Dear Sir

The National Union of Journalists, London Photographers’ Branch notes with great concern the proposed introduction of new byelaws covering Trafalgar Square and Parliament Square. We are specifically concerned with the restrictions on press photography in these areas without prior written consent:

“Acts within the Square for which written permission is required: take photographs or film or make any other recordings of visual images for the purpose of or in connection with a business, trade, profession or employment or any activity carried on by a person or body of persons, whether corporate or unincorporate.”

This is wholly unacceptable to our members and we are protesting in the strongest terms against this infringement on our right to photograph in a public place.

We are also alarmed by the prospect of fines, “forfeiture of any item seized under bylaw” and giving security guards/heritage wardens the power to demand names and addresses. The production of a UKPCA press card should be sufficient to establish a journalists identity.

These GLA proposals are impractical and if enforced will have a massive impact on news gathering and press freedom. We urge you to consider our objections.

Yours Faithfully

Jess Hurd (London Photographers’ Branch Chair)

Tuesday 31 January 2012, 6pm at Headland House will host the third NUJ London Photographers’ Branch Annual Delegate Meeting. We will also be holding branch nominations for the new National Executive Position (NEC) Photographers’ Seat and we will be passing an important motion on the Leveson Inquiry, calling for a nation wide UK Press Card Code of Conduct.

In the first part of the meeting we are very privileged to have Nigel Dickinson travelling over from Paris to discuss privacy law in France and its effect on photography and reporting. We also have the NUJ Senior Campaigns and Communications Officer Sarah Kavanagh, taking time out of her busy schedule to talk to the branch about what the union has being doing about the Leveson Inquiry. With the NUJ being a core participant, Sarah has been working with Michelle Stanistreet and can fill us in on the latest developments and what we can expect next.

The second part of the meeting will most importantly be the LPB AGM, where branch members vote for the committee members they want to represent them over the coming year. Any full branch member can be nominated for a position. Temporary and Student members cannot hold a position but can be co-opted on to the committee to take a non-portfolio position. We encourage all members to attend and get involved.

The Branch Committee positions are,

Chairperson

Vice Chair

Secretary

Membership Secretary

Treasurer

Welfare Officer

Equality Officer

Union Learning Representative.

We will also hold nominations for the NEC Photographers’ Seat. Anyone wishing to be nominated for this voluntary position must attend this meeting, as all nominations must be brought to a constitutionally held meeting and the January AGM is th  only meeting before the deadline for nominations.

Facebook Event Page

Please contact joint secretary Jason N. Parkinson is you are interested in being nominated for a position.

The vacancies are as follows:

National Executive Council

Midlands of England

Ethics Council

Continental Europe

Industrial Councils

Broadcasting Industrial Council

Commercial Radio

Disabled Members

Equality

Continental Europe Council

Brussels

Freelance Industrial Council

North East

North West

Black Members

Magazine and Book Industrial Council

Books in London

Magazines in London (6)

Magazine and Books outside London (3)

Disabled Members

Equality

New Media Industrial Council

Midlands

North East

South East

Wales

Black Members

Disabled Members

Equality

Newspapers and Agencies Industrial Council

East Anglia

Midlands

Northern Ireland

South West

Wales and Merseyside

Black Members

Disabled Members

Equality

Public Relations and Information Industrial Council

Midlands

South West

Black Members

Disabled Members

Executive Councils

Scottish Executive Council

Black Members

Industrial Seats

Broadcasting (2)

National Newspapers and Agencies

Branch Seats

Ayrshire

Berwick

Dumfries and Galloway

Fife

Grampian

Greenock

Highlands

Lanarkshire

Perth and District

Welsh Executive Council

Black Members

Industrial Seats

New Media

Branch Seats

BBC Wales (2)

Chester

Herefordshire

Shropshire

However, it’s true purpose can be deduced from the following paragraph in the scheme’s Terms and Conditions:

“By submitting any material to Archant, You automatically grant Archant the royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable right and license to use, reproduce, modify, edit, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform and display such material (in whole or part) worldwide and/or to incorporate it in other works in any form, media, or technology now known or later developed for the full term of any rights that may exist in such content.”

This is clearly an attempt to cut costs at the company’s four daily and 75 weekly titles by replacing the work of professional photographers and videographers, including a number who are members of this branch, with that of unpaid readers, whose ‘shared’ contributions will be used free of charge by Archant.

