Posted by William Vrolyk on January 18, 2007 at 12:26 PM
When you sell a photograph to an advertising firm, or any business, are you endorsing the product for which the photograph is intended? Even though you would remain anonymous?
Would you, or have you, rejected a lucrative offer by an advertising firm because you do not support their product?
Do advertising firms give out information about their clients? Or do they just want to buy your photograph and you do not know where it winds up? Would you insist on knowing?
Whew ! A lot of questions. But I am interested to know your thoughts on this.
Once you sell the rights you have no say on how your image gets used within those rights.
I'm sure stock photographers will have more experience with this type of stuff, but personally I declined a large print sale to decorate the boardroom of a logging company, as well as a sale of a web image for the site of a political party.
In my mind this falls into the same ethical dilemma faced when investing in stocks, even through mutual funds. Many agree there's a problem, considering the growing popularity of mutual funds that refuse to support companies or industries they consider unethical.
I've been using vague terms intentionally, because ethical definitions vary so widely. In my mind it's a case of "put your money where your mouth is," and more and more people are doing so.
On a more localized example we provide photographic services to a wide range of companies, and some are unpopular. We draw our line differently than some of our friends, and as a result take some grief for it. There are companies and organizations we refuse to work for, but that carries little weight in such discussions. In our experience it's an all-or-nothing issue for some people, and you wrong if you don't do everything their way.
We refuse to let others run our business for us, and we make our own choices of which companies we work for and which not. I'm kinda hardnosed, but I figure anyone who tries to impose their values on me while disrespecting mine is verging into the territory distinguishing friends from acquaintances.
Yup, touched a nerve with me. In a nutshell I think you should follow your specific beliefs in these kind of decisions, but think carefully before following the dictates of others. You can end up chasing your tail trying to make them happy, meanwhile going broke. It's your decision which companies to support, but it is nonetheless a decision which should be made.
Posted by Richard Wong on January 18, 2007 at 2:57 PM
I don't think that because your photo gets licensed for use that it makes you an endorser. Unless your name is on it. It's like if your photos get sold by a stock photo agency, you have no control or knowledge or where it goes generally. I'm more concerned about having enough food to put in my mouth.
The last ad agency I worked at had U.S. Smokeless Tobacco as a client and David Stoecklein was one of the photographers for one of the brands. Though I think I was the only one at the agency who even cared who the guy was. I don't know him personally but I suspect he probably lives a very good lifestyle...
Posted by William Vrolyk on January 19, 2007 at 12:17 PM
Hank, I didn't mean to touch a nerve with you. I just wanted to know wether or not NPN members would say yes or no to my question. I could carry my question a step further; does the magazine that carries the advertisement endorse the product or company? What if you approve of the advertising firm's client but find out they placed it in a magazine you would be ashamed to be seen with Are you endorsing the magazine as a result of your photograph appearing in it?
I tend to go along with Richard on this. How can you endorse anything if you are anonymous? Furthermore endorsing is publicly announcing your willingness to use the product. With whom or where you provide photographic services does not concern me and I , nor should anyone, do not sit in judgement if it doesn't conform to my ethical standards.
I was talking about direct sales and service rather than stock, Will. I don't know of any stock agency that claims to follow any such restrictions, so in for a dime in for a dollar with them. You can end up chasing your tail, and meanwhile chasing off clients, if you follow it to the end of your questions. I can say no to the people who come through the door, but once I've said yes to them the only restrictions are spelled out in our contracts.
Don't worry about touching that particular nerve. In fact I think it's a good nerve to reserve decisions for yourself rather than letting others including friends try to do it for you. That's the point I was making- You'll have to make your own decision where to draw the line.
Discussion
5 repliesWould you, or have you, rejected a lucrative offer by an advertising firm because you do not support their product?
Do advertising firms give out information about their clients? Or do they just want to buy your photograph and you do not know where it winds up? Would you insist on knowing?
Whew
Will
Edmonton, Alberta
Canada
I'm sure stock photographers will have more experience with this type of stuff, but personally I declined a large print sale to decorate the boardroom of a logging company, as well as a sale of a web image for the site of a political party.
Guy
I've been using vague terms intentionally, because ethical definitions vary so widely. In my mind it's a case of "put your money where your mouth is," and more and more people are doing so.
On a more localized example we provide photographic services to a wide range of companies, and some are unpopular. We draw our line differently than some of our friends, and as a result take some grief for it. There are companies and organizations we refuse to work for, but that carries little weight in such discussions. In our experience it's an all-or-nothing issue for some people, and you wrong if you don't do everything their way.
We refuse to let others run our business for us, and we make our own choices of which companies we work for and which not. I'm kinda hardnosed, but I figure anyone who tries to impose their values on me while disrespecting mine is verging into the territory distinguishing friends from acquaintances.
Yup, touched a nerve with me. In a nutshell I think you should follow your specific beliefs in these kind of decisions, but think carefully before following the dictates of others. You can end up chasing your tail trying to make them happy, meanwhile going broke. It's your decision which companies to support, but it is nonetheless a decision which should be made.
The last ad agency I worked at had U.S. Smokeless Tobacco as a client and David Stoecklein was one of the photographers for one of the brands. Though I think I was the only one at the agency who even cared who the guy was. I don't know him personally but I suspect he probably lives a very good lifestyle...
I tend to go along with Richard on this. How can you endorse anything if you are anonymous? Furthermore endorsing is publicly announcing your willingness to use the product. With whom or where you provide photographic services does not concern me and I , nor should anyone, do not sit in judgement if it doesn't conform to my ethical standards.
Thanks for the replies.
Will
Edmonton, Alberta
Canada
Don't worry about touching that particular nerve. In fact I think it's a good nerve to reserve decisions for yourself rather than letting others including friends try to do it for you. That's the point I was making- You'll have to make your own decision where to draw the line.