pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Alamy Demographic Survey  (Read 1961 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: November 15, 2021, 10:23 »
+2
Had a look at "Alamy Demographic Survey" which arrived a few days ago.

They want to know the ethnic group, sexuality, gender identity, disability etc. of their contributors.

W-T-F is this?

Any thoughts?


« Reply #1 on: November 15, 2021, 10:25 »
+7
Just more corporate woke nonsense they want to try and prove they are down with the kids whilst screwing their contributors.

 ;D

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #2 on: November 15, 2021, 11:03 »
+3
Seems to be a Brit thing atm. PC gone mad.
When I signed up for my current level for an evening class in Spanish (on Zoom), I got an email to tell me that I couldn't enter for credit if I didn't fill out a very similar form, listing disabilities, gender identity, sexual preferences etc. Total insanity, as most of it, except some disabilities, would have no impact at all on me being able to complete the course and do the exams.
Never got that in any previous year.

I binned Alamy's email.

« Reply #3 on: November 15, 2021, 11:18 »
+7
...Any thoughts?

My first thought was that I couldn't see how this could in any way be an assist in marketing the agency - they are licensing images, not the contributors who created them.

My second thought was that none of that information was any of Alamy's business.

My third thought was that it was a totally harmless set of information and that on balance, contributing to their time-wasting exercise wouldn't take long.

So I completed the survey knowing that I was of zero help to them as I'm white, old, not disabled and in most other respects boringly mainstream :)

« Reply #4 on: November 15, 2021, 11:43 »
+1
...Any thoughts?

My first thought was that I couldn't see how this could in any way be an assist in marketing the agency - they are licensing images, not the contributors who created them.

My second thought was that none of that information was any of Alamy's business.

My third thought was that it was a totally harmless set of information and that on balance, contributing to their time-wasting exercise wouldn't take long.

So I completed the survey knowing that I was of zero help to them as I'm white, old, not disabled and in most other respects boringly mainstream :)


Exactly what I was thinking

« Reply #5 on: November 15, 2021, 12:20 »
+2
I did not receive this. This kind of data collection, especially by a private company, is forbidden in France.

Don't give away your personal datas to private companies, they will resell them to whoever needs personal datas to build their business. Don't feed the beast.

« Reply #6 on: November 15, 2021, 13:53 »
+4
Or you can alway identify yourself as an Apachee helicopter.

« Reply #7 on: November 15, 2021, 21:31 »
0
So I completed the survey knowing that I was of zero help to them as I'm white, old, not disabled and in most other respects boringly mainstream :)

I did it thinking the same thing.  Not sure what they were looking for but pretty sure it wasn't me.

« Reply #8 on: November 16, 2021, 04:31 »
+1
I did not receive this. This kind of data collection, especially by a private company, is forbidden in France.

Don't give away your personal datas to private companies, they will resell them to whoever needs personal datas to build their business. Don't feed the beast.

Exactly.

I too was thinking that this can't be legal.

The data they are asking is personal sensitive information.

"Data relating to religion, politics, health, etc. is considered sensitive under the EUs data protection law and gets special protection."

https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/law-topic/data-protection/reform/rules-business-and-organisations/legal-grounds-processing-data/sensitive-data_en

"Sensitive personal data is protected under EU law and can only be processed by organisations if specific safeguards are in place."

https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/law-topic/data-protection/reform/rules-business-and-organisations/legal-grounds-processing-data/sensitive-data/under-what-conditions-can-my-company-organisation-process-sensitive-data_en

Sure, they are an UK company, but I am a citizen of an EU country. They may get away if we give them this information voluntarily, but such personal data is no way relevant in the business of selling and distributing stock photos. They have no business asking any of this.  No way it would be acceptable to use sensitive personal information in any advertorial or marketing purpose.

How are they going to use this information? How is it stored and for how long? How it protected? Who has access to it? The email was vague about it, they said they will "share it".

It would be interesting to get some answers from Alamy.



Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #9 on: November 16, 2021, 09:42 »
+2
...Any thoughts?

My first thought was that I couldn't see how this could in any way be an assist in marketing the agency - they are licensing images, not the contributors who created them.

My second thought was that none of that information was any of Alamy's business.

My third thought was that it was a totally harmless set of information and that on balance, contributing to their time-wasting exercise wouldn't take long.

So I completed the survey knowing that I was of zero help to them as I'm white, old, not disabled and in most other respects boringly mainstream :)

Yes and I'm a boring minority: White, Christian, male, heterosexual, over 70, college degree, Military Vet, not a drooling blind follower of any divisive political party.

This survey was just to tell people who identify with a group, special interest, politics or origins, that Alamy really cares about you. 

« Reply #10 on: November 16, 2021, 15:36 »
+1
Yes and I'm a boring minority: White, Christian, male, heterosexual, over 70, college degree, Military Vet, not a drooling blind follower of any divisive political party.

That probably makes you unique!

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #11 on: November 17, 2021, 16:10 »
0
Yes and I'm a boring minority: White, Christian, male, heterosexual, over 70, college degree, Military Vet, not a drooling blind follower of any divisive political party.

That probably makes you unique!

LOL, I think there are many people who are sick of politics behind everything and everything always about the politics. Not enough, but maybe some day? How did a pandemic become a political issue, instead of a world health issue?

"The elderly, along with children and minorities, are
considered vulnerable to greater environmental risk than the
general population.  Due  to  frailty  and  the  greater  likelihood
of  pre-existing  illness,  the  elderly  are  especially  vulnerable
to  hazardous  events  such  as  natural  disasters  and  extreme
weather,  degraded  community  infrastructure,  crime,  heavy
traffic,  and  poor  air  quality."

And then they go off on how global warming will harm the elderly more than the rest of the people. Hey wake up, none of us will be here in the year 3,000  ;D Maybe they should be making plans for when the asteroid hits the Pacific Ocean and we have the equivalent of Nuclear Winter. We'll want more heat then?

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #12 on: November 17, 2021, 16:45 »
0
And then they go off on how global warming will harm the elderly more than the rest of the people. Hey wake up, none of us will be here in the year 3,000 
You are Donald Trump and I claim my $100  8)

PS: Meanwhile, having binned the origianl email, I got another today.  ::)
« Last Edit: November 17, 2021, 20:12 by ShadySue »

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #13 on: November 17, 2021, 22:36 »
0
And then they go off on how global warming will harm the elderly more than the rest of the people. Hey wake up, none of us will be here in the year 3,000 
You are Donald Trump and I claim my $100  8)

PS: Meanwhile, having binned the origianl email, I got another today.  ::)

I can neither confirm nor deny that I was ever any politician, nor a megalomaniac, in any past or future life.  ;) I'm getting at how every time something happens, it becomes an issue of politics, climate, race, gender or national origin. (and some other causes) Can't anything be, just what it is without some extended agenda, attached to the story?

Alamy is running this demographic survey, for what reason? I think their agenda is an attempt to market their own business and promote their contrived concerns for so many popular social issues. Why don't they just do like the rest and email us with messages about how concerned they are and how much they care about all of us, to promote their image.

Didn't we have some survey last year about our Exclusive images, how much we wanted to have Alamy do more to investigate and find use? Didn't it have to do with having actual exclusive images? What happened after that? Oh yeah, they dropped commissions, and still do nothing to protect our assets.

What will this new survey actually do? What use is this data for selling MY images?
« Last Edit: November 20, 2021, 10:42 by Uncle Pete »

« Reply #14 on: November 17, 2021, 23:49 »
+4
I assume they want to show what a diverse contributor base they have and use that as a marketing strategy?  Or something.

« Reply #15 on: November 18, 2021, 03:54 »
+1
I did not receive this. This kind of data collection, especially by a private company, is forbidden in France.