All of this is part of a much wider trend towards amateurising lens journalism, driven by publishers’ and broadcasters’ quest for free or almost-free imagery, via copyright grabs or unfair licensing. In Archant’s case, iwitness24 includes a moral rights grab that, together with the sidelining of NUJ lens-based journalists working within a professional code of conduct, will also debase ethical standards.

The LPB deplores this move, which will inevitably lead to a further erosion of the living standards of our members, but the London Photographers’ Branch believes there is much that can be done in defending professional standards among working photographers. The LPB committee understands very well that achieving agreements, over rates of pay, with various media managements is a powerful way of sustaining the quality of the work we do.

First, it is the LPB AGM* where we elect our committee members & discuss the work of the branch for the coming year.

With the prospect of tighter restrictions resulting from the Leveson Inquiry, we will also be having an introduction by Paris based photographer Nigel Dickinson about the impact of Privacy Law on photography in France.

More details on this will follow soon.

Secondly, the first ever Photographers’ Seat on the National Executive Committee (NEC) is up for election. We will get the chance to decide who to nominate for the position from the London Photographers’ Branch. This is very important as the NEC puts into action the decisions made by the NUJ delegate meeting, coordinates the day-to-day work of the union and the campaigns we are involved in.

If you would like to stand for the Photographers’ Seat the submission date for all nominations must be in at Headland House by close of business Friday 10 February 2012. Please inform the branch Secretary if you want to stand for nomination by the branch ahead of the AGM (31st Jan), with a short statement, so it can be publicised.

The NEC Photographers’ Seat position is for a period of two years. There is one seat available, but the position can be shared. The position is unpaid, but expenses are covered.

Nominees must be up-to-date with their union contributions when nominated and throughout the election period and must be registered as a photographer, photojournalist or video journalist.

Nomination forms must be signed by an elected officer of the branch and nominees must sign the consent section of the nomination form or inform head office independently that they are willing to accept nomination.

Nominees must also submit their statement for the election pamphlet by Friday 10 February 2012.

Tomorrow morning, Tuesday 13 December 2011, I will head to Chelmsford Crown Court to oppose a production order application by Essex Police to seize all my footage from the Dale Farm eviction.

The production order, calling for all footage shot on 19 and 20 October, is also being served upon other news outlets.

I am resisting the order with the full support on the National Union of Journalists (NUJ) and legal support from Bindmans Solicitors. The handing over of material, either published or unpublished goes against the NUJ Code of Conduct.

I strongly believe a journalist should protect her/his confidential sources and material gathered in the course of her/his work. If I am forced to comply with the production order I am being forced into breaching my own union’s ethical code, but also to be forced into being an unwilling agent of the state, handing over material that will surely be used as intelligence.

I also believe it will have serious consequences on my ability, and the ability of those in my profession, to report future events. We are already seeing a growing trend of intimation and violence against members of the press reporting on the frontline. This is based on a wide mistrust of the media, which has been accelerated by the increase in the use of production orders we have seen since the student protests of 2010.

NUJ general secretary Michelle Stanistreet said: “Journalists play a critical role in informing the public and the police should not be trying to hands their hands on journalistic material. Media workers are engaged in professional activity which is independent of the police and they should never be seen as collectors of information for the state. It is an attack on press freedom and turns every photographer, videographer and journalist into a potential target.”

The impact of this continuing trend of production order use will have dire consequences on press freedom in this country, to the extent that eventually we may not be able to report some events at all. The courts have recognised the vital role of the media as the public watchdog. With the press unable to operate a fundamental pillar of our democracy slips away.

The irony is that the restrictions on the press to operate freely will not come from the authorities – as we have seen with the misuse of anti-terror and other restrictive laws – it will come from the mistrust of the media by the public, believing that footage shot and images taken could be seized by the police. In effect the public may also unwittingly impact on press freedom.

I have operated in countries like Egypt, Mexico and Russia, where the press are under physical control of the state, and I have experienced first-hand the tactics deployed to stop the press reporting, from beatings in the street, journalist material seized and destroyed or used to apprehend protestors, to simply having a police sniper trying to put a bullet in the head of the camera operator first, in order to eliminate any witnesses to the atrocities they intend to commit. Is that the route we want to head towards here in the UK?

We need to be totally independent of the state, in order to get to the truth behind incredibly dangerous and sensitive situations. If no one was able to analyse the recent UK riots, or talk to the people on the ground as events took place, then we would only have the government response as to why they happened, ending in the government dictating the official line.

We need a strong and united campaign of awareness across our media organisations to resist this attack on press freedom.

The proceedings at Chelmsford will commence at 10am tomorrow morning. If we are able, judge willing, we will be tweeting from the court. For updates please follow @NUJPhoto #productionorder.

]]> http://londonphotographers.org/2011/12/why-im-resisting-the-dale-farm-production-order/feed/ 11 http://londonphotographers.org/2011/12/branch-xmas-party/ http://londonphotographers.org/2011/12/branch-xmas-party/#comments Sun, 11 Dec 2011 10:43:57 +0000 Jules Mattsson http://londonphotographers.org/?p=2568

photo Jess Hurd/ design Jason Parkinson

7pm, 14th December 2011 at the Queens Head Pub near the NUJ.

66 Acton Street, London, WC1X 9NB – Map

Print Exchange

This Christmas we are coming together as a branch in a celebration of our year. Over the last 12 months our members have reported and documented everything from revolutions to civic engagements. Though our commitment to the highest standards of ethical journalism we continue to stand and fight together for the future of photography in the UK and Abroad. To celebrate this last years achievements the branch is running a print exchange at the party. To enter you can either buy raffle tickets on the  night or donate a print to the exchange and get them free. All financial proceeds will be donated to a journalist’s charity to be announced.

If you would like to donate a print for our raffle then please bring it along to the party on the night, otherwise Matt can offer a quality (giclee) A3 print for £12 inc. VAT. Please Email him your image file in the form of a JPEG to matt@matthewaslett.com.

FB Event - Please do RSVP on here if you can!

Look forward to seeing you there! Santa outfit optional

Police officers block Jules's camera, dislodging a lens hood, during the incident. photo Jules Mattsson

The London Photographers’ Branch congratulates its member Jules Mattsson in winning his case against the actions of the Met police when he was covering an Armed Forces Day parade in Romford last year. Jules kept calm, recorded the incident and argued for his rights in an intimidating encounter with the police. During the encounter he was abused, assaulted and threatened under the Terrorism Act and falsely imprisoned. Jules was 15 at the time and a student but had the support of branch officials at the scene and the national union in successfully pursuing justice with the help of leading civil rights solicitor and friend of the NUJ, Chez Cotton.

NUJ Legal Officer Roy Mincoff said:

“This was very poor and unlawful behaviour by a senior police officer, trying to intimidate a young NUJ photographer. It is not acceptable conduct, has no place in the police force and is hardly likely to gain respect for the police amongst the youth of the UK. The police have now recognised this, apologised and compensated our member. The NUJ will continue to hold the police to account to ensure that the vital rights of journalists, enshrined in law, are upheld, to enable reporting and photographing to continue, as part of the democratic framework of our society.”

Read the full Bindmans statement:

Met Commissioner compensates journalist arrested for taking photographs in public place and told to stop “running round acting silly, being stupid and gay”

Film & TV student Lewis Stainer in front of the protest camp. photo © Alan Lodge

From the NUJ Nottingham Branch:

Today, the NUJ has written to Nottinghamshire’s chief constable Julia Hodson calling for the apology to be made in person to 20-year-old Lewis Stainer, a student at New College in Nottingham.

Last Friday he was given back his film after it was seized on Monday 21st November by the police for evidential reasons.  Lewis had been filming in the old Market Square for his course project when police made four arrests at the Occupy Nottingham camp. Subsequently two people were charged with offences.

National officials of the NUJ have also decided today to give Lewis Stainer legal support while the union’s legal officers carry out a full investigation into the incident. Lewis who’s studying a BTEC in TV and Film says he wants an apology as well as compensation for the stress and  inconvenience he experienced in having his coursework seized.

The union is increasingly unhappy at the number of problems involving photographers across the country.

Diana Peasey, chair of the Nottingham NUJ branch said ‘we know photographers are under increasing pressure here. They’re often told they can’t photograph crime scenes or face having their camera or material seized by police under section 19 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984. It is done all too frequently.’

‘We have our own Police and Media guidelines which the NUJ negotiated with the Nottinghamshire police. Section 7 says specifically:

‘Police officers do not have the authority to prevent a person taking a photograph or to confiscate cameras or film and such conduct could result in criminal, civil, or disciplinary act.’

Ms Peasey said “It is clear that the PACE legislation is overriding the Media guidelines and we need to toughen them up to ensure that the police understand they cannot intimidate photographers and journalists at crime scenes or major incidents.”

Meanwhile, Nottinghamshire Constabulary’s Complaints and Misconduct unit is also looking into the incident.

Diana Peasey, chair, Nottingham NUJ branch.

Material ‘acquired or created for the purposes of journalism’ is Special Procedure and protected from seizure in this way under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984. The London Photographers Branch is strongly against the use of journalistic material as evidence.

Members approached by the police for your material you should contact the NUJ immediately. During office hours you can contact the NUJ Legal Department on 020 7843 3721. If you urgently need help you call the 24hr NUJ emergency legal helpline on 0800 5877530.

Additional coverage: BBC, ITV, Indymedia, Further on Indymedia, HTFP

LPB Posts on Seizure of Material:

Journalists not Evidence Gatherers

We Are Press Not Police Intelligence

Protecting Journalistic Material

Project Griffin training at Wood Street Police Station, 6 October 2011.

Project Griffin was formed in 2004 with constituents from the London Fire Brigade, London Ambulance Service, City of London Police, Coorporation of London and private security firms deployed in the City. Originally conceived by the City of London Police, it is now a national partnership and has been successfully exported to other countries.

Like many partnerships, it requires one party to be the leading initiator in the process, and in this case it is the City of London Police. Training days are held monthly at Wood Street Police Station. I attended as an observer, on behalf of the NUJ, and as a possible contributor to the training process.

The day began with an introduction to Project Griffin, and it wasn’t long before photography was mentioned, about 15 minutes into the session, and that came with the expression ‘Hostile Reconnaissance or innocent tourism?’ A Special Branch officer gave an overview of the terrorist threat, from both domestic and international organizations as well individuals acting alone. The classification and assessment of the threat levels and the current threat level was addressed. The use of hostile reconnaissance as an important part of planning in a terrorist action was discussed.

In the event of an incident, the role of the security forces as support for the police was raised. This included deployment of security personnel to staff secondary cordons around an incident site, as directed by a police officer. The emphasis was on close working and cooperation with the police at all times. An officer from the Bomb Squad revealed the different types of explosives, their constituent parts, how they may be detonated and the resultant damage. A firearms and weapons officer revealed tactics on how to avoid and minimize injury in a weapons attack.

The last briefing was from an officer from Operation Fairway, an intelligence gathering operation co-ordinated by detectives based within the Counter Terrorism Command unit at New Scotland Yard. The operation’s remit is to detect, deter or disrupt terrorist activity. This involves enlisting additional ‘eyes and ears’ in support of the central government’s attempts to counter the threat, and Project Griffin dovetails neatly with this operation.

Hostile reconnaissance was covered in depth by Operation Fairway, and various types of reconnaissance were revealed. Despite the fact that the officer re-iterated that not all photography is hostile reconnaissance, it is one of the most manifest examples. It is hard not to think that guards leaving the training day will view photographers as potentially more suspicious than any other activity. However if the photographer is paying particular attention to control and security systems, ingress and egress routes, then it is said that a security guard ought to be suspicious, (unless the photographer has been commissioned by a company that supplies security systems).

Other possible indicators of hostile reconnaissance are said to include:

• Making notes (something which photographers may do to record the position of the sun at a particular time of day),

• Observation of security processes, entry points, perimeter barriers and reaction drills (though a photographer may be observing when a building is at its busiest to capture the buzz around the building)
• Repeated walk-bys (again a possible research method used by a photographer to assess how the light falls most favourably on the structure)

The typical response from many photographers when challenged taking photographs is to mention Google Earth and the visual information in that data bank. It was also acknowledged that photography is not the only tactic used in hostile reconnaissance. Furthermore, someone taking photographs is not necessarily to be viewed as suspicious.

It is in this area that leads to some serious misunderstandings between photographers and security guards. It was emphasized that someone who is taking photographs is generally not suspicious, and certainly someone who is co-operative should not be considered as such. Guards were reminded that they had no power to demand deletion of images (if evidence of hostile reconnaissance is required, then this evidence would be vital), nor do they have the power to seize equipment.

Though there is no law preventing photography, once a photographer questions the guards’ insistence that ‘photography is not permitted’, the suspicion of the guard is alerted. Common sense and discretion become rare, and very soon, terrorism and ‘the current climate’ is mentioned as the reason why photography is prohibited. The prohibition on photography becomes more confused and muddled, as happened in Braehead shopping mall last month.

It would also be useful to convince security personnel to treat photographers less suspiciously and with more civility. There is good reason for photographers to do the same.

It seems that nowhere within the training currently are security guards told to stop or report all photography, and yet this continues to happen regularly, perhaps fueled in part by advertising like this?

The recent ‘Stand you Ground’ film highlights the problems photographers often face from security guards.

Note: The BISA (British Security Industry Association) have recently released new guidance in conjunction with the home office on photography & hostile reconnaissance, it can be downloaded here.