2008 16:20
He writes, "In a similar way to last year's procedures, you intend to restrict the media to 'facilitated tours' of the camp between 11am and 1pm. To limit access in this way severely hampers the ability of the media to provide objective and accurate coverage."
Well, it is obviously is highly disingenuous of him to suggest that the facilitated media tours each day from 11pm to 1am somehow represent a restriction or limitation of journalistic access when the media policy clearly invites journalists to attend the camp for the entire period of 3rd August to 11th. This is a massive concession compares to last year when indeed the camp was official out of bounds to people working for the mainstream media. John seems to have been eager to complain again this year without apparently noticing that the changes this year have removed the core of his complaint.
He goes on to raise issue with the codes of conducts that journalists will be required to sign which say stuff like, don't record people without their knowledge and consent etc. He seems to think that imposing conditions is an attempt to control journalists yet points out the that NUJ members already governed by union codes of conduct (
Take a look for yourself, they are all very quaint. No doubt there are plenty of journalists who
could do with reading them each morning. If the NUJ had the power to get working journalists to actually follow those codes then perhaps there would probably be no need for the camp media policy.
Next on John's list of gripes (and clearly clutching at straws now) is the issue of press cards which the media policy states should be worn by journalists on site. For some reason he seems feels the need to state that "professional journalists will be able to identify themselves by producing their National Press Card" and that "many freelance journalists will not have any affiliation".
Of course many of the journalists attending will not members of the NUJ, and many will come from overseas. While no doubt the vast majority will have a press card of some sort, those who don't will be issued one. Those journalists working freelance can obviously simply say that they are unaffiliated, so what exactly is the problem?
Finally getting to an argument of substance, John says, "As an organisation that espouses openness and transparency, you risk accusations of hypocrisy if you follow such procedures restricting the media. It is not too late to change this. Would you please reconsider your media access policy while there is still time?"
There is no doubt that the climate camp is being measured against a standard of access that is rarely found in the real world. Journalists do not get to walk into peoples homes or work place without an invitation and when invited in they are rarely given carte blanch to enter spaces considered private or restricted for whatever reasons, nor interrupt meetings or disrupt people at work.
The climate camp is not a reality TV show and the media policy, drawn up by the people attending, attempts to ensure that the intended purpose of the camp is not adversely affected by the presence of journalists. At the same time the policy attempts to address the needs of the media and so provides vantage points, helps arrange interviews and guided tours of the camp and even encourages journalists to spend the entire week camping with everyone else.
It's hard to understand what changes John would like to be made that would no undermine the main purpose of the camp (which isn't to provide a goldfish bowl for the worlds media). And besides, the media policy is not something that the media team is at liberty to change. It has been drawn up by consensus over the period of a year by the 50 - 100 people who attend the monthly climate camp gatherings, often relating concerns and opinions from their own more regular regional meetings.
The process is extremely open and transparent and actually actually involved input from several NUJ members. It is certainly a more democratic process than that generally practised by the NUJ (or other unions), and unlike the freelance branch, climate camp gatherings have never had a problem finding volunteers to take the minutes.
representing me
???
25.07.2008 16:30
Last year's Heathrow 'Camp for Climate Action' annoyed press considerably by restricting access to what was, after all, land that the occupiers did not own and had no legal rights over. In an attempt, presumably, to curtail potentially hostile coverage by the evil right-wing MSM, the organisers modelled their press policy on Kim Jong-il and turned the field into a little bit of Pyongang. For sure, Government and BAA are guilty of media manipulation and are bang-to-rights serial fibbers where LHR, traffic and emissions are concerned, but three wrongs don't make a right.
If this is a serious environmental debate - and as someone who lives on this planet and under the flightpath I certainly think it should be - then facts rather than propaganda are what matters, and if they're inconvenient to someone that's just tough shit. Any obstruction of open debate is self-defeating and likely to engender an attitude that all parties are posturing, vested-interested liars so best disregarded completely.
This is possibly not the message Camp for Climate Action intended to convey. I know of a number of journalists, who whilst sympathetic to the aims boycotted the event because they considered Camp for Climate Action's media policies destructive and unsustainable and their emissions on access toxic. This is what is known in the tabloids as an 'own goal'. It's clearly ridiculous to prevent coverage of a supposedly awareness-raising event because you're worried the Mail will portray you as a bunch of bolshie workshy anarchist hippy troublemakers. Unless of course that's what you are.