Don't give away your personal datas to private companies, they will resell them to whoever needs personal datas to build their business. Don't feed the beast.

Exactly.

I too was thinking that this can't be legal.

The data they are asking is personal sensitive information.

"Data relating to religion, politics, health, etc. is considered sensitive under the EUs data protection law and gets special protection."

https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/law-topic/data-protection/reform/rules-business-and-organisations/legal-grounds-processing-data/sensitive-data_en

"Sensitive personal data is protected under EU law and can only be processed by organisations if specific safeguards are in place."

https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/law-topic/data-protection/reform/rules-business-and-organisations/legal-grounds-processing-data/sensitive-data/under-what-conditions-can-my-company-organisation-process-sensitive-data_en

Sure, they are an UK company, but I am a citizen of an EU country. They may get away if we give them this information voluntarily, but such personal data is no way relevant in the business of selling and distributing stock photos. They have no business asking any of this.  No way it would be acceptable to use sensitive personal information in any advertorial or marketing purpose.

How are they going to use this information? How is it stored and for how long? How it protected? Who has access to it? The email was vague about it, they said they will "share it".

It would be interesting to get some answers from Alamy.
It is just a new direction of their business. The data have their own cost and become a commodity.

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #16 on: November 18, 2021, 05:43 »
0
I assume they want to show what a diverse contributor base they have and use that as a marketing strategy?  Or something.
That's certainly their story, and they're sticking to it.

« Reply #17 on: November 18, 2021, 05:58 »
0
My guess is that Alamy has lost direction.

They cut contributor royalties, gave up unique content, began licensing RM content for perpetual use at microstock prices.
Then they realized that this is the dead end. What to do?

They decided to renew their brand to give it the weird lifestyle stocksy-ish look.

But the image base looked too normal. Too many ordinary pics of normal people, houses, gardens, animals.

But wait! Even if images look normal, contributors can be strange and different. Alamy decided to become the stock agency with the weirdest contributors in the market and start selling images with the help of contributor stories. 

Alamy came up with the plan to ask about private information from their contributors. Such as race, sex, sexual preferences, identification, disabilities, etc. They will choose the winning combinations (the more unusual, the better of course) and promote the photography of those contributors. Their images will determine the future style of Alamy. The rest of contributors who submit normal, saleable, non-lifestyle, not-activist photography will not be promoted, displayed, they will drop off Gold level to oblivion forever. They will sell less and less, as customers will look for useful images elsewhere.

Nothing of course changes the fact that a private company asking sensitive personal information is not legal -  from a citizen of an EU member country anyway. I am surprised that more of you won't address this issue?




« Reply #18 on: November 18, 2021, 07:26 »
+1
I assume they want to show what a diverse contributor base they have and use that as a marketing strategy?  Or something.
That's certainly their story, and they're sticking to it.
Marketing

« Reply #19 on: November 18, 2021, 09:43 »
+6
Hi All,

Hopefully I can add some clarity here.

Firstly, this survey is 100% optional and anonymous. We will end up with % numbers against the survey questions with no identifiable information next to the answers. The data itself is not accessible other than to view results as a summary and there is absolutely zero chance of us "selling this data on" (as has been suggested in this thread).

Picture buyers in the publishing world are increasingly interested in this type of information, and when I say interested, I'm not talking about us "tapping into" some kind of trend.

We have face to face meetings with world leading publishers who ask us specific questions about where the images on Alamy come from and who takes them. They are keen to source images from a diverse mix of providers that demonstrate equal opportunities and ethical dealings. This subject has become increasingly common in our client meetings over recent times and we felt that we did not have the right level of information to inform them, but also closer to home, we want to make sure we are operating in an ethical and inclusive way.

That is the reason as to why this has been sent. The format, wording and distribution method we've chosen has been reviewed at all levels within the business and signed off by the in-house legal team within PA Media.

I hope this clears up any confusion around the survey, if you have any specific questions then please feel free to email
[email protected] and the Contributor Releations team will be happy to help.

Many thanks,

James Allsworth
Head of Content

« Reply #20 on: November 18, 2021, 10:26 »
+2
Hi All,

Hopefully I can add some clarity here.

Firstly, this survey is 100% optional and anonymous. We will end up with % numbers against the survey questions with no identifiable information next to the answers. The data itself is not accessible other than to view results as a summary and there is absolutely zero chance of us "selling this data on" (as has been suggested in this thread).

Picture buyers in the publishing world are increasingly interested in this type of information, and when I say interested, I'm not talking about us "tapping into" some kind of trend.

We have face to face meetings with world leading publishers who ask us specific questions about where the images on Alamy come from and who takes them. They are keen to source images from a diverse mix of providers that demonstrate equal opportunities and ethical dealings. This subject has become increasingly common in our client meetings over recent times and we felt that we did not have the right level of information to inform them, but also closer to home, we want to make sure we are operating in an ethical and inclusive way.

That is the reason as to why this has been sent. The format, wording and distribution method we've chosen has been reviewed at all levels within the business and signed off by the in-house legal team within PA Media.

I hope this clears up any confusion around the survey, if you have any specific questions then please feel free to email [email protected] and the Contributor Releations team will be happy to help.

Many thanks,

James Allsworth
Head of Content

Just when we were having fun with lot's of conspiracies --I was going to lean towards the X files myself  8)

« Reply #21 on: November 18, 2021, 10:33 »
0
Hi All,

Hopefully I can add some clarity here.

Firstly, this survey is 100% optional and anonymous. We will end up with % numbers against the survey questions with no identifiable information next to the answers. The data itself is not accessible other than to view results as a summary and there is absolutely zero chance of us "selling this data on" (as has been suggested in this thread).

Picture buyers in the publishing world are increasingly interested in this type of information, and when I say interested, I'm not talking about us "tapping into" some kind of trend.

We have face to face meetings with world leading publishers who ask us specific questions about where the images on Alamy come from and who takes them. They are keen to source images from a diverse mix of providers that demonstrate equal opportunities and ethical dealings. This subject has become increasingly common in our client meetings over recent times and we felt that we did not have the right level of information to inform them, but also closer to home, we want to make sure we are operating in an ethical and inclusive way.

That is the reason as to why this has been sent. The format, wording and distribution method we've chosen has been reviewed at all levels within the business and signed off by the in-house legal team within PA Media.

I hope this clears up any confusion around the survey, if you have any specific questions then please feel free to email [email protected] and the Contributor Releations team will be happy to help.

Many thanks,

James Allsworth
Head of Content

 when questioned about it on their own forum, they Twice deleted threads instead of interacting with their own posters. 

« Last Edit: November 18, 2021, 10:36 by ouatedeP »

« Reply #22 on: November 18, 2021, 10:51 »
+2
when questioned about it on their own forum, they Twice deleted threads instead of interacting with their own posters.

Not true. Threads were removed for breaching our forum content rules, not for posing questions about the survey.

James A

« Reply #23 on: November 18, 2021, 11:16 »
+12
So if clients are so much interested in behaving ethically correct, does this also extend to payments?
Do they ask for minimum prices and royalties, so that the (hopefully diverse and inlcusive enough) crowd of photographers can afford to continue to take photos and sell them?

« Reply #24 on: November 18, 2021, 17:35 »
+11
Hi All,

Hopefully I can add some clarity here.

Firstly, this survey is 100% optional and anonymous. We will end up with % numbers against the survey questions with no identifiable information next to the answers. The data itself is not accessible other than to view results as a summary and there is absolutely zero chance of us "selling this data on" (as has been suggested in this thread).

Picture buyers in the publishing world are increasingly interested in this type of information, and when I say interested, I'm not talking about us "tapping into" some kind of trend.

