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)

Click here - Video: The Five Stages

Trauma sells, it dominates the news. We read about it every day, images of trauma bombard us through every media outlet. But what happens when the photographer becomes traumatised?

Following our last branch meeting Dealing with Trauma, myself and Branch Secretary Jason Parkinson were invited to a Trauma Retreat, hosted by the Dart Centre in Whitby. We had previously been part of a Dart round table discussion with journalists who had covered the revolution in Egypt, sharing the experiences in covering the uprisings in the Middle East with a view to working more safely in the future.

Despite the high volume of traumatic work carried out by journalists and photojournalists, we rarely give ourselves the time to sit down and to take full stock of the material we are handling. Taking the time to do this is important, because it is the first stage in arming ourselves with the tools and techniques that we can use to protect ourselves and our colleagues. The question is a dual one: what can we do to make ourselves both more resilient and at the same time produce more insightful work?

Talking about trauma in this way, during the weekend in Whitby was intense and demanding. We looked at situations journalists are confronted with when covering stories about trauma victims. While most of us bear up extremely well in instantly stressful situations, and deal as well as we can when listening to the harrowing accounts of survivors, it was clear that long-term exposure can have an accumulative impact on those documenting traumatic events.

We heard many harrowing accounts from the journalists, both staff and freelance, working for a variety of media outlets who have covered war, public order, or stories involving children which presented ethical dilemmas and emotional challenges. We also covered specific issues for female journalists and sexual violence.

One of the issues we explored in detail was Post Traumatic Stress disorder (PTSD). A lot of mythology surrounds the condition, but it is clearly a danger for people working around violence and trauma, just as it is for the victims whose lives we are documenting. As photojournalists we are often in the thick of it and right in the frontline. And nobody, however experienced they are or strong they appear to be on the surface, is necessarily immune from the toxic effects of working on this kind of material.

Some talked about feeling like a “trauma sponge” others about the “toxic buildup” associated with their work. And these responses are common in journalists who don’t go onto develop a clinical condition like PTSD.

So what we can do to look after ourselves and our colleagues?

Our mental wellbeing is as important as our physical health as journalists. We were taught by psychotherapists and industry professionals how to recognise the signs of trauma trouble in our colleagues: short temper, panic, lack of sleep, flashbacks, irritation, anger, lack of concentration, nightmares.

Traumatic stress still has an impact, even when PTSD as a clinical condition is not suspected.  There are a number of simple things we can do to reduce the pressure level. We were given practical methods to relieve stress, aerobic exercise is very good, as is meditation and breathing techniques. Healthy eating and a balance of vitamins also helps your body process stress, as is trying to maintain a regular sleep pattern.

Finding help is important, especially if somebody suspects they may have developed PTSD.  Sometimes people may worry that admitting they are not coping well might derail their work and make it less likely they’ll be employed. The truth is that doing nothing about a condition, which responds well to treatment, is more likely to have a devastating impact on the relationships around you and your work.

A supportive network of colleagues can be a great help, many of us go for the obligatory post assignment trip to the pub which can be very useful in sharing experiences and allowing the brain to start processing the memories.

Some media organisations have set up peer support groups which pair up journalists. We heard from the Australian Broadcasting corporation (ABC) who have done this very successfully, especially coping with the devastating forest fires. (Another group of Australian journalists trained by the Dart Centre even provided peer support to their colleagues in Samoa after the 2009 Tsunami  -  a wonderful gesture of solidarity)

Even if it is just a friendly voice on the end of the line, or a text asking if you are ok when you are away on a job helps. We are thinking of running a similar scheme through LPB. Many of our members are freelancers, but others who are attached to news organisations or publications are also unsupported.

Media professionals are very resilient – it is the nature of the job. But some maybe in denial, others feel embarrassed, inadequate or that they wont get work again if they talk about their situations. But negative responses to stressful situations are a natural human reactions and the down time needs to be factored into any workflow.

We are exploring with the Dart Centre a new initiative to provide photojournalists with relevant training. This is mostly about learning to listen and deal with stress and will be on an informal basis. It will provide us with the skills and care needed to be more resilient. It will give us the tools to help our colleagues, referring them to health Pro’s if necessary. We’re trying to create a trauma aware culture for us as journalists and how we cover events. Also making our editors more away of the effects of work overloads, deadlines, organisational pressures, logistics in the field.

Setting up a peer-support programme for journalists is going to take time and some careful planning to get right. If that sounds interesting and you’d like to contribute to that discussion, please get in touch.

© Jess Hurd

A Pakistani man holds his baby, both affected by last Saturday's earthquake as they wait to be airlifted to capital Islamabad for further treatment, at an army base in the northern Pakistani town of Muzaffarabad, Friday Oct. 14, 2005. (AP Photo/Lefteris Pitarakis)

The film showed by the DART Center for Journalism & Trauma can be viewed here:

Meeting audio is available to listen below:

Flashmob City Hall

22 April 2011

Tuesday 3rd May, World Press Freedom Day, at City Hall, London SE1 2AA at 12:30.

I’m a Photographer, Not a Terrorist! (PHNAT), the campaign group set up to fight unnecessary and draconian restrictions against individuals taking photographs in public spaces, is organising a flashmob outside London’s City Hall.

The event takes place on International Press Freedom Day and is supported by the National Union of Journalists (NUJ) London Photographers’ Branch (LPB).

PHNAT is concerned about the role of private security guards in the prevention of terrorism. Their role has been promoted by police, with the result that many privately employed guards are illegally preventing citizens from taking any photographs at all.

Areas designated as public realm are often privately managed spaces that are subject to rules laid down by the private management companies. Most insidious of these is the outright banning of photography in some of our most widely enjoyed public spaces, such as Canary Wharf and the Thames Walk between Tower Bridge and City Hall.

The mass gathering will highlight the restrictions on street photography in a public space. Photographers are encouraged to bring a tripod.

An illustrated PHNAT pamphlet will also be launched at the event. Created by PHNAT and LPB members, supported by the NUJ, British Press Photographers Association (BPPA) and the Campaign for Press and Broadcasting Freedom, it will celebrate the history of the PHNAT campaign.

Join Facebook event

Follow on Twitter

As requested by our members, we have increased the image submission to five images per person and a maximum video rush of 25 seconds. Images should be at least 1400 pixels on the longest side. The video can be more than one scene and all material should be from 2010 to the present time. The theme is still about selecting your own personal favourites.

All images should be sent to the branch secretary. Video can be sent via a file share site. The next branch members slideshow is pencilled in for the February branch meeting, 22 February, 6pm at Headland House. Look forward to seeing you all there.

It’s a seductive take: right now there are many reasons why the “concerned photographer” (a term current back then) might think their chosen medium is on a downward path. Magazines, and many newspapers, are dominated by celebrity and lifestyle trivia, with virtually no space for serious picture stories; staff photographers on the nationals are an almost extinct species; freelancers are ten a penny, their ranks swollen by digitally-equipped wannabes and hobbyists prepared to work for peanuts; commission rates and repro fees have been static or falling for years, and copyright is under threat from big business interests and business-friendly legislators. Many photographers are feeling very hard pressed indeed.

The days of news weeklies filled with extended picture stories were undoubtedly a high point in the relatively brief history of print photojournalism, but their demise was not the end of the line. Today, the web is spawning new outlets and multimedia forms that expand the ways in which photography can be used to tell stories. And pictures are everywhere, made and seen in numbers and formats that would have been unthinkable before the advent of digital technology. It is true that the majority are dross, and too many picture editors seem happy to make choices based on cost, not quality, but the new technology has created at least as many opportunities as problems.

Many of those problems are the result of its revolutionary impact on publishing. The industry is struggling to adapt to a completely new business model – or possibly several of them. And it’s only part way done. The big question is, how do you make money distributing content on the web, when everyone expects it to be free? Cut costs with copyright grabs and rate cuts? Boost revenues with paywalls and advertising? Probably all of the above and more, with no-one sure what is going to work, and who will go to the wall.

We are in a period of transition, but the death of photojournalism is not inevitable. Sooner or later, viable revenue streams for publishing on the web will be established by the big corporate players, and smaller niche companies will follow in their wake (or vice versa). Who knows – even print might survive in some form or other. However it works out, there will still be an enormous demand for photography. And if paid-for content is to stand out in a web awash with oceans of cheap-and-cheerful mediocrity, dross will not be good enough. Quality will be at a premium, and quality will only be possible if the new reality is a sustainable one for photographers. Cutting rates and grabbing rights isn’t going to work in the long term.

So maybe there are good old days still to come. Of course, to get to there we have to find ways of surviving the short term. Undoubtedly, as a first step, that survival requires a vigorous defence of rates and rights. As for what else – answers on a postcard, please.

Phillip Wolmuth is a freelance photographer and branch committee member. This article originally appeared on Phillip’s blog.

Comment pieces from branch members are always welcome. Articles should be 400-600 words long and sent to editor@londonphotographers.org

A journalist at all times upholds and defends the principle of media freedom, the right of freedom of expression and the right of the public to be informed.

- NUJ Code of Conduct

The February meeting of the London Photographers’ Branch agreed to create the position of Legal Rep. It was agreed that the person elected to this position would support Branch members who have had a ‘negative encounter’ with the police and to coordinate the Branch’s relationship with the police.

I’m proud that Branch members have elected me to this position. The Legal Rep’s job is to support members to uphold and defend press freedom, in hindsight maybe the Branch should of named the position ‘Press Freedom Rep’.

Just to be clear the Legal Rep does not give legal advice, that is the job of the NUJ Legal Officer Roy Mincoff and the specialist lawyers that the union uses. It is the job of the Legal Rep to get you into a meeting with the most appropriate national officer or lawyer to help you.

So what kind of situations does the Legal Rep support members with?

A Branch member was stopped & searched three times in 45 minutes by police whilst covering a protest in London; branch members were forcibly removed and stopped by police from covering an EDL protest in Bradford; a branch member was forced to delete pictures under the threat of arrest in east London; branch members have been violently assaulted by police officers when working and a branch member has been threatened with a warrant by police to seize pictures of a political protest.

These are some of the real and current situations that Branch members have had to face when working, a barometer of the current political situation in the context of press and media freedom today.

In the majority of cases I have been one of the first people in the branch that members have contacted when things go wrong with the police. One of the first things is to listen to find out what the member needs. To give the member an idea of some of the options that are available to them. This could be highlighting the issue in the media, making a complaint to the police or IPCC or take legal action – sometimes all three!

Practically, this involves time, emails, phone calls and meetings to get the Branch member the best support the union can give them.

Currently the Branch does not have any formal contact with the Metropolitan Police. The Branch has successfully gained the agreement of NUJ Freelance Officer John Toner to report to the Branch on the meetings he attends, along with other organisations that represent photographers, with the police.

Meetings with the police are problematic at best, sharing a cup of tea with senior officers is seen by many as no more then a public relations exercise on behalf the police. The lack of any real concrete and lasting change in the behaviour of frontline officers gives weight to this view.

A trade union of photographers and journalists – a freedom of expression organisation – has to be cautious about such contact with a section of the state. Especially when it’s our members job to report on the actions of the police to the wider public. Transparency is the key and full and open records of any such meetings is vital for a democratic member lead organisation like ours.

A domestic worker at St. Charles Hospital, Notting Hill, newly contracted out to cleaning company Mediclean, watches a televised speech by Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher. Image © 1986 Phillip Wolmuth.

The call to action from the TUC in Manchester this week brings to mind campaigns against public spending cuts imposed by previous governments, and the part that photography has played in them.

Perhaps the most memorable image of the ‘Winter of Discontent’, which immediately preceded the election of Margaret Thatcher in 1979, was of rats scurrying over piles of uncollected refuse sacks in Leicester Square. In that and subsequent disputes, those parts of the press more sympathetic to the trade union point of view, particularly the papers produced by the unions themselves, built solidarity with photographs of countrywide protest actions, and of workers in their workplaces.

One big difference between then and now, immediately discernable in the trade union (TU) press, is the current lack of representation of people at work. This is the culmination of a trend that began in the 1990s. It’s also at the root of the heated debate about the use of photography in TU journals that recently sprang up in the pages of the NUJ’s Journalist magazine.

The TU papers of the 1980s and 1990s were usually tabloid in format, like the NUPE Journal, for which the above photo was taken. Features frequently ran over two or three pages, with pictures used large, often occupying more than half the page. And they were very often unposed, documentary shots taken in workplaces – something that is now rare.

I think this is a significant loss, particularly in the present context. Such photographs can give meaning to the otherwise seemingly abstract effects of ‘planned public spending cuts’. If these images do not even appear in the TU press, they are unlikely to appear anywhere else.

Why has this change come about? One obvious reason is that the privatisation of so many services – from the railways and other public utilities, to hospital porters and school dinners – has made access difficult. Another is that union membership has fallen, resulting both in an increase in non-unionised workplaces, and in a decrease in union income. Over the same period there has been a move, across the media generally, away from serious photojournalism and towards ‘lifestyle’ and celebrity. And then there is the proposition that, with the rise of the new, fully automated, digital cameras, anyone can do it – so why pay for photos when members will send them in for free?

Access is a problem, but not an insurmountable one. As for the rest – I don’t buy any of it. Declining union membership has been offset by amalgamation – the membership base of the new ‘super-unions’ means that cheapskate sourcing of photography should really not be necessary. And there’s no reason why union journals should follow Murdoch and the rest down the celebrity and lifestyle route. As for digital cameras – ownership no more confers the ability to produce meaningful photojournalism, than does possession of a pen the ability to write like Shakespeare.

The fundamental reason for the absence is, I think, more depressing. It is that many editors (and those who employ them), inundated with mundane, ‘good enough’, almost-free imagery, have forgotten the value and impact of intelligently presented, serious photography.

Phillip Wolmuth is a freelance photographer and branch committee member. This article originally appeared on Phillip’s blog.

Like many, however, he tends to present economic processes and technological change as wholly determinate, immutable manifestations of “natural” capitalist forces that admit no contravention. “The Market” and those who, prior to the crash, were seen as “Masters of the Universe”, are thus mythologised as Joseph Schumpeter’s “Creative Destruction” is invoked:

Innovation by entrepreneurs is the force that sustains long-term economic growth, even as it destroys the value of established companies and labourers that enjoy some degree of monopoly power derived from previous technological, organizational, regulatory, and economic paradigms.

It is a common enough prognosis these days. “There is no alternative” to the depreciation. As photographers no longer piss about with smelly chemicals in the dark getting dermatitis and listening to Women’s Hour or tediously attaching labels to trannies and poking them into plastic sheets prior to shipping,  we have lost our “monopolisable skills” and must accept ever decreasing prices for a product that we’re told almost anybody can now produce. Those who question this wisdom or think otherwise are typically dismissed as foolishly idealistic, wanting a return to some previous pre-digital (and equally mythological as I recall) “golden age” of restrictive practices. We’re sort of Pre-Raphaelites of the Photo industry – though not as good looking, “Wheel Tappers” as one railway trade union editor put it – oh alright then “Luddites” (although popularly they are done a great disservice). In short, dissenters are characterised as wishful thinkers failing to comprehend the harsh commercial realities to which they must inevitably bend and submit or break.

Firstly, I feel this blinds us to understanding the development of the dominant business model and to the contradictions that it has and continues to develop – for example the divergence of the interest of between the supplier and the distributor or to put it another way, the business model undermines the content. Their fatalism demoralises us into giving up the possibility of competing on something other than price.

Secondly, these assertions divert us from the qualitative, ethical and ideational aspects of photography (and its delivery) – that which distinguishes great pictures. At one end of the industry “stock photography” is a “commodity” in the sense of being ubiquitous and generalizable. Typically a positivistic reaffirmation of the status quo and displaying a useful a tendency towards replicating “Fake pictures of Fake People”, it is like a machine rotating on the same spot. By contrast the best photography is limited only by history. It is specific, embodies something of the difficulties and complexities of real human experience, encapsulates contradictions or even denies the easy dominant social narratives. Intuition, intellect and events synthesise into inspiration or what Philip Jones Griffiths called “The upward spiral towards enlightenment… The more you see, the more you understand, and the more you understand the more you see”. Ideas are also a material force in the world. New businesses and modus operandi will continue to emerge as these dynamics unfold.

Finally, and forgive me for stepping back, but we should contemplate the fact that as the 70^th anniversaries come around, at the time of Joseph Schumpeter’s writing the long years of the last Great Depression were finally ended when capitalism’s “creative destruction” was unleashed in the form of Hitler’s devastating rampage across Europe and the “Final Solution”.

John Harris is a branch member, photographer and also runs ReportDigital.co.uk. This article originally appeared on John’s blog.

…architectural photographers manage to make children look lonely, even in photos of a kindergarten.

Marcus’ point is timely and recognizes an underlying problem with images of children, as taking photographs with children as a secondary subject is being made more difficult.

Have you ever wondered why people in photographs are either blurred, have their back to the camera, look lonely and not engaged with neither the space nor the photographer?

Prior to digital imagery, film required long exposures, especially interior scenes and this resulted in blurred imagery owing to movement. Digital imagery meant that images can be recorded at higher speeds, as the light sensitivity of the recording chip can be rated at significantly higher levels than can be achieved with film. This can deliver more intimate imagery, as photographers can now successfully record scenes that are low lit.

Yet the images that are published are not like this. Home owners are often unwilling to be so critically exposed by the camera and have their living habits openly viewed. Pictures of the public in corporate or commercial buildings often depict people half turned away from the camera, or hurrying past so that they are blurred. Rushing out for a meeting or a sandwich, they often aren’t in a mood to be photographed, and see the photographer as a major nuisance; an inconvenience in a perhaps already stressful day. There is a suspicion of anybody taking photographs and the public become unwilling subjects in the attempt to bring scale and humanity to the buildings.

Photographs of schools or kindergartens raise entirely different issues. The blind belief that anybody taking photographs in a school, especially a male, must have an ulterior motive prohibits an easy interaction between subject and photographer. Some of the provisos I have operated under when photographing children in schools have been absurd. On a recent assignment photographing building works at a school in Hackney, the project manager told me it was illegal to photograph children, and advised me not to engage with the children under any circumstance. Other parents have asked whether the images would be on the internet. If the images were for printed publication, it was deemed acceptable; the internet was definitely out of bounds.

Some schools are quite relaxed about photography; a circular is sent out in advance that advises parents’ that a photographer will be working in the school. If they prefer their children not to be photographed, then the child does not take part in any activities that may be in danger of being photographed. However the normal restrictions are that children can only be photographed from the back, any front on images are blurred so that their faces are not recognizable, or they are far enough away from the camera so as not to be identifiable.

The result is often an image of a small child standing alone in a playground looking lonely.

Grant Smith is a branch member and also one of the organisers of the I’m a Photographer, Not a Terrorist campaign group.