However it seems Climate Action still haven't learned that PR ineptitude comparable with npower's attempts to supprress the press does not help your cause. John Toner of the NUJ has now written the following open letter regarding this year's planned camp.
Personally I'll be staying well away from the Camp, just as I did last year, and I am a paid-up hippy troublemaker.
?
Free access to your living room
25.07.2008 16:37
Dear journos,
Once again you have failed to understand that the climate camp is a place where people live, in very stressful conditions, for a week (or two or more if involved in the set-up and take-down crews) and have the same need as anyone else for privacy.
Would you expect any other target of journalistic attention to allow cameras into their living room at all hours, unsupervised? Would you expect to be allowed to lurk outside their bathroom door, film them as they stumble to get their first cup of morning tea, or try to relax in the evening with a beer, or would you expect to be allowed to film their children at play?
The camp is also a workplace. Do you expect free access to building sites, artists' studios, NGOs offices?
No? Maybe you want such access, but know you can't get it because in normal life all these places have doors to lock.The only difference is that the camp has no doors - it has a media policy, which is its only defence against intrusion by those who want to goggle at people as if in a zoo. Get used to it, and learn some consideration.
camper
NUJ = Elistist
25.07.2008 16:55
The NUJ has never recoginsed the Alternative Press.
To be an NUJ member one must prove that one makes a Living from Journalism ,eg. show payslips tax accounts etc etc...Which many in the Alternative press can not supply so therefore it make it (the nuj) an elitist middleclass organisation.
Many in the Alternative press work hard with NO pay...So they have no payslips,accounts etc.
Cold Stomper
"accusations of hypocrisy if you follow such procedures restricting the media"
25.07.2008 17:43
said the man who just posted on the open newswire!
Priorities
25.07.2008 17:49
How about if I refuse to let you in my house when I'm having a meeting?
How about if I refuse to let you in my house when I'm having a meeting I want - need - to remain private?
Are you mad at the Prime Minister for having set press times, rather than letting people wander into Downing Street as and when they wish? (That, if anything, surely has more far-reaching implications than the restriction of journalists at the camp.)
Would you want some stranger with a camera wandering around when you're heading to and from the shower, when you're trying to de-stress, if you've been hit by police?
Freedom of the press does not outweigh other rights and concerns, privacy and security being two such examples. It seems quite astoundingly arrogant for you to demand an unhibited all-access right to stick your nose in wherever you want. The camp does not owe you anything.
While I have no desire to group all media together, activists have reason to be suspicious - a particularly pertinent example being the case earlier this year with the Evening Standard (see
I am not involved with the camp but have attended in the past and may do this year. I felt their media policy was fair and provided a balance between media access and the needs of those in the camp itself. If there was any "unfairness" in favour of the camp which resulted in media feeling "restricted," frankly, get over it.
Your rights do not override ours.
rasputin
technical point to 'cold stomper'
25.07.2008 17:55
Jog on, my good man.
bill posters
NUJ membership re Bill Poster.
25.07.2008 19:12
After reading your comments here, I had a Look at NUJ Website to see what is required for membership.
The application form states that one must prove that one earns at least 50% of living from Journalism.
Again asking for Payslips, income tax etc.
So I really cant see how you say its easy to get an NUJ card.
How did you get yours ?
Cold Stomper
Marxist NUJ?
25.07.2008 20:05
You lost my vote as a shear lack of union support for photographers, that the NUJ has sold down the line without batting an eyelid; declining picture sales and rights grabs are all to frequent and the day rates are the same as 10 years ago from the nationals, which you have a high percentage of members in and you still refuse to get of your arse.... so how dare you get all high and mighty now!
You even say that Journalists have a code of conduct, but it is never enforced, neither is there a code of conduct for other media types, which would stop all this hassle of paps that bring us photographers a bad name
Suggest you get of your backside John and take a good look at the NUJ and fix that first instead of criticising other organisations perhaps take a look at my current representation the AoP as a start!
Damm it i am angry now!
snapper
??? --? PhotoRights.org
25.07.2008 20:51
As another photographer I am often restricted at concerts and sporing events and have to apply for special press passes. right grabs from concert photography seems to be on the increase and now the FA are trying to restrict access and in John's terms 'mange the media'
Again i don't see the NUJ doing anything on this and for yet another year we are without a photographers representative.
I just have been over earlier to PhotoRights.org and found the comments from ??? - ? and posted a comment there. Nice to know that they are all moderated 'Media Managed' and even though he said he is not going to go. Well the reality of from what i saw last year was that every man and his dog was there, the campers were friendly and I got a few sales, so where is the restriction? In fact it would be better to restrict it as there was so many Media we were all competing with each other which resulted in fewer sales.
After all the story was all over the world and the media team did not ask journalists for proof of id or to see our passes so there were a few armature photographers on site too getting experience
I was working with a journalist the other day she is working for the PA 12-14 hours a day some of which is on a weekend she gets £8,000 a year and is in London all that after getting a degree is it worth it.
Why is the NUJ letting this happen?
not amused
Dear NUJ
25.07.2008 20:53
dirty digger
Toner's hypocrisy
25.07.2008 21:54
Maybe you'd like to come clean too on whether you have actually read this years revised media access policy with it's broader permissions? Eh? Did you bother to engage with the CCA's media group?
Something stinks around Mr Toner's intransigence on this issue and it is more than his own political ambitions (
And as for the photographers who are petulantly refusing to come to the camp, what makes you think you have some absolute right to photograph what you want when you want at the camp? Do you believe that nobody has a right ot privacy there?
Put your questions directly to John Toner...
Tel: 020 7843 3735
Fax: 020 7278 1812
Email:
unnecessary
Photojournalists sour grapes
25.07.2008 22:10
"I just have to share with you the utterly jaw-dropping media 'plan' from the forthcoming Climate Camp outside Heathrow Airport. There are nuclear installations in Iran with more openness than this..." -
"Would you like it if someone kept walking past your bedroom, kitchen, dining room and lounge windows taking photos? Apparently this should be OK for anyone at the camp for climate action currently taking place." -
"A small but anonymous faction of the old protest movement at the climate camp had decided from the start that the 'corporate' press is actually the enemy, and therefore has to be excluded.” -
"...your diatribe against the climate camp tells its own story. When has a corporate journalist ever railed in this manner against the restrictions imposed by the US/UK military in Iraq, against the control freaks of New Labour, against the taboo on discussing their advertisers‘ products and services? " -
"I was about as welcome as the police. Reading the camp handbook on my way home under the section how to make the camp welcoming and inclusive, it read: ‘Avoid branding people as potential police/journalists. Just because someone ‘looks’ the part doesn’t mean they are.’ " -
freedom brings duties and responsibilities
Personal Vendettas, Egos and Sour Grapes
26.07.2008 00:02
He begins, "as a photojournalist who is working on a long term project to document political protest it would be no surprise to anyone that i have had the camp for climate action (cca) event in my diary for some time. but after reading the cca's “media plan” last week i have to say i feel the cca have done a bit of baa on the press:"
Next he quotes a draft version of proposed media policy, "media wanting access to the camp will be invited to come on site between 11 am and 12 noon. all visits will be over and journalists off site by 1 pm at the latest. journalists will be given a tour of the site, accompanied at all times by two (or more) members of the media team, who will carry a flag to make the journalists / photographers identifiable. journalists will be required to stick with the tour and will not be allowed to go into marquees or meetings and workshops unless invited at the agreement of all participants.
there will be no journalists on site on saturday, sunday, or monday. this action period will be covered by a separate media strategy. the media hour will occur at the media team’s discretion, if it seems appropriate, on the final tuesday. journalists will be encouraged to book in advance. some journalists will not be allowed on site (eg. those with a previous record of hostile coverage of the camp/other activism). the decision to not allow these journalists on site will be made on a case by case basis – anyone involved in the camp is welcome to suggest names journalists to 'black-list'".
Marc seems ignores the fact that that proposal was not agreed by the gathering and a revised version eventually agreed by consensus.
Next he reveals that the NUJ's freelance organiser, John Toner had written of "deep concern" and urged the climate camp to reconsider as a "matter of urgency".