We have face to face meetings with world leading publishers who ask us specific questions about where the images on Alamy come from and who takes them. They are keen to source images from a diverse mix of providers that demonstrate equal opportunities and ethical dealings. This subject has become increasingly common in our client meetings over recent times and we felt that we did not have the right level of information to inform them, but also closer to home, we want to make sure we are operating in an ethical and inclusive way.

That is the reason as to why this has been sent. The format, wording and distribution method we've chosen has been reviewed at all levels within the business and signed off by the in-house legal team within PA Media.

I hope this clears up any confusion around the survey, if you have any specific questions then please feel free to email [email protected] and the Contributor Releations team will be happy to help.

Many thanks,

James Allsworth
Head of Content


ooh ooh ooh, I bet the buyers would be really happy to know that you restored the 50/50 split to contributors to help out your diverse contributors. or even better roll it back to the 60 percent for the contributor. I'll tell you I am whatever ethnicity or whatever you want if you do that.

« Reply #25 on: November 19, 2021, 03:55 »
0
Hi All,

Hopefully I can add some clarity here.

Firstly, this survey is 100% optional and anonymous. We will end up with % numbers against the survey questions with no identifiable information next to the answers. The data itself is not accessible other than to view results as a summary and there is absolutely zero chance of us "selling this data on" (as has been suggested in this thread).

Picture buyers in the publishing world are increasingly interested in this type of information, and when I say interested, I'm not talking about us "tapping into" some kind of trend.

We have face to face meetings with world leading publishers who ask us specific questions about where the images on Alamy come from and who takes them. They are keen to source images from a diverse mix of providers that demonstrate equal opportunities and ethical dealings. This subject has become increasingly common in our client meetings over recent times and we felt that we did not have the right level of information to inform them, but also closer to home, we want to make sure we are operating in an ethical and inclusive way.

That is the reason as to why this has been sent. The format, wording and distribution method we've chosen has been reviewed at all levels within the business and signed off by the in-house legal team within PA Media.

I hope this clears up any confusion around the survey, if you have any specific questions then please feel free to email [email protected] and the Contributor Releations team will be happy to help.

Many thanks,

James Allsworth
Head of Content


Thanks for replying. So the questionnaire was sent out with the CUSTOMERS in mind. You say you're not tapping into a trend, but that's exactly what Alamy has been doing.

Maybe, as others pointed out, customers should know about Alamy cutting contributor royalties, removing the 50/50 cut, licensing Rights Managed work for perpetual use, paying us microstock prices. How ethical, diverse and inclusive is that?

Alamy is not a traditional work environment (eg not an office, factory, store). Alamy is a web based agency where we contributors upload our images for licensing. You do have the information on who your contributors are, where they are from, and how to pay them and that should be enough. No need to ask personal sensitive data as it's irrelevant in the process of selling stock.

If ever sensitive data such as race, gender, gender identity, and blah blah, is asked, it should benefit the person in question some way, NOT the company. So how would this serve us contributors? If I come up with a star combination (great race-gender-sexuality-disability-politics combo), will you pay me more or will you accept images of lower quality? If you won't, I have given out information in vain just for Alamy and customers to goggle. My information may be lost or stolen and all over dark web next week (you never told us how this information is stored and protected). And I'm submitting my work from another country from the privacy of my home, it doesn't really matter to anyone who I am as long as I just submit good pictures.

Passing this data onto customers is not acceptable as it means using sensitive personal data in an advertorial way. Maybe your legal team relies on the "100% optional" thing but I highly doubt you have checked if asking sensitive personal data is legal in every country where your contributors come from.

If this survey has been discussed twice on Alamy forum, and you have removed the thread twice, that should tell you something.

This trending diversity & inclusive thing only creates more discrimination. That never works.

« Reply #26 on: November 19, 2021, 09:50 »
+3
"but also closer to home, we want to make sure we are operating in an ethical and inclusive way."

