There are some bloggers who get a lot of attention in the photo community. Unfortunately, some are more reliable than others and there is one who, well, much of what he writes is at best spurious, but damn it sounds believable. I’m tired of seeing good photographers sucked into trusting someone like this, and so I published this post (below) on one of the forums. I’m sharing it with all of you because I think it is important that you investigate, on your own, the big issues that you are facing.
What I write and what others write are only opinions and should not be held up as The Truth, no matter how plausible it sounds.
______
It is easy to take a position that is popular and/or looks good on the surface. It is much harder to do the right thing when it is less obviously “good” for the community. ASMP had integrity and spoke truth on the OW situation, even though it knew that photographers would not be happy hearing that truth. ASMP did not want OW legislation, but they did their research and made the best choice possible in a very bad situation.
This same attitude can be said for the OZMO information ASMP provided. ASMP is not saying “you must sign up for this–it’s great” but rather they are letting the community know that this service is out there. There are many, many photographers who are selling their images for much less and with less control. This is just an alternative.
Unfortunately, some photographers have decried ASMP’s honesty and integrity, and even made allusions that there were nefarious forces at work behind the scenes. This is sad, and even more so when some of the very people who are attacking ASMP are perfectly happy to take advantage of their relations with ASMP–including get money from the group. These attacks are, fundamentally, not serving the community but rather good only for increasing the rate they can charge for the ads on their sites.
Think about it–each time someone writes “there’s a post saying ASMP isn’t supporting photographers” and links to such a post, the site where the post is made gets another “targeted” click. When one has ads on a site, that site owner gets paid by the number of clicks to that site. More clicks = more money and nothing generates interest like a controversy. Who cares if it’s real or made up of half-truths and innuendo and lots of imagination?! Click click click, $$$. Like Rush Limbaugh and his ilk, playing to the easy emotions and portraying oneself as leading the “Cause” for the masses is usually nothing more than a self-aggrandizing ego trip that increases one’s ratings and, thus the income derived by advertising.
Do your own research, independent of any self-proclaimed expert, especially one supported by advertising.
Sometimes the truth isn’t easy or comfortable, but if you dig, you will find that ASMP is first and always thinking of their constituents, photographers like you.
I think I know which blogger/post you’re talking about, and I’ve spent a few days trying to think up an appropriate response. I think if used properly, creative commons licensing may actually help photographers take care of their “true fans” and turn the long tail into a revenue stream.