John Toner's letter is partially quoted, "while i can understand your apprehension that coverage of the camp by mainstream media could be negative, the conditions you have stipulated are guaranteed to attract criticism from all professional journalists, whether supportive of, or hostile to, your views. You should be aware that journalists of all political views and none are united in their abhorrence of restrictions on media access, and that you risk alienating even 'sympathetic' journalists by your behaviour. I am sure your organisation believes in openness and transparency, and that you would criticise public bodies who fall short of those aspirations. your stated intention to avoid openness imitates the behaviour of those organisations you criticise."
Ironically, considering John Toners letter this year, he also said, “by allowing the media more open access you will impress all journalists, and even those you consider hostile to your aims will have something positive to report about the event.”. Seems John didn't remember writing that.
An update to his blog tells us that "the media team at the camp for climate action (cca) have 'revised' the 'mainstream media' access policy for the camp next week. it's a shame but the new media policy does not work for me. plus can someone tell me who are the 'mainstream media'? or more to the point who the cca think are the 'mainstream media'?"
Well, I don't know if Marc ever got an answer to that question. It is certainly a good one and I'm sure it's one that this years media team will be struggling to crasp over the next few weeks. But it's kind of irrelevant really as the policy was designed to do to things: a) provide access to the media to get interviews and take photos and video footage, while b) preventing media presence on site from excessively disrupting planned activities (such as planning illegal actions for example).
Marc didn't seem to consider or care about these issues as he was more concerned about his job. He took issue with how he thought the camp media team would be "under cutting freelancers by giving images away (for free?) to the 'mainstream media'". Again, he asked good questions about the role of what was known as the camp photo pool, "will this public relations content be given away for free? and how is this content being generated? by the media team? by media activists? by indymedia?"
"I'm sure the media team feels it has done the best it can", he said as he reached the conclusion of this first blog entry on the issue, "but i still think they are being far too jumpy about all of this and that is a shame. whatever takes place next week i'm sure it's going to be very interesting. i'm not happy about the access policy but i will do my best to cover the event. i just hope i come back with a bit more then just images of the flag waving media team."
There is no doubt that Marc had genuine reasons to have felt hard done and as the week progressed it was clear that he became more and more angry. However, he reveals his priorities are selfish ones and so illustrates which side of the fence he sites on in terms of loyalties to selling a few pictures or respecting those who put their liberty on the line in front of his camera.
An entry or two latter he comes back to the issue, with the dismissive caption "no news day at the camp for climate action". He suggests that because of the media policy there was no news yet that's obviously crap as the reams of media coverage that day clearly testifies. He seems to think that if he didn't get the picture he wanted, nothing happened - doesn't that sound familiar?
Sour gapes are revealed in the following entry, "Last night we were are told that '30 police officers' walked on to the climate camp site and that protesters 'blocked' the police and 'pushed them back' and that the police had to 'withdraw'. the press association reported this last night with quotes from people at the camp. why is this not headline news today? why did the broadcast crews not 'go live' from the scene when this was taking place? why did my fellow photographers and i not have images of this action? the camps excessive’s media restrictions of keeping the media off the camp site for 23 hours of the day is the reason why."
He later adds, "the important thing to take note of is that there would probably have been a photographer or two there last night if the camp weren't so unreceptive to the media."
Well actually there were images of this action and the BBC ran footage of the incursion on the national news. Agreed, it wasn't headline news, but that's probably not a bad thing as while coverage of conflict might satisfy sensationalist tendencies, it doesn't really say much about the issues. I personally don't see this incident as some kind of evidence that the media policy failed, on the contrary, footage and photos were available to the camp and protesters should they have been required and the news agenda didn't become dominated by images of conflict. Result if you ask me.
However, it wasn't just the camp media policy that meant that the mainstream didn't have cameras available to capture the incident. The police moved all the media crews from the main gate and down the road beyond view before they invaded the camp.
But back to Marc's complaints, "I have spent the last 3 days reporting from outside the camp and only got to go in yesterday for the 'media hour' tour which was a waste of time as it was all 'photo ops' that had been set up and that is not photojournalism."
If Marc had wanted something other than a quick tour, a chance to document the camp more fully throughout the week, he could have joined the camp photo pool (as for some reason he had been invited).
For somebody who has been following radical politics from the sidelines for some time, Marc's next comment has got to be a joke, "i just do not understand why the camp does not want independent journalists in attendance." I can certainly think of many reasons and a good example from last year when somebody supposedly 'onside' chose to publish ideo footage which relating to an assault against a police officer. With friends like those, who needs enemies.
The next entry sees Marc more cheerful and singing the praise of his companion during the media tour. "The "media hour" worked a lot better today and i was able to go all over the camp site and my media guide was very helpful." But that would all change when Marc experienced a more unfriendly face on an action off site.
He writes, "this young woman (above pic) hit my lens hood and pushed my camera away all because i had not asked the young man with the d-lock around his neck (which was attached to one of the gates) if i could take his photo! this group of anarchists had just invaded a company called carmel agrexco (a fruit and vegetable importer) near heathrow airport and i’m being told off by one of them because i did not asked before taking a photo!!"
While I agree that this behaviour was pretty stupid, it's pretty typical and reflects a large body of opinion based on years of bad experiences with the press. It is this body of opinion that influenced the climate camp media policy and frankly there have been plenty of photographers that have been at the receiving end of far worse.
Marc bleats, "freedom of the press anybody? pubic space! news event taking place! public interest!" but hold on! What the fuck has that got to do with anything? Sure, you have a right to try to take pictures but those in front of your lens are under no obligation to co-operate.
Pretty much the last entry in his series of coverage on the camp is one praising 'brave' John Vidal for his 'excellent' article in the guardian which lambasts "the heavy-handed media strategy of the camp for climate action". He quotes one blatantly inaccurate passage from Vidal's piece, "the only people excluded were those journalists trying to be honest who could help them make their points to a wider public. anyone who wanted to write lies was facilitated."
There is no doubt that there was a lot wrong with last years media policy, but it was a lot better than the year before, just as this year is a massive improvement again. Those choosing to complain might like consider that direct action groups and convergence camps of this nature are historically extremely hostile to journalists of all flavours and anyone seen taking pictures risked a kicking and loss of their equipment. We've come along way and this more welcoming approach to the media hasn't yet spread to other parts of 'the movement'.
So, finally, this letter from NUJ (I mean John) should be put into the perspective of the access issues that journalists experience elsewhere, at the hands of the cops for example, or trying to cover political or music/film industry events. Come on guys - the camp for climate action is positively inviting journalists this year - get a grip!
snap happy crew
Where does Indymedia stand on this?
26.07.2008 07:20
Since Indymedia has in the past published photos and videos of CC campers am I to assume that their contributors are trusted or is there a similar ban on them too? It would be good if this was clarified.
Itsme
yer' havin' a larf, mate!
26.07.2008 07:57
objective and accurate coverage.... 'nuff said.
FTP
Be The Media?
26.07.2008 09:45
> want to be badly misrepresented yet again by the MSM, where would it and its message be if
> it was devoid of all mainstream publicity?
For gods sake! Can people not read? The policy has nothing to do with preventing misrepresentation. That's impossible. The policy aims at allowing a camp (a camp for direct action) to function without excessive disruption of having working journalists in your face the entire time.
> Since Indymedia has in the past published photos and videos of CC campers am I to
> assume that their contributors are trusted or is there a similar ban on them too?
What is indymedia? Who are indymedia? You probably can't answer those questions adequately for your question to make sense. Can indymedia contributors be trusted? Can contributors to an open publishing platform be trusted? Can posters to YouTube be trusted. Duh! With some peopl unable to act responsibly with what they film and publish, then obviously not. However, is there a ban on them? - no. There isn't a ban on anyone, read the policy. Journalists are welcome to attend the camp and you can stretch that to include indymedia contributors if that's how you'd chose to define them.
camper
Peter Marshall
26.07.2008 10:40
snapwatch
"The NUJ has never recoginsed the Alternative Press."
26.07.2008 12:23
Just how many NUJs are there? Or is the comment above just a wee bit innaccurate?
Facts
NUJ and 'alternative' media
26.07.2008 12:58
The NUJ makes a clear divide between participant and observer, the exact divide that indymedia rhetoric claims it aims to erode. If journalism were about being objective (and of course we know it rarely is due to issues of ownership, advertisers and economics) then the concept of everyone being the media is nonsense. Telling your own story to somebody is not media - media means somebody else placing themselves in the middle to tell the story. But I digress...
The NUJ is a TRADE union. If journalism is your trade (and that does not mean you have to be making shit loads of money from it) then the NUJ will probably support you. If journalism is not your trade, then why should a union of those people for who journalism is their trade, put their resources into supporting you? It may be that in same cases the members (or leadership) might feel that there is a good reason to support somebody outside of the union, but generally, a trade union supports those in their specific trade.
The NUJ is a hot bed of lefties but not a particularly hot bed of journalists. Many journalists in this country are not members of the NUJ, and I've meant plenty who haven't even heard of the NUJ. That goes double for photographers. Even long term photographer members of the NUJ have been bailing out and find representation elsewhere.
With Jon Toners annual tirade on the subject of the climate camp media policy, I can see that members might be concerned about the priorities of their representatives and how their subs are being spent. However, look at some of the amazing stuff the NUJ has been up to, such as supporting Shiv Malik in his battle with the Greater Manchester police over protecting his sources.
my 2 cents worth
It boils down to this
26.07.2008 13:15
seems fair enough
Censorship And Self Serving Bollocks.
26.07.2008 16:26
The Camp had no right to lay down any restrictions on entrance and egress, as it wasn't on private land - unless you want to assert that it was 'yours' by occupation or conquest or something, which er...is the same excuse given for Tibet, Gaza and Iraq.
So you're in piss-poor company there.
Apart from the strategy of the Camp having its own embedded photographers - a discredited censorship concept originally dreamt up by Donald Rumsfeld - anybody else attempting to cover the Camp got the full Kim Jong Ill treatment, with visits restricted to an hour a day with minder in tow - presumably to make sure all images were ideologically pure.
I understand all the embedded photographers had to present their images for Media Team 'approval' - to which the only decent response should have been "sod off, Gestapo" - but presumably they were quite happy to accept being censored, as long as they knew any competing snappers were being stitched up from getting 'exclusive access'.
Having a media team laying down draconian restrictions makes you no better than BAA or Nu Labour spin-doctor spivs deciding what 'the line is' on any given news day. I don't give a toss if you're on the side of the angels, censorship is censorship and if you can't see that, you must be stupid.
If you had the courage of your convictions, you wouldn't give a toss who photographs you - what, bad for the CV when you put the suit and tie back on? Might balls up the promotion perhaps? If having your mug snapped by the FIT team or the Daily Scum is enough to make you boohoo, you might as well just go home, 'cos there are ten-year olds in Burma with more backbone (and a clearer understanding of censorship) than the Camps pathetic 'only on our terms please' suburban excuse for radicalism.
Whats even more hilarious and tragic is the media team itself - one was a photographer who does advertising campaigns for Volkswagen cars, and another was a journo working on the inside for Murdoch's Sky News!
This is the bunch who then had the nerve to implement a policy telling other journos what they could and couldn't see!
With friends like that, who needs enemies? George Orwell (another journalist you wouldn't have let in) would be absolutely pissing himself.
Looks like you're quite happy to lay down with 'the enemy' - and use its dishonest tactics - as long as it suits you.
Sion Touhig
I can't help thinking...
26.07.2008 17:38
Think I'm joking?
Pick up your mobile phone, turn it over and take a long hard look at the lens on the back. The only difference is that the ones used by everyone from the corporate media to the security services will get much better sound and picture quality whether it is filming or taking stills. It will be well hidden under an item of clothing and near impossible to spot. So if you don't want your Climate Camp PR ruined by some drunk idiot ranting about violent struggle to an undercover journo then you best concentrate on the cameras you can't see, rather than the obvious ones being used openly by professional photographers and cameramen. Most of whom will comply if you politley tell them that they are invading your space or are otherwise not welcome.
For what its worth I fully understand the concerns of activists who are totally sick of being missrepresented by the corp media. But I can assure you that short of thoroughly frisking EVERYONE entering the camp, you will not stop their lies by introducing media restrictions. All you are doing is handing them a story about 'SECRETIVE ACTIVISTS BANNING MEDIA FROM PROTEST CAMP'. I'm not even sure that such restrictions are necessary. As I understand it, they tried and completely failed to prove that anything sinister was happening at last years camp. They even became the subject of a PCC verdict?
My heartfelt sympathy goes out to whoever has been charged with the task of striking a balance between media access and unwanted intrusion. But please don't make it easy for the Daily Mails of this world to slag you off as having a hidden agenda while still getting their story via a hidden cam.
Guido
e-mail:
guidoreports@riseup.net
Sion, Lies and Video Tape
26.07.2008 17:56
.
> Apart from the strategy of the Camp having its own embedded photographers - a discredited censorship
> concept originally dreamt up by Donald Rumsfeld - anybody else attempting to cover the Camp got the
> full Kim Jong Ill treatment, with visits restricted to an hour a day with minder in tow - presumably to
> make sure all images were ideologically pure.
Presume what you like. The photo pool was deisgned to ensure that the camp had it's own high quality images to document the camp (without the disruption of having dozens of press photographers running around the place) which would be free to use for future promotion of the campaign and the camp. I guess you'd have preferred that they had to come to you to buy photos.
> I understand all the embedded photographers had to present their images for Media Team 'approval'
Understand what you like, the photo pool photographers were part of the media team and the decision about which photos would get used was theirs as much as any one else. You know that not all of the thousands of photos taken on a digital camera would be used. Obviously there is a selection process. It's nonsense to suggest that the remit was the 'ideologically purity' of the images.
> I don't give a toss if you're on the side of the angels, censorship is censorship and if you can't see that,
> you must be stupid.
I must be stupid then because I don't think it would be censorship for me to decide whether to let a journalist into my office for just and hour rather than let them come in and out whenever they wanted, and I don't think it would be censorship for me to sit down with my family and go through the holiday snaps deciding on which 12 we'd make into a calender for out friends.
> If you had the courage of your convictions, you wouldn't give a toss who photographs you - what,
> bad for the CV when you put the suit and tie back on? Might balls up the promotion perhaps?
I knew people at last years camp who had taken time off as sick leave to attend the camp, they would probably have been staying out of the way of the cameras during the media hour and why the hell not. It really is none of your business why people might choose not to have their photo taken. Generally however the media policy has nothing to do with preventing photos (anyone with a zoom lens could get their pictures from the fence line), it was about keeping those media packs from disrupting meetings etc. That's our right, live with it or don't, either way our reasons are sound.
> Whats even more hilarious and tragic is the media team itself - one was a photographer who does
> advertising campaigns for Volkswagen cars, and another was a journo working on the inside for
> Murdoch's Sky News!
Where did you get that bullshit from, trawling from the disinfo trolls or did you make it up all on your own?
Sion, you are a brilliant example of why a large proportion of the camp would rather string up journalists from the nearest tree than spend the week smiling for their cameras.
media whore
Self serving, yes
26.07.2008 18:09
we let the press in and give them interviews because we want to get our opinions into the public domain and the mainstream media can do that
we exclude the press because we have better things to do than spend all day giving interviews and stopping what we are doing for a photograper or film crew
we supply our own photographers because we understand the value of documenting our efforts but don't want to pay a third party for those photos and we know we can get what we want without disrupting the camp
so yes, it is self serving, just as working photographers are self serving in their desire to get their pictures and flog them for publication. if your interests conflict with ours, and its our camp and our efforts, then i'm happy to prioritise serving our interests rather than yours.
that's us
Missing the point guido
26.07.2008 18:35
Those hidden cameras aren't going to reveal any hidden agenda, the agenda is clear. And if they use hidden cameras at least they arn't disrupting meetings.
n
Loaded terminology
26.07.2008 19:04
friends like these
Would a journa be allowed freerange in any organisation,most corporations never
26.07.2008 20:09
Green syndicalist
Does"freelance organiser"represent NUJmembers or bosses?, this makesNUJ look bad
26.07.2008 20:13
Green syndicalist
If you're not with us, you're against us?
27.07.2008 08:51
Since it seems to be an unavoidable reality, however, a suggestion for the Climate Camp press people. Why not invite the more interested and interesting national writers (eg John Vidal, Simon Jenkins, Matthew Paris, Mark Steel, Max Hastings) to stay at the camp for a day/night?
Really, why not?
a
Doesn't anyone read before commenting?
27.07.2008 09:21
> press people. Why not invite the more interested and interesting national writers (eg John Vidal,
> Simon Jenkins, Matthew Paris, Mark Steel, Max Hastings) to stay at the camp for a day/night?
All those people have been invited, did you not read the policy posted above before commenting?
This years policy invites journalists to come and stay at the camp. I can't imagine Vidal would have the balls to show up after last years little prima dona act.
abc
It's embarrassing
27.07.2008 10:04
journos ego
RE It's embarrassing
27.07.2008 10:33
In America there is the Alternative Press Syndicate.
Anything like that here ?
I see the NUJ similar to the Actors Union Equity.
Cold Stomper
Cold Stomper
Er, yes, abc
27.07.2008 10:33
Agree otherwise ridiculous fuss about decent sounding access policy.
a
Recent call to remove NUJ president
27.07.2008 18:58
The President of the NUJ (maybe just in Scotland) James Doherty now works as a PR man for Glasgow's privatised culture agency. He has been involved in the removal of the (excellent and radical) cultural magazine Variant (www.variant.org.uk) from all of the city's cultural venues. This accompanied by threats of legal action for defamation over an article that drew (obviously unwelcome) attention to the tight networks linking politicians, cultural types and business folk around Culture & Sport Glasgow.
Just thought I'd throw that in, since I think it should be more widely known.
CH
Homepage:
http://scotland.indymedia.org/node/10942
I tell you what....
28.07.2008 09:32
What I am interested in is making a fair and informed point to any jounalist who isn't so far up their own arse they can see yesterdays dinner! You know the rare kind who will report how it really is in a fair and non-biased fashion... bet we can count those on one hand!
I am perfectly happy to do this within the constraints laid out by the camp.. put there for us campers privacy and security.
If any of the above mentioned self indulgent megalomaniac type journos should try and do otherwise, I personally think it fair to make sure a proctological exam should be necessary to retrieve their equiptment.
Troll
e-mail:
garden.troll@hotmail.co.uk
Shooting yourself in the foot
31.07.2008 00:58
Donnacha DeLong (NUJ NEC member).
Donnacha DeLong
e-mail:
donnacha.delong@tiscali.co.uk
Homepage:
http://donnachadelong.wordpress.com
Kill the messenger
31.07.2008 01:42
There's quite a few people pointing out that John Toner can't claim to speak for the entire membership and quite a few people saying that they are NUJ members and pissed off with John for making a fuss over a policy that has taken into account concerns from last year and is clearly an improvement in terms of access for journalists.
"The NUJ fights for its members access to a range of different places - from concerts and sports events to demonstrations where the police block access."
That's great but the camp isn't blocking access to journalists so this whole thread is a distractions caused by John Toner playing games with the truth. Yes there are some attacks directed at the NUJ by some in the thread, guess somebody pissed them off.
"You're just pissing off people who are likely to try their best to show the campaign in a good light and give a free hand to the critical parts of the media."
The vast majority of journalists will have no problem with this policy just like last year when many commented that the facilitated media hour made it really easy for them to get what they needed. The people pissed off are a hand full of independent photojournalists and their comments this and last year show clearly that they have no intention of trying to show the campaign in a good light but instead make as much noise as they can about being told they are not welcome to make the camp into a 24/7 photo safari.
"It's your choice."
Exactly.
muppet
Is this thread still going
31.07.2008 14:42
Many previous action camps have operated with a no cameras policy and often with no interesting in courting the attention of the mass media but the since it's inception the Climate Camp has embraced working through the mainstream media and each year the media policy has been modified to account for the previous years experiences.
So, this year there will be plenty of journos on site and they wont have to pretend to be concerned citizens or sneak about eves dropping on private conversation before going back to their tents to make up some scandalous outrages for their editors. Photosgraphers, TV and radio crews can all come in due to media tour hours and get what they need without be treated with distrust and contempt and everyone can get down to the business of the camp for the rest of the time without camera flashes interrupting their meetings.
nickon
Hide 3 hidden comments or hide all comments