MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Designer slams Showtime for asking for free work  (Read 5409 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Shelma1

« on: August 19, 2014, 13:03 »
+16
You gotta love this guy. Showtime asked him to enter a contest for "exposure," and he tweeted his exchange with them. Getting lots of press.

http://www.adweek.com/adfreak/meet-hero-designer-who-publicly-shamed-showtime-asking-him-work-free-159579


« Reply #1 on: August 19, 2014, 15:11 »
+1
Excellent!!

« Reply #2 on: August 19, 2014, 15:22 »
0
It's funny, but all he did was write an email response back to them.  Then he made a screenshot of it, and that's what he tweeted.  Back and forths are always funnier.

« Reply #3 on: August 19, 2014, 15:38 »
+10
First comment on the article - and brilliant:


klyon 3 hours ago

As a musician, I am often asked to play "for the exposure."
My reply?
"Exposure" is something you die from when your boat sinks or you get lost in a snowstorm.

Shelma1

« Reply #4 on: August 19, 2014, 16:31 »
+8
The best part is all the exposure he's getting since he refused to work for free.

« Reply #5 on: August 19, 2014, 17:56 »
0
doesn't getty own showtime?

Goofy

« Reply #6 on: August 19, 2014, 20:22 »
0

As a musician, I am often asked to play "for the exposure."
My reply?
"Exposure" is something you die from when your boat sinks or you get lost in a snowstorm.

"Exposure" is something that will get you arrested especially if it is indecent exposure  8)


Leo

« Reply #7 on: August 19, 2014, 21:20 »
+1
The best part is all the exposure he's getting since he refused to work for free.
LOL Depending on the situation love it or hate it. +1k to that.

« Reply #8 on: August 19, 2014, 21:33 »
+2

« Reply #9 on: August 19, 2014, 22:48 »
+2
i hate freeloaders asking my works for free

« Reply #10 on: August 19, 2014, 23:58 »
+3
Shared on twitter - thanks for posting!
++++

« Reply #11 on: August 20, 2014, 08:27 »
0
even the NFL is of like mind
http://www.mtv.com/news/1904304/why-is-the-nfl-asking-rihanna-and-katy-perry-for-money/


Yea that is a disgrace unless you are an up and comer and NEED the exposure. That would be tantamount to a marketing expense. But if you expect an established, popular artist to pay to perform, they should all tell the NFL to go take a hike, so to speak.  But you and I know that there will always be an artist willing to shell out big bucks to be in front of a crowd, or they have someone else funding them who has so much doe your head will spin.

Shelma1

« Reply #12 on: August 20, 2014, 08:36 »
+4
What really irritates me is that Showtime and the NFL are huge, rich megacorporations who have paid everyone else for everything else, but they expect only certain people (artists) to either work for free or pay for the privilege of working.

« Reply #13 on: August 20, 2014, 09:23 »
+7
What really irritates me is that Showtime and the NFL are huge, rich megacorporations who have paid everyone else for everything else, but they expect only certain people (artists) to either work for free or pay for the privilege of working.

The real stinger in this story is that the Showtime event they are requesting free art for is a Floyd Mayweather fight, and Mayweather is currently the highest paid athlete in the world.

I love that this designer outed them, and I wish more people would do the same. I read a comment on this saying that we shouldn't publicly shame companies that make these requests, that it's "unprofessional". Really? Because I would think that "unprofessional" would be targeting really good, established, professional artists like the guy in this story and asking them to work for free.

Next time I get one of these free work requests it's going right on twitter, facebook, etc...

Hobostocker

    This user is banned.
« Reply #14 on: August 21, 2014, 02:21 »
0
i'm recently seeing a boom in online naming and shaming and it's a worrying trend.

first of all, is it legal ?
NO !

secondly, is it professional ?
NO !

so what do we do ?
if the trend keeps going on my forecast is negative from any perspective, we're slowly getting used to live in a society where you will soon need to record everything you say or write or do for fear of being exposed in public and online, and by domino effect nobody will trust anybody.

Shelma1

« Reply #15 on: August 21, 2014, 06:12 »
+3
What's illegal about telling people a huge corporation asked you for free work?

ShadySue

« Reply #16 on: August 21, 2014, 07:59 »
+4
And what's unprofessional about warning of multimillion corporations wanting creatives to work for nothing?

Re EmberMike's post, Mayweather is the highest paid athlete precisely because of the Showtime deal:
"Floyd Mayweather announced Tuesday that he is climbing back into the ring May 4 to face off against Robert The Ghost Guerrero. The fight was expected, but the real surprise came with the news that Mayweather would leave long-time partner HBO for a pay-per-view deal with Showtime Networks. The six-fight, 30-month deal was called the richest individual athlete deal in all of sports in a press release."
http://www.forbes.com/sites/kurtbadenhausen/2013/02/20/floyd-mayweather-hits-jackpot-with-new-showtime-ppv-dea
(press release link takes to something else now.)

He was asked to enter a competition to get his work published for free by a huge commercial enterprise. Not even guaranteed that he'd get the 'exposure' even if he made the effort to produce new work.

This is in a totally different league than small charities asking for use of a Flickr photo which already exists.
« Last Edit: August 21, 2014, 09:32 by ShadySue »

« Reply #17 on: August 21, 2014, 08:04 »
+4
What's illegal about telling people a huge corporation asked you for free work?

Right. It's factual and there's no defamation going on. Frankly I'd like to see more of this as it exposes the greed of organizations that contribute to the erosion of visual imagery.  I would LOVE to highlight what stock agencies are doing that can expose, factually, how they keep taking from contributors.  I view this thread as exposing another big name trying to use their big name to hook artists into thinking, WOW, I can submit to that big name and "MAYBE" I get famous (which you won't) because of that big name and will make millions because of that big name (which you won't) so heck, I'm in and going to give them my work for free.  I am stoked that this photographer did what he did. This should be tweeted to the hilt in my opinion.

Hobostocker

    This user is banned.
« Reply #18 on: August 21, 2014, 08:41 »
0
guys, i'm not referring to defamation but about publishing private emails in public, that's a breach of trust and totally unprofessional and also illegal in some EU countries, no idea about the US but i don't think you're allowed to post private emails, private images, etc, especially about your ex girlfriend or whatever, let alone confidential business stuff of your employer.

if i ever posted some internal emails when i was working in a corporate job i would get fired on the spot, sued, and rightfully so.

this guy has all my support regarding his crusade against cheapskate clients but i wonder if he'll lose customers doing so, who will trust him knowing he could defame you in public as he did in the past ?

i mean, even the micro agencies would delete our accounts if we publish some confidential information we received via private emails with their drones.

now he's praised as a hero by fellow designers but about his clients ? if i was a client i would scared dealing with people that can't control his emotions and need to vent in public giving me a bad image and making me lose face.

ShadySue

« Reply #19 on: August 21, 2014, 08:46 »
+1
this guy has all my support regarding his crusade against cheapskate clients but i wonder if he'll lose customers doing so, who will trust him knowing he could defame you in public as he did in the past ?
It's not defamation if the information is true.

I do worry on his behalf in case he'll lose clients, but that's probably not the kind of clients he wants. Honest/decent clients shouldn't have anything to worry about.

« Reply #20 on: August 21, 2014, 09:23 »
-1
i'm recently seeing a boom in online naming and shaming and it's a worrying trend.

first of all, is it legal ?
NO !

secondly, is it professional ?
NO !

so what do we do ?
if the trend keeps going on my forecast is negative from any perspective, we're slowly getting used to live in a society where you will soon need to record everything you say or write or do for fear of being exposed in public and online, and by domino effect nobody will trust anybody.
You are out of wack with the situation. You sound like a soccer mum out in Oclahoma that hat her first internet connection last year.
The internet has been full of illegal things for 15 years it is only recently that laws have been made to save the net from  being the wild west.
« Last Edit: August 21, 2014, 09:27 by JPSDK »

ShadySue

« Reply #21 on: August 21, 2014, 09:36 »
+1
if i ever posted some internal emails when i was working in a corporate job i would get fired on the spot, sued, and rightfully so.

The email was addressed to him by name. He owns his own studio.
http://youngjerks.com/about
Where are you getting the 'corporate job' thing?

ShadySue

« Reply #22 on: August 21, 2014, 09:41 »
+2
guys, i'm not referring to defamation but about publishing private emails in public, that's a breach of trust and totally unprofessional and also illegal in some EU countries, no idea about the US but i don't think you're allowed to post private emails, private images, etc, especially about your ex girlfriend or whatever, let alone confidential business stuff of your employer.

I still don't know what employer you're talking about. He seems to be self-employed.

Here is the law as it stands in the US:
http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/publication-private-facts
The relevant section in this case is:
"Elements of a Private Facts Claim
A plaintiff must establish four elements to hold someone liable for publication of private facts:
    1. Public Disclosure: The disclosure of facts must be public. Another way of saying this is that the defendant must "give publicity" to the fact or facts in question.
    2. Private Fact: The fact or facts disclosed must be private, and not generally known.
    3. Offensive to a Reasonable Person: Publication of the private facts in question must be offensive to a reasonable person of ordinary sensibilities.
    4. Not Newsworthy: The facts disclosed must not be newsworthy. Stated differently, the facts disclosed must not be a matter of legitimate public concern."


I'd say the hypothetical 'reasonable person' wouldn't be offended by this, but that's only my opinion.

However, this issue is certainly a 'matter of legitimate public concern'.

ShadySue

« Reply #23 on: August 21, 2014, 09:51 »
0
... publishing private emails in public, ... illegal in some EU countries,

I'm not saying you're wrong, but although I could find loads of links about the US situation, I'm not getting any authoritative ones about even the UK far less the rest of the EU. Have you got links?

« Reply #24 on: August 21, 2014, 09:53 »
+1
And what's unprofessional about warning of multimillion corporations wanting creatives to work for nothing?

Re EmberMike's post, Mayweather is the highest paid athlete precisely because of the Showtime deal:
"Floyd Mayweather announced Tuesday that he is climbing back into the ring May 4 to face off against Robert The Ghost Guerrero. The fight was expected, but the real surprise came with the news that Mayweather would leave long-time partner HBO for a pay-per-view deal with Showtime Networks. The six-fight, 30-month deal was called the richest individual athlete deal in all of sports in a press release."
http://www.forbes.com/sites/kurtbadenhausen/2013/02/20/floyd-mayweather-hits-jackpot-with-new-showtime-ppv-dea
(press release link takes to something else now.)

He was asked to enter a competition to get his work published for free by a huge commercial enterprise. Not even guaranteed that he'd get the 'exposure' even if he made the effort to produce new work.

This is in a totally different league than small charities asking for use of a Flickr photo which already exists.


I have been noticing a big trend in these "competitions." I notice things on TV too: like "take a picture of your pizza and send it in and we'll use it in our advertising" or some such nonsense. Since the quality of images now includes cellphone snaps, corporations seem to be capitalizing on Joe Schmo's naivete when it comes to photo usage/no compensation but promises of fame.

Shelma1

« Reply #25 on: August 21, 2014, 09:53 »
+1
guys, i'm not referring to defamation but about publishing private emails in public, that's a breach of trust and totally unprofessional and also illegal in some EU countries, no idea about the US but i don't think you're allowed to post private emails, private images, etc, especially about your ex girlfriend or whatever, let alone confidential business stuff of your employer.

They're not his employer. And they weren't even offering him employment. They asked him to enter a contest, and even if he won, he wouldn't be paid for his work.

Quote

if i ever posted some internal emails when i was working in a corporate job i would get fired on the spot, sued, and rightfully so.

Different situation. These were not internal emails. Did you read the article?

Quote

this guy has all my support regarding his crusade against cheapskate clients but i wonder if he'll lose customers doing so, who will trust him knowing he could defame you in public as he did in the past ?
 

He didn't defame anyone. Don't want to be outed? Offer to pay him fairly.
Quote
i mean, even the micro agencies would delete our accounts if we publish some confidential information we received via private emails with their drones.

now he's praised as a hero by fellow designers but about his clients ? if i was a client i would scared dealing with people that can't control his emotions and need to vent in public giving me a bad image and making me lose face.

I don't think you read the article.

ShadySue

« Reply #26 on: August 21, 2014, 10:03 »
+2
^^ But again, whatever we might think about it, that's crowdsourcing Joe Schmo, (cynically, because a proportion of the buying public prefer 'real' imagery to perfect pro images) which is different from targetting professionals.

« Reply #27 on: August 21, 2014, 10:16 »
+2
No Solicitation
i think the designer should have just put up a sign like that.

i have been to certain old-school businesses where the owner(s) are not afraid to "offend" a client who is trying to freeload on them. they literally walk to the door and told the freeload, "this is the door, ...
no free lunch here!".

what's wrong with doing the same on the web?  it's not defammation or whatumightcallit, if it is true that they did ask to freeload.
the problem is the myth that every freeloader will sue you if u pubish it . so, no one dares relate anything. it's no wonder the freeloaders continue to breed and now, it's the norm.

and the irony of this ? the same freeloader don't think much about paying $x for a cup of coffee at
$.......ks every morning . yet, he expects the photographer/designer/ .....  to give away his /her
work for less than he pays for a cup of coffee.


« Reply #28 on: August 21, 2014, 10:18 »
0
^^ But again, whatever we might think about it, that's crowdsourcing Joe Schmo, (cynically, because a proportion of the buying public prefer 'real' imagery to perfect pro images) which is different from targetting professionals.

True. Even in other professions though, at least here in the US, there is a perception on the part of large companies/corporations, that even professionals are "desperate" for work. Seems like it's spilling over from Joe Schmo to the pros, too.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
11 Replies
4556 Views
Last post April 19, 2008, 07:39
by leaf
4 Replies
2332 Views
Last post June 17, 2009, 05:34
by michealo
18 Replies
8252 Views
Last post March 15, 2010, 22:04
by RacePhoto
3 Replies
2140 Views
Last post June 13, 2014, 10:50
by DF_Studios
12 Replies
6115 Views
Last post July 01, 2015, 10:22
by PaulieWalnuts

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results