MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: is IS a totalitarian state?  (Read 19406 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

yecatsdoherty

« on: January 27, 2009, 00:45 »
0
just kidding, sort of. don't get me wrong, I am a TOTAL iStock groupie. I love the site, I jumped at exclusivity and I promote iStock everywhere that I go. I am very proud of being an IS exclusive.

now that I have been around for a while, in my third year, I have noticed something...they are pseudo-dictatorial when it comes to the consequences of contributors asking questions, requesting information or posting negative feedback in forums. not just as it pertains to me, I have watched many a fellow istocker get totally shut down after asking perfectly legitimate questions.

and what amazes me, is that this type of speak no evil culture only generates angst and dissension and this seems to completely contrast with how progressive iStock claims to be.


jsnover

« Reply #1 on: January 27, 2009, 01:14 »
0
I guess everyone's experience of iStock is different, in part because of how we each use the site, in part because of expectations, and in part because we differ in how to approach public conflict and discussion of same.

My experience of iStock is that they do tolerate negative comments and feedback that isn't positive - I think I've given them a fair bit of that over time. I've never been banned or warned or otherwise discliplined for doing that.

They don't tolerate angry rants or personal attacks or circular discussions (past one or two turns of the circle). I've seen this less as totalitarianism than enforcing civility and debating rules. They don't tolerate discussions of competitors, but then none of the sites do. For sheer chutzpah, FT takes the cake in not tolerating negative comments in off-forum locations, something I'm not aware of any other site doing.

Perhaps if you had something specific you wanted to discuss here - off site forums are great for touchy topics. My guess is that there is a "for instance" behind your general observations...

shank_ali

« Reply #2 on: January 27, 2009, 02:09 »
0
Stacey you have been more vocal than alot of other on the istock forum about poor sales.Rather surprised to hear a grown mature women cry so much!
Why don't you just sit tight and keep producing and hopely things will improve.
As for the forum it will remain a fine place to chat and discuss anything and everything.

« Reply #3 on: January 27, 2009, 02:14 »
0
Stacey

First of all, what many people sometimes confuse (like you in the title, even if you didn't mean it), iStock is not a "state", it's a business. And it has the right to protect its business interest first. And we are not a citizens, we are a suppliers. We have a business relation with this company, and as such we don't have any given rights and both sides always have a choice to define the conditions for our relationship. Actually, most contributors would probably even agree that iStock has the duty to protect its business as all of us are relying on iStock to make good or even better business in the future, right?

Second, I have seen lots of controverse discussions in the iStock forums. There are just very few rules that lead to threads being closed and it has never been "I am opposed to the changes that iStock had made". Some of the rules are pretty obvious like "don't compare us to our competitors in our forums". And some are just "don't ask questions which you know will not get an official answer anyway". iStock's policy has been not to share detailed business secrets with contributors and I am sure they will continue to do so.

And then there are forum-specific rules like "don't insult fellow contributors", "don't start threads as a method of personal promotion" or "don't discuss the same issues in more than one thread at a time". This is to protect the forum culture. If iStock would allow the same topics to be discussed again and again, the whole forum would be full of threads about the same topic and no one could talk about anything else than best match because other threads just would get lost.

I can fully understand your current frustrations if your sales are down or sales patterns are changing. But it simply doesn't make sense trying to keep everyone busy telling you the same over and over again. Eventually it's just a waste of time for many people. If you have that spare time, fine. But don't make everybody else use his to argue with you.

Best regards,

Michael
« Last Edit: January 27, 2009, 02:19 by MichaelJay »

« Reply #4 on: January 27, 2009, 02:24 »
0
Frankly, I'm surprised that they have forums to begin with.  You don't see the major agencies like Corbis or Getty messing around with stuff like that.

« Reply #5 on: January 27, 2009, 02:47 »
0
Frankly, I'm surprised that they have forums to begin with.  You don't see the major agencies like Corbis or Getty messing around with stuff like that.
I think community forums are fundamental to the development of a crowdsourcing business model.

e-person

« Reply #6 on: January 27, 2009, 04:16 »
0
I think they should get rid of forums. Waste of bandwidth.

