Nice to see them step down from the ivory tower for a fraction of a second.  I can't help feeling it's been just another case of 'I'm all right Jack... pull up the ladder' and now Jack is instructed to let the ladder down a bit because they're not all right any more.

That's the kind of thinking that really has to change.  I echo the others who have said that site fixes plus 20% commissions across the board for indies would be a good start (more for exclusives' loyalty and the risk of having all eggs in one basket, obviously). 

Ultimately though, as life experience caused my great-grandparents, grandparents and parents to echo down the generations - and I see no reason for that echo to end: 

"Actions speak louder than words".

I'm just going to watch and wait to see if these words turn into any sort of useful action.

I didnt know who she was, so i googled her:

http://www.businessinsider.com/difference-between-men-and-women-managers-rebecca-rockafellar-istock-photo-getty-images-2012-11

I didnt know who she was, so i googled her:

http://www.businessinsider.com/difference-between-men-and-women-managers-rebecca-rockafellar-istock-photo-getty-images-2012-11

Wow! Look at this:


"I was asking some colleagues to help me crystallize what makes me different as a female leader versus some of the male leaders in our organization"

Am I alone in reading that as "All right, underlings, tell me why I'm the most wonderful person in the business".

And, sure enough, "a male colleague called out is that I am able to gain the trust of others by just being very visibly confident in my own skills without boasting"

Give that boy a Christmas bonus!

Note the "called out", it wasn't a private chat, apparently, it was a question to a full room.

Getty is just unable to run a forum, they should close it down and forget about the whole idea of community, it's just wasted energy for both parties.

These guys are the typical execs who can't accept any criticism, and since in their day job none of their subordinates dare to complain they end up thinking they're doing a great job, only to discover with horror that contributors are all pissed off and moving to other agencies in droves.

I mean look at this exec Rockfeller, she doesn't even admit IS is in dire straights, instead  in classic corporate style she now acknowledges that there's just a miscommunication issue.

But, miscommunication means that WE failed to get the message right, not that Getty is wrong.
Execs are .. NEVER wrong !

I've seen the same sh-it in so many other companies, nothing ever changes, and by the way the same is going on at Alamy forum now, threads get locked up, people get banned, and only a bunch of maybe 15 resident posters is still active in the alamy forum.

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on December 08, 2012, 05:54

"I was asking some colleagues to help me crystallize what makes me different as a female leader versus some of the male leaders in our organization"

And, sure enough, "a male colleague called out is that I am able to gain the trust of others by just being very visibly confident in my own skills without boasting"

I'm getting so sick of these female execs in IT/ICT companies.

They wouldn't last long in harder and more competitive countries like europe or china.

I wonder that she didn't get the obvious answers: "A bloke wouldn't ask a stupid question like that" or "you've got ***s, luv".

But, I suppose those aren't career enhancing responses.

I feel Rebecca is just the messenger. She is testing the water for her bosses. I wonder what is cooking for the new year.

To me it looks like a sign of desperation.
If they've something really important to say they should use a Company Blog, not the forum.

The point is, and i've seen it by myself many times when working for other companies, execs never deal directly with the workforce or even with small and medium buyers, they only focus on big deals and internal politics, sort of living in a bubble, if they ever get fresh uncensored feedback they're usually taken aback and shocked as the picture painted by their subordinates is always rosy glassed and it can't be otherwise or they would be fired.

Maybe, just maybe, some of the complaints written by angry buyers reached the top of the pyramid and now they're realizing how bad is the situation ?

But you see, there's no solution for this, execs ARE the problem ! in a perfect world they should start from the lowest junior position, say QC temp-hire employee, and then eventually rank to the top based on meritocracy.

In the real world you can forget it, all the execs are there because of political wars and alliances, and if female there's always the option of being the lover of a top execs or a shareholder, "shagging her way to the top" as they say.

These execs have usually no experience with photography, couldn't even snap a photo with an iPhone, before they were in finance or marketing or law firms, all they know is they take orders from the CEO and they're paid to manage the drones below them.

SO, a top exec of IS being so shocked that contributors and buyers are rabid about iStock only shows how clueless these execs are of the very company they claim to run successfully.

I can't see anything positive coming out of all this, and even if we agree on her female skills i could say that all my former female managers often panicked when the crap hit the fan and ended up taking very emotional decisions doing more harm and making further chaos while blaming others for their failures.

Guess this Rockfeller lady is now also taking the forum rant and raves as a personal insult on herself ..

And that's why execs should be Male, as females can be certainly better in marketing and in dealing with buyers and dealing with people and teams in general but when it's time to make hard strategical decisions they're too emotional and only man have the balls to look at the situation in a cold and rational way.

I wonder that she didn't get the obvious answers: "A bloke wouldn't ask a stupid question like that" or "you've got ***s, luv".

But, I suppose those aren't career enhancing responses.

In my experience this sort of tricky questions are the norm in corporates.
They're dangerous, they're a trap, and a way to humiliate their subordinates.

What you as a male execs would ever answer to your female boss ? that you think female execs like her should be fired ? and any other small criticism will be carefully recorded for the future anyway.

A serious leader would never ever ask such silly idiotic questions.
If she's doing it, and if she's even proud about it and getting it also on newspapers then she's not fit for the job in my opinion.

Attention who-res and snakes like her can make good managers and good low level execs, but never a good CEO or a good leader.

From the IS forum, Rebecca Rockafellar post:
'' We are still, by far, the number 1 microstock site revenue-wise''


  looool ha ha haaaha .... maybe revenue/download regarding exclusives.... not even close being No. 1 site. again .... loooool

If the IS forum is read by so many admins... maybe this forum/topic is read by some IS/Getty admins...... so my question is:

Do you believe us , independents f**king idiots??

And that's why execs should be Male, as females can be certainly better in marketing and in dealing with buyers and dealing with people and teams in general but when it's time to make hard strategical decisions they're too emotional and only man have the balls to look at the situation in a cold and rational way.

So KKT was a great leader, then, being apparently male.
It's down to individuals.

Quote from: MetaStocker on December 08, 2012, 06:38

And that's why execs should be Male, as females can be certainly better in marketing and in dealing with buyers and dealing with people and teams in general but when it's time to make hard strategical decisions they're too emotional and only man have the balls to look at the situation in a cold and rational way.

So KKT was a great leader, then, being apparently male.
It's down to individuals.

As a man who worked long time in corporates i've just no respect for execs in general, no matter if men or women but women really have this tendency to go over the top, to be too emotional, to talk and talk about being female leaders, there are hundreds of hideous articles on female leaders in female magazines and gossip newspapers, all focusing on pure BS factors as if having a * could be of any help when a company is losing billions and the best manager left already for greener pastures and the whole workforce is alienated and sending CVs to job seekers.

KKT : no idea, we should ask his former colleagues about it, but until proven otherwise with KKT at the helm iStock was still nr.1 in the micro market, what about this Rockfeller lady instead ?

She's been there 2 yrs as a female leader and now suddenly she discover (shock ! horror !) that the site is slow and buggy and that the fees are too low for us and that both buyers and contributors are moving to other agencies, and all she can say is accusing us of misunderstanding her messages and the other execs of miscommunication ? if this is the ring leader, imagine the rest of her team...

Notice also she wrote nothing proactive, no empty promises about fixing the buggy site, zero, as she knows she's not risking her job as getty has been sold for a hefty profit and the new owner trust her and the whole getty management so if sh-it happens it will take a couple years to notice it and she's got all the time to move as a CEO in another company.

Thanks god there are forums like this without the whole censorship attached or many of us would be as much clueless as Rockfeller about what's really going on in the micro market.

Sooner or later all the forum in agencies will be closed down and it will be back to business, no more community BS, maybe they will leave just a section for tech support, exactly as they do in any other IT/ICT company.

Let's face it, it's already a good thing they tolerate independent forums as they could pretty much sue MSG and any other photo forum or blog for whatever silly reason.

I feel Rebecca is just the messenger. She is testing the water for her bosses. I wonder what is cooking for the new year.

Good possibility. The new owners may have finally looked under the hood of what they just bought and told her to fix the mess they just found. They thought they bought a vintage Ferrari they could flip for a profit and found out it's a bondo'd kit car.

Perception goes a long way toward success. Look at Apple.

Just as I feel she shouldn't be making a big deal out of her gender, I feel that assertions by  contributors and buyers shouldn't be made on the basis of gender either.

It's not about gender, it's about the ability to do the job, regardless of that.  Assess each person on their merits, nothing else.

It can only work in some fields where you can be measured by data-driven results, for instance in sales and marketing.

But, if we talk about management, that's a whole different story.

It's the shareholders having the last word, if the management is doing good and there are a few bad apples they can pretty much be happy with it and forget it, in other case they can fire the whole board with a phone call, just as they fired Carol Bartz (Yahoo) and just as they fired Carly Fiorina and her cronies after a quick meeting.

So, there's no clear rule about it, some companies run massive re-orgs every 2 years (microsoft ?), others keep the same faces around for decades no matter the ups and downs in Wall Street or Nasdaq.

All this focus on meritocracy is pure BS apart rare cases, it's usually the best in power-politics who rise to the top, never the ones who deserve it.

Women are very good in politics, they're great liars by nature, they smile, they know how to please men, they know how to set people at ease, they've all the skills you need to succeed in such a toxic environment
but where dealing with people and opposing views is the biggest and most important factor.

So why are they failing in such disastrous ways in IT/ICT ? because you see, before or later, the sh-it always hits the fan, their castles of cards fall down along their whole careers based on lies and deceptions.

Money talks, BS walks.

Just as I feel she shouldn't be making a big deal out of her gender, I feel that assertions by  contributors and buyers shouldn't be made on the basis of gender either.

It's not about gender, it's about the ability to do the job, regardless of that.  Assess each person on their merits, nothing else.

Exactly. All the sexist nonsense, apart from being patently untrue, is distracting from the real issues.

In any real sense Rebecca isn't actually "in-charge" of iStock. Her job title is "General Manager of Istockphoto". I very much doubt she has the authority to make real decisions in the way that Jon can do at SS for example. Even if she happened to think that it was in iStock's best interests to abandon the RC system and return independents to 20% commission for example __ could she do it? Unlikely. The big decisions are made by Getty. All she's doing is trying to keep a steady hand on the tiller and attempt to maintain impossibly high profit targets.

I thought it was very telling that she's spent the last year or so hiding behind the 'HQ Admin' moniker, or whatever it was called. She clearly doesn't want to take ownership of all the issues that she doesn't actually have the authority to address.