What does this mean?  What defines whether you are or are not operating in an ethical and inclusive way?  Your contributor base is your contributor base.  The only way I can see meeting some criteria of "ethical and inclusive" is if you could tweak search results by, say, ethnicity, which sort of fits into that equity silo.   But to do that you'd have to know by contributor their ethnicity. So according to your post, that approach is out. Outside of that, how do you use these data from the survey to "make sure" you are operating in an ethical and inclusive way?

So let's say a customer is interviewing you and says, what percentage of women artists make up Alamy, because that's important to us.  You say, well, it's about 40%. The customer says, that's not good enough, we want 60% before we work with companies like yours.  What is Alamy going to do about that statistic?  Fire male contributors to meet that metric? Invest in a campaign to attract more female artists? I mean, if it is viewed as unethical or not inclusive enough for the customer (or Alamy) what is Alamy's countermeasure?

« Last Edit: November 19, 2021, 09:58 by Mantis »

« Reply #27 on: November 19, 2021, 10:01 »
0
" equal opportunities" is called EEO in the the US.   

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #28 on: November 19, 2021, 10:09 »
+5
"but also closer to home, we want to make sure we are operating in an ethical and inclusive way."

What does this mean?  What defines whether you are or are not operating in an ethical and inclusive way?  Your contributor base is your contributor base.  The only way I can see meeting some criteria of "ethical and inclusive" is if you could tweak search results by, say, ethnicity, which sort of fits into that equity silo.   But to do that you'd have to know by contributor their ethnicity. So according to your post, that approach is out. Outside of that, how do you use these data from the survey to "make sure" you are operating in an ethical and inclusive way?

So let's say a customer is interviewing you and says, what percentage of women artists make up Alamy, because that's important to us.  You say, well, it's about 40%. The customer says, that's not good enough, we want 60% before we work with companies like yours.  What is Alamy going to do about that statistic?  Fire male contributors to meet that metric? Invest in a campaign to attract more female artists? I mean, if it is viewed as unethical or not inclusive enough for the customer (or Alamy) what is Alamy's countermeasure?
Why isn't it enough to say that there is no barrier to the 'category' of people can apply to supply Alamy so long as their photos meet their standards?
The only thing they could do to make sure they have the 'right' mix  ::) would be to make applicants fill in these details, then reject those who don't tick enough 'diversity' boxes. How would you then make sure people weren't lying?
What if a buyer said, "I only want to buy from suppliers who are X and Y and come from Z."

But the main thing (as mentioned already above) is how can  you claim to be 'ethical' while selling files for low prices and scraping off 60%?
What would you say if a customer asked  you that? "We do it because we have all the power. Suppliers are free to leave."?

« Reply #29 on: November 19, 2021, 10:53 »
+1
"but also closer to home, we want to make sure we are operating in an ethical and inclusive way."

What does this mean?  What defines whether you are or are not operating in an ethical and inclusive way?  Your contributor base is your contributor base.  The only way I can see meeting some criteria of "ethical and inclusive" is if you could tweak search results by, say, ethnicity, which sort of fits into that equity silo.   But to do that you'd have to know by contributor their ethnicity. So according to your post, that approach is out. Outside of that, how do you use these data from the survey to "make sure" you are operating in an ethical and inclusive way?

So let's say a customer is interviewing you and says, what percentage of women artists make up Alamy, because that's important to us.  You say, well, it's about 40%. The customer says, that's not good enough, we want 60% before we work with companies like yours.  What is Alamy going to do about that statistic?  Fire male contributors to meet that metric? Invest in a campaign to attract more female artists? I mean, if it is viewed as unethical or not inclusive enough for the customer (or Alamy) what is Alamy's countermeasure?
Why isn't it enough to say that there is no barrier to the 'category' of people can apply to supply Alamy so long as their photos meet their standards?
The only thing they could do to make sure they have the 'right' mix  ::) would be to make applicants fill in these details, then reject those who don't tick enough 'diversity' boxes. How would you then make sure people weren't lying?
What if a buyer said, "I only want to buy from suppliers who are X and Y and come from Z."