RacePhoto

« Reply #7 on: January 27, 2009, 08:26 »
0
I think they should get rid of forums. Waste of bandwidth.


They have forums there?  ;)

« Reply #8 on: January 27, 2009, 08:52 »
0
I am a TOTAL iStock groupie. I love the site, I jumped at exclusivity and I promote iStock everywhere that I go. I am very proud of being an IS exclusive.


Why, why, why, why and why?

RT


« Reply #9 on: January 27, 2009, 09:45 »
0
I am a TOTAL iStock groupie. I love the site, I jumped at exclusivity and I promote iStock everywhere that I go. I am very proud of being an IS exclusive.

Yet you decided to start this thread!

I'm not exclusive but I do love iStock for the amount of revenue it creates for me, nearly everything else about the site drives me nuts.

The people that woohoo there and boohoo here always amuse me.

KB

« Reply #10 on: January 27, 2009, 10:49 »
0
It seems to me that iStock is far more tolerant of criticism than are, say, DT and (ha!) FT. The only place I've seen more critical posts allowed than iStock is at StockXpert. But it shouldn't be surprising that any business would be likely to do something about posts and/or people that they feel are doing harm to their bottom line. The difference is in how far they are willing to stretch it, and iStock IMO is fairly liberal in that regard.

Tuilay

« Reply #11 on: January 27, 2009, 11:15 »
0
all sites are pretty much protective about their reviewers and infallibility and godliness  ;D
some, thankfully, for example StockXpert, Zymmetrical, Cutcaster,SV, 123rf once in a while, take on human form to at least come here to rub sholders with us, and to be a little more casual.  which is nice, as it shows us at least they don't mind being human once in a while  ;D

p.s.
oh btw, HAPPY CHINESE NEW YEAR OF THE OX. to all those here who belong to the golden race and who celebrate this auspicious day. Hope your Ox will bring us better luck than the Rat.
« Last Edit: January 27, 2009, 11:17 by Tuilay »

hali

« Reply #12 on: January 27, 2009, 11:24 »
0
I may be wrong but isn't iStock based in Calgary, Canada? That is hardly the place to be totalitarian. Perharps if they are based in what once was Berlin,or in Beijing, or Singapore, where the politics are more like you say they are, that may have influenced iStock to be like the government of the day.
Noooo, iStock is the most liberal entity of the Big 6.  8)
(aside: "huh what? I just got yet another approval from IS? all bow to the great emperor )
« Last Edit: January 27, 2009, 11:28 by hali »

yecatsdoherty

« Reply #13 on: January 27, 2009, 11:35 »
0
I think I am in an iStock rut...hoping to get out of it soon. was really chugging along toward Gold, invested a whole bunch in new equipment etc., and then as of the new year, I have watched my sales trickle to almost nothing. so I have asked some questions, which remain unanswered.

I think I need to take a step back and chill. I am usually one of the people defending their decisions. I realize they are a business and that they are making decisions to continue to grow business. these recent changes just happened to have killed my sales, but I'm sure they are overall doing what they are supposed to do.

I don't want to be seen as a squeaky wheel, because I'm not usually. I certainly have been whining in this situation, probably because I am so disappointed with how things have turned. anyway, a learning experience for sure. this is the first major change that has really affected me and I'm sure many others have gone through similar issues.




lisafx

« Reply #14 on: January 27, 2009, 11:48 »
0
Stacey, I have followed the best match thread and can completely identify with your feelings about your sinking sales. 

Believe me - I went through the same thing from mid October through the end of the year.  My sales were tanked during the busiest part of the year, and lots of others were in the same boat.  And we were not given a lot of sympathy when we complained on istock's forums.  At all.

Now those of us who took a beating over the holidays are mostly seeing our sales rebound to where they were in Aug/Sept, but the people who saw the big sales jump from Oct - Dec are the ones with the sales downturn. 

What is so frustrating is that some of the very people who were most unsympathetic to those who suffered under the last best match are the same people most vocally complaining about this one.

The best match giveth and the best match taketh away.  Hopefully the people getting clobbered by this incarnation will be a bit more sympathetic to the next batch of best match losers when they are on top again....

lisafx

« Reply #15 on: January 27, 2009, 11:52 »
0
OMG, Tuilay, you have gone and had a sex change??!! 

Claudia Schiffer is okay, but I am really going to miss Bruce!  :(

Tuilay

« Reply #16 on: January 27, 2009, 12:04 »
0
OMG, Tuilay, you have gone and had a sex change??!! 

Claudia Schiffer is okay, but I am really going to miss Bruce!  :(
lovely to see you, lisa!
ya got tired of moonlighting  ;D 
 you think blonde hair is becoming on me  ??? nice long tassles !hmm?  sooo soft :)

yecatsdoherty

« Reply #17 on: January 27, 2009, 12:05 »
0
Stacey, I have followed the best match thread and can completely identify with your feelings about your sinking sales. 

Believe me - I went through the same thing from mid October through the end of the year.  My sales were tanked during the busiest part of the year, and lots of others were in the same boat.  And we were not given a lot of sympathy when we complained on istock's forums.  At all.

Now those of us who took a beating over the holidays are mostly seeing our sales rebound to where they were in Aug/Sept, but the people who saw the big sales jump from Oct - Dec are the ones with the sales downturn. 

What is so frustrating is that some of the very people who were most unsympathetic to those who suffered under the last best match are the same people most vocally complaining about this one.

The best match giveth and the best match taketh away.  Hopefully the people getting clobbered by this incarnation will be a bit more sympathetic to the next batch of best match losers when they are on top again....

thanks Lisa - I really appreciate your kind words, you're very thoughtful, always encouraging....I was one of the people who often groaned sarcastically about "not another best match thread"....so I had this coming, karma. I used the forums to vent, which just made me look incorrigible and whiny. I am just going to continue working on my portfolio, culling old images and adding new stuff, keeping my fingers crossed.

« Reply #18 on: January 27, 2009, 12:11 »
0
Of course iS isn't a totalitarian state; it's neither totalitarian nor a state.  I do find their forums an unappealing place to be, both from the heavy hand of iS and even more from the rah rah of iS apologists when a discouraging voice is heard.  More than any other site, I get a true believer vibe from iS members.  I used to spend a lot more time on the SS forums, which I felt had a higher content value.

As for results, iS has been sinking for me for a while.  My monthly earnings are down about a third, and this month iS has slipped from second in earnings to fifth.  Granted, I have a lot more images on other sites, but that's due to iS's restrictive upload policy.  I have a backlog of 1400 images, and it'll only get worse!

lisafx

« Reply #19 on: January 27, 2009, 12:37 »
0

thanks Lisa - I really appreciate your kind words, you're very thoughtful, always encouraging....I was one of the people who often groaned sarcastically about "not another best match thread"....so I had this coming, karma. I used the forums to vent, which just made me look incorrigible and whiny. I am just going to continue working on my portfolio, culling old images and adding new stuff, keeping my fingers crossed.

Definitely it is hard to relate to the frustration until it happens to you...

I am betting newer images will be favored again soon and then you will find all your hard work uploading now will pay off :)

« Reply #20 on: January 27, 2009, 14:23 »
0
best match changes must surely test the faith of many istock exclusives. When things go bad the question of hedging on other sites must surely come up. But...what about the next best match change? Especially at the moment with a radically new best match in the wings, I guess no one is prepared to jump ship until they see how it pans out.

On another note (and since a few people have asked why be exclusive on istock), I think it's a common phenomenon that something that causes such strong emotional involvement as the best match (highs and lows) actually binds people to the group/activity. Like cults, or gambling.

shank_ali

« Reply #21 on: January 27, 2009, 15:33 »
0
I am a TOTAL iStock groupie. I love the site, I jumped at exclusivity and I promote iStock everywhere that I go. I am very proud of being an IS exclusive.


Why, why, why, why and why?
Seems a reasonable question to me...I share  Stacey's sentiment 100%
Many many micro contributors are not professional or want to be or will ever be.When you pursue photography as  a hobby/interest and you find a site to showcase your work and actually sell it the feeling is quite exciting and amazing to begin with.Once you have tasted a little bit of success you strive to improve your work to increase your chances of making more sales to generate more money.Istockphoto is the premier micro site in the world and the rest have copyied Mr  B. Livingston's brilliant original  idea.
When money is your sole purpose of your photography you would be a bit dumb IMO to only have your work on one particular site even if that site was istockphoto which gives it's exclusive contributors the highest  monies that any other micro site.
When sales dip  especially for an exclusive contributor on istockphoto the question always will arise....what if i contributed to  7 different micro-sites ,would i make seven times as much money....I have neither the time or the notion to upload to any other site other than istockphoto and i hope stacey can sit tight and with her fine portfolio i am sure the sales will return.

« Reply #22 on: January 27, 2009, 15:47 »
0
best match changes must surely test the faith of many istock exclusives. When things go bad the question of hedging on other sites must surely come up. But...what about the next best match change? Especially at the moment with a radically new best match in the wings, I guess no one is prepared to jump ship until they see how it pans out.

On another note (and since a few people have asked why be exclusive on istock), I think it's a common phenomenon that something that causes such strong emotional involvement as the best match (highs and lows) actually binds people to the group/activity. Like cults, or gambling.

This is not a change disfavouring exclusives: for what I've read, it's just a temporary brief change favouring "more than two years old sucessful files" with data-mining purposes. Things should come back to normality soon, after all, if IS wants no-exclusives turning to exclusives they have to communicate the message that doing that sales will increase. For what is read in forums, comission increase won't compesate for itself the loss of income at the oher six or seven significant micro-sites.
« Last Edit: January 27, 2009, 15:49 by loop »

« Reply #23 on: January 27, 2009, 20:58 »
0
hi,

personally there are worse than IS :) at least their communication on some issues / changes etc is pretty good. personally I feel that at least a modicum of respect as a contributor there. (but I havent ever tried to get problems etc resolved).

Not that I go either and I know its a bit exaggerated but Istocks forum makes me think of the american tv evangelists? (I think thats what they are called, the preachers on tv) that we see occassionally (generally times like 3am :) -anyway all clinically clean, getting the audience revved up and shouting hallelujah!   In contrast shutterstocks forum makes me think about a pile of people in my local pub, complete with the bar flies, who barely leave (sometimes they go take some photos :)) and filled with people socialising, wandering from table to table talking to mates, talking politics, the state of society etc etc. 

(I dont think either is bad, just different :) and in both cases people there seem to be having a good time)

Phil
« Last Edit: January 28, 2009, 01:16 by clearviewstock »

« Reply #24 on: January 27, 2009, 21:14 »
0

Not that I go either and I know its a bit exaggerated but Istocks forum makes me think of the american tv evangelists? (I think thats what they are called, the preachers on tv) that we see occassionally (generally times like 3am :) -anyway all clinically clean, getting the audience revved up and shouting hallelujah!   In contrast shutterstocks forum makes me think about a pile of people in my local pub, complete with the bar flies, who barely leave (sometimes they go take some photos :)) and filled with people socialising, wandering from table to table talking to mates, talking politics, the state of society etc etc. 

That's well observed! The SS forum regulars do appear to be a bunch of sad social-inadequates with way too much time on their hands. If I pop in for a look around I invariably leave quickly shuddering with disgust at the inane comments, fawning and ego-massaging which is pretty much all that goes on there.

If you think the IS forums are evangelical now you should have been there 4 years ago __ that was truly disturbing. Somehow getting sold off to 'The Great Satan', as Getty were considered to be at the time, seemed to slowly temper that enthusiasm.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
13 Replies
13882 Views
Last post May 08, 2012, 03:43
by CarlssonInc
76 Replies
17402 Views
Last post November 03, 2013, 07:55
by luissantos84
7 Replies
3018 Views
Last post December 09, 2013, 09:38
by ShadySue
3 Replies
3011 Views
Last post August 30, 2014, 03:44
by Beppe Grillo
2 Replies
2994 Views
Last post March 17, 2015, 06:37
by sunflowerstock

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors