Management asks me to remove band photos because it suits their latest PR wheeze

[editor]

Do the guy a favour and take them down. It’s a small ask to help someone out on a project they’re working on. Don’t be tight.

How is it "tight" exactly? And no, it's a big fucking ask telling someone to remove a piece that I was asked to review and one that involves other acts. And any charitable feelings I might have had towards them vanished when the veiled threats came in.

 

[editor]

The whole photography permissions thing would disincline me to help them, but on the other hand, imagine it was you: would you want the right to be forgotten?

It's not about the right to be forgotten though, is it? The article doesn't mention the act's real name so if he wants to piss about with new projects, then he could pick a new name rather than expecting third parties to start accommodating his PR whims.

There is nothing in the article that mentions anyone's real name. btw.

 

[MrSki]

Please post the photos on this thread then it will be easier to make my mind up.

 

[Supine]

Send them a quote for your time and administration fees. If they pay earn a few dollars

 

[editor]

Send them a quote for your time and administration fees. If they pay earn a few dollars

If they'd offered something in return, then my response would have been different. I don't mean money, but something like tickets for their next show or a free CD or something. I wouldn't have wanted them because I didn't much care for the act, but the gesture would have changed everything.

What fucks me off is their attitude that I'm here to do their bidding whenever they decide that their precious and totally unknown artist wants to reinvent himself, and that photographers somehow work for them.

 

[Edie]

Send them a quote for your time and administration fees. If they pay earn a few dollars

Isn’t that a bit grasping?

I dunno, I’m inclined in life to help people out if it’s no skin off my nose. Not sure it’s any more complicated than that.

 

[editor]

Isn’t that a bit grasping?

I dunno, I’m inclined in life to help people out if it’s no skin off my nose. Not sure it’s any more complicated than that.

But it is skin off my nose. I was invited to the gig. I took the time to go along, take photos, edit them and then write an article about the gig and share it over social media,

They were perfectly happy with that review for 11 months. Acts do NOT have the right to demand that reviews are taken down because I am not there to serve them or their career.

That's the basic point of being an independent reviewer.

 

[Edie]

But it is skin off my nose. I was invited to the gig. I took the time to go along, take photos, edit them and then write an article about the gig and share it over social media,

They were perfectly happy with that review for 11 months. Acts do NOT have the right to demand that reviews are taken down because I am not there to serve them or their career.

That's the basic point of being an independent reviewer.

Sure, ok. Well, up to you. I’d do it out of the goodness of my heart, not cos they “deserved” to ask for it, just cos it’s a kind thing you could do. *shrugs*

Good luck whatever you decide tho.

 

[editor]

Sure, ok. Well, up to you. I’d do it out of the goodness of my heart, not cos they “deserved” to ask for it, just cos it’s a kind thing you could do. *shrugs*

Good luck whatever you decide tho.

You don't really know what you're talking about here, but it's got nothing to do with the supposed 'goodness of my heart' that you're claiming the higher moral ground on.

It's about principles and ethics. It's about treating reviewers with respect and not treating them like a commodity and telling them to take down their hard work because it happens to suit their own selfish agenda.

Anyway. Shrugs.

 

[Santino]

#shruglife

 

[Supine]

Sure, ok. Well, up to you. I’d do it out of the goodness of my heart, not cos they “deserved” to ask for it, just cos it’s a kind thing you could do. *shrugs*

Good luck whatever you decide tho.

Nice sentiment but it's a business requesting a service not a charity.

 

[Chilli.s]

I'd be tempted to try and sell them the photos. They'll pay up if it's that important to them.

 

[Pickman's model]

You don't really know what you're talking about here, but it's got nothing to do with the supposed 'goodness of my heart' that you're claiming the higher moral ground on.

It's about principles and ethics. It's about treating reviewers with respect and not treating them like a commodity and telling them to take down their hard work because it happens to suit their own selfish agenda.

Anyway. Shrugs.

Any updates?

 

[Smangus]

Do the opposite , enlarge the pics with a close up of the face and change the text of the review to a real slating. Show them the powa of the media!

 

[mhendo]

Good on you, editor, for holding your ground here.

I completely agree with the principled argument you're making. I think, as a general rule, that it would set a terrible precedent to start acceding to these sorts of demands, especially when they are based not on important concerns about privacy or personal safety, but simply on a preference for one type of publicity over another.

 

[editor]

Good on you, editor, for holding your ground here.

I completely agree with the principled argument you're making. I think, as a general rule, that it would set a terrible precedent to start acceding to these sorts of demands, especially when they are based not on important concerns about privacy or personal safety, but simply on a preference for one type of publicity over another.

If there was some sort of serious privacy issue, I would have removed the photos in an instant.