But the main thing (as mentioned already above) is how can  you claim to be 'ethical' while selling files for low prices and scraping off 60%?
What would you say if a customer asked  you that? "We do it because we have all the power. Suppliers are free to leave."?

Nicely stated.

« Reply #30 on: November 19, 2021, 15:25 »
+6
...They are keen to source images from a diverse mix of providers that demonstrate equal opportunities and ethical dealings...

There are equal opportunities for anyone included minorities of any kind to be contributor. There are equal opportunities to sell images. There are equal opportunities to be successful as contributor. No one cares about ethnicity or sex or anything, just about images. But YOU are creating unequal opportunities. Right now. Good work Alamy!

« Reply #31 on: November 20, 2021, 05:55 »
0


There are equal opportunities for anyone included minorities of any kind to be contributor. There are equal opportunities to sell images. There are equal opportunities to be successful as contributor. No one cares about ethnicity or sex or anything, just about images. But YOU are creating unequal opportunities. Right now. Good work Alamy!

Exactly!

« Reply #32 on: November 20, 2021, 07:07 »
+1

But the main thing (as mentioned already above) is how can  you claim to be 'ethical' while selling files for low prices and scraping off 60%?
What would you say if a customer asked  you that? "We do it because we have all the power. Suppliers are free to leave."?

Let's be realistic here. The problem is, the customers most likely won't ask for that. Every company wants to join on the diversity bandwagon these days. Not because they are so concerned about the issue, but because it's "in" these days. It's a marketing strategy. "Oh, look, we are so diverse!"  They probably want to print in some flyer how diverse their image providers are.
And I think it's good that diversity is more represented these days! I am all for inclusion. I just don't buy that it's anything but a marketing campaign when I see for example an advertisement for a body lotion with women of different skin colors and body shapes. I don't feel like it's "honest".
Payment on the other hand? Most companies don't care what the contributors or any other workers get paid. They got away with paying low wages forever. No one but the people getting paid poorly really care, because everyone fears that paying them fairer will lead to higher prices somewhere for someone else one way or another.
"Paying well" is not in, but everything is about diversity these days. Diversity doesn't cost a company anything.
« Last Edit: November 20, 2021, 09:16 by Firn »

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #33 on: November 20, 2021, 11:04 »
+1
^^^ Of course, it's nothing but a trend as I previously said (reply #2, above)

However, James from Alamy said, specifically, "we want to make sure we are operating in an ethical and inclusive way!"

Fair pay is unarguably* ethical, and it would apply equally to all sectors of suppliers.

*Universal Declaration of Human Rights:
"Everyone who works has the right to just and favourable remuneration ensuring for himself and his family an existence worthy of human dignity ..."

« Reply #34 on: November 26, 2021, 09:08 »
0
Since there is no information about the contributors' gender, religion, ethnicity, etc taken when the photos are submitted, it's about as fair as it can get.

You can't be unfair to particular groups if you don't know they are there.

« Reply #35 on: November 26, 2021, 09:47 »
0
Since there is no information about the contributors' gender, religion, ethnicity, etc taken when the photos are submitted, it's about as fair as it can get.

You can't be unfair to particular groups if you don't know they are there.

Doesnt that then make the survey moot? I mean, how would they take action to right the ethics ship and be able to measure it? How will they know what good looks like?


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
PDN Survey

Started by Istock News Microstock News

0 Replies
1964 Views
Last post March 14, 2007, 13:11
by Istock News
PDN Survey

Started by Istock News Microstock News

0 Replies
1933 Views
Last post March 15, 2007, 12:11
by Istock News
54 Replies
41088 Views
Last post July 10, 2012, 15:16
by Freedom
13 Replies
4333 Views
Last post July 08, 2011, 07:15
by aeonf
100 Replies
18176 Views
Last post September 03, 2011, 16:24
by madelaide

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle