It's huge news. Other big players are joining in. Buyers will be annoyed as hell.
Jon says he does not want our content on Twitter. That goes for the big players too.

My conspiracy theory is that Facebook is about to buy Shutterstock and wants the prices pushed down so that they can give our stock assets away to their advertisers.

That's why FB was so quick to gag the Inside Imaging article. Also would explain why SS seems to have lost the plot wrt to dealing with their contributors. It's FB pulling their strings now.

Ja, that's what they tried to sell us, right? The word "boycott" did not appear in that article. They went pretty quiet after that. Did you note that the second article by chance did? I managed to forward that on my profile no problem. It's still up on my FB account - no auto algorithm stuff there.

Try it for yourself.

My guess is that they worked overtime to squash the story that way. Nah, guys, it was just these fools not knowing how our automatic algorithm works . . .

Note that the whole thread disappeared on our FB page? That was after I asked them some really hard questions.

Spooky stuff.

That is HUGE!

These big guys deserve props for taking decisive action - it would be so much easier for them to leave their ports on and just stop submitting, and try to wring whatever�s left!

Makes me wonder if SS DIDNT make any special deals with ANYONE.
They really are taking a TAKE IT OR LEAVE IT stance.

Uncle Pete, I have no idea why would anybody not believe me. I'm 55 years old, professional photographer, feeding my family, high school educated. Why would I come to a forum with a fake news?

That is HUGE!

These big guys deserve props for taking decisive action - it would be so much easier for them to leave their ports on and just stop submitting, and try to wring whatever�s left!

Makes me wonder if SS DIDNT make any special deals with ANYONE.
They really are taking a TAKE IT OR LEAVE IT stance.

Quote from: pics2 on June 24, 2020, 07:22

Uncle Pete, I have no idea why would anybody not believe me. I'm 55 years old, professional photographer, feeding my family, high school educated. Why would I come to a forum with a fake news?

It wasn't not believing, it was a matter of making it easy to see that 0 = zero. Just like the screen captures of Jon's tweets. For the record, in case anyone went to look... they don't have to go look. I went and searched all over Twitter, found nothing. So lets say something changes? OK here's a picture of what it looked like.  Nothing personal.

If you believe in conspiracy theories - take a look at this thread.
Somehow I missed the response between the two last posts when I was screen grabbing.

Then "poof" the whole thread went missing. Gone from the group FB page.
Apparently, if you are the thread creator on FB, if you delete it all disappears.
Our "Facebook employee" took their own thread down when I called them out.

What do you guys make of this?

Quote from: pics2 on June 24, 2020, 07:47

Quote from: cathyslife on June 24, 2020, 07:41

Quote from: pics2 on June 24, 2020, 07:36

Quote from: noodle on June 24, 2020, 07:23

That is HUGE!

These big guys deserve props for taking decisive action - it would be so much easier for them to leave their ports on and just stop submitting, and try to wring whatever�s left!

Makes me wonder if SS DIDNT make any special deals with ANYONE.
They really are taking a TAKE IT OR LEAVE IT stance.

It is not how big productions work. They can't stop working just like that. They have a lot of expenses, employees, models,
photographers, contracts, offices, debts for equipment, props, vehicles etc. They are better finding another agency, My guess they will go Getty exclusive now.

Oh, I�m sure they didn�t just stop working. I�m sure they will be flooding the other agencies now. And making more than $.10 an image.

Yes, they will. I don't see a problem with that. If they are capable to produce enormous amounts of pictures, congratulations to them. It looks like everything and everyone is going on your nerves. And congratulations to them for making such a brave move!

Everyone is going on my nerves? LOL Because you aren�t a native English speaker, somewhere along the line you have interpreted my comment as some kind of slam. It�s not. Stop reading into stuff when it�s not there. 

We always complain about massive portfolios, but for this kind of actions they are so important. By deactivating some of them SS could see million a million image loss in short period of time.

Quote from: cathyslife on June 24, 2020, 09:17

Quote from: CommuniCat on June 24, 2020, 08:55

If you believe in conspiracy theories - take a look at this thread.
Somehow I missed the response between the two last posts when I was screen grabbing.

Then "poof" the whole thread went missing. Gone from the group FB page.
Apparently, if you are the thread creator on FB, if you delete it all disappears.
Our "Facebook employee" took their own thread down when I called them out.

What do you guys make of this?

I saw some of her posts. I�m pretty sure she was a FB/SS spy. But posts are getting flagged in a lot of FB groups (not just related to microstock) as being spam or �goes against community standards�, when they are not. I personally think it has to do with who FB does business with. I think they are monitoring groups closely that revolve around their ties to that industry. FB is aligned with SS, FB aligned themselves with pHARMa, like that.

I hope quoting this makes it stay, in case people change what they wrote. FB/SS spies? And trying to infiltrate the group? Really, like someone is so stupid that they couldn't just create a quiet account to watch. Let me help, a spy likes to work in secret not in your face and arguing, attracting attention to their devious plans and plots.

Yes, You can remove posts and comments that you have made on Facebook. You can remove comments others have made on something you've posted, but you cannot delete comments they've left on posts you didn't create. This is also quite ordinary and doesn't need any special access or authority.

NewAfrica different logo maybe trying to imitate and get business? Are the images the same or some other company?

Uncle Pete, I have no idea why would anybody not believe me. I'm 55 years old, professional photographer, feeding my family, high school educated. Why would I come to a forum with a fake news?

I think they are back up under a different name. I hope I'm wrong.

Quote from: Firn on June 24, 2020, 12:07

I have a lot of restepect for Africa studio for disabling their port. They are big enough that even with the now much lower payment from SS, it still means they are missing out on thousands of $ each month by pulling their port. I am also glad for them, because that must also mean that they are making enough profit on other agencies to still keep their company sustainable even with the loss.
I hope the loss of such a huge contributor will help stir customers to other agencies.

I think they are back up under a different name. I hope I'm wrong.

Quote from: Mantis on June 24, 2020, 12:10

Quote from: Firn on June 24, 2020, 12:07

I have a lot of restepect for Africa studio for disabling their port. They are big enough that even with the now much lower payment from SS, it still means they are missing out on thousands of $ each month by pulling their port. I am also glad for them, because that must also mean that they are making enough profit on other agencies to still keep their company sustainable even with the loss.
I hope the loss of such a huge contributor will help stir customers to other agencies.

I think they are back up under a different name. I hope I'm wrong.

Yes
https://www.shutterstock.com/g/newafrica
Also from Ukraine�
And the style of images is very similar to the "old" Africa studio

New Africa has a port at other sites as well. I�m guessing Shutterstock gave them permission to have more than one account. Not sure why they�d disable one and not the other.

It's huge news. Other big players are joining in. Buyers will be annoyed as hell.
Jon says he does not want our content on Twitter. That goes for the big players too.

My conspiracy theory is that Facebook is about to buy Shutterstock and wants the prices pushed down so that they can give our stock assets away to their advertisers.

That's why FB was so quick to gag the Inside Imaging article. Also would explain why SS seems to have lost the plot wrt to dealing with their contributors. It's FB pulling their strings now.

Yeah I know, it's just the spy stuff that got me sidetracked. 

Since I'm not on FB and I don't read all the tweets and I didn't join the group, just because I don't follow FB, nothing else. What was the name and why was it blanked out? Public service, public posts, I'd see nothing wrong with including their name. I only gathered it was a she from one of your posts? Makes me wonder who that was.

....

Quote from: cathyslife on June 25, 2020, 11:53

Quote from: Uncle Pete on June 25, 2020, 11:22

Yeah I know, it's just the spy stuff that got me sidetracked. 

Since I'm not on FB and I don't read all the tweets and I didn't join the group, just because I don't follow FB, nothing else. What was the name and why was it blanked out? Public service, public posts, I'd see nothing wrong with including their name. I only gathered it was a she from one of your posts? Makes me wonder who that was.

Not sure why he blacked out the name. Her first name was Svetlana, don�t remember the last. She claimed to work for FB, but then her arguments were strange. Anyway, what she was saying made it seem like she was pro-SS/FB, hence the �spy� speculation. You had to be there. 😀

That�s disappointing about africastudio. In the end, everybody can be bought for a price. I�m sure it was all negotiating tactics between them and SS. Oringer has lots of toys to pay for.

Thanks, half the population of Russia is named Svetlana. (the other half is male) 

About the censorship. I don't agree, but quoting from recent news:

Under current law, platforms are allowed to moderate anything they find "obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable.� The DOJ, however, suggests that this standard is too vague and says the "otherwise objectionable" language should be removed from the law.

So for example, FB can find anything they want to be "objectionable" and remove it. Whether they are protecting a business alliance, the API which FB uses SS images, or something else, complaints, who knows what, I don't know. Apparently the first amendment doesn't apply to social platforms, unless it's someone trying to sue another person for what they post. But the platforms are not required to allow us to post, what they don't want and aren't actually liable for what individual users post.

congrats this whole thread is useless

My conspiracy theory is that Facebook is about to buy Shutterstock and wants the prices pushed down so that they can give our stock assets away to their advertisers.

Yesterday Africastudio had around 650 online images on Shutterstock.
Currently they have 96706 images there, so they are obviosly coming back online.

Quote from: cathyslife on June 25, 2020, 17:24

Quote from: Uncle Pete on June 25, 2020, 12:37

Quote from: cathyslife on June 25, 2020, 11:53

Quote from: Uncle Pete on June 25, 2020, 11:22

Yeah I know, it's just the spy stuff that got me sidetracked. 

Since I'm not on FB and I don't read all the tweets and I didn't join the group, just because I don't follow FB, nothing else. What was the name and why was it blanked out? Public service, public posts, I'd see nothing wrong with including their name. I only gathered it was a she from one of your posts? Makes me wonder who that was.

Not sure why he blacked out the name. Her first name was Svetlana, don�t remember the last. She claimed to work for FB, but then her arguments were strange. Anyway, what she was saying made it seem like she was pro-SS/FB, hence the �spy� speculation. You had to be there. 😀

That�s disappointing about africastudio. In the end, everybody can be bought for a price. I�m sure it was all negotiating tactics between them and SS. Oringer has lots of toys to pay for.

Thanks, half the population of Russia is named Svetlana. (the other half is male) 

About the censorship. I don't agree, but quoting from recent news:

Under current law, platforms are allowed to moderate anything they find "obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable.� The DOJ, however, suggests that this standard is too vague and says the "otherwise objectionable" language should be removed from the law.

So for example, FB can find anything they want to be "objectionable" and remove it. Whether they are protecting a business alliance, the API which FB uses SS images, or something else, complaints, who knows what, I don't know. Apparently the first amendment doesn't apply to social platforms, unless it's someone trying to sue another person for what they post. But the platforms are not required to allow us to post, what they don't want and aren't actually liable for what individual users post.

You aren�t on FB anyway, you said. And yes, I know it�s a popular name. It�s irrelevant. 

A joke about the name Svetlana but apparently you don't understand humor. And yes it is my elephant.

"Africa studio

Welcome to the world of modern commercial images and footages.

Bright, creative and trendy images and footages will help you visualize any subject and field of activity."

Quote from: cathyslife on June 25, 2020, 17:24

Quote from: Uncle Pete on June 25, 2020, 12:37

Quote from: cathyslife on June 25, 2020, 11:53

Quote from: Uncle Pete on June 25, 2020, 11:22

Yeah I know, it's just the spy stuff that got me sidetracked. 

Since I'm not on FB and I don't read all the tweets and I didn't join the group, just because I don't follow FB, nothing else. What was the name and why was it blanked out? Public service, public posts, I'd see nothing wrong with including their name. I only gathered it was a she from one of your posts? Makes me wonder who that was.

Not sure why he blacked out the name. Her first name was Svetlana, don�t remember the last. She claimed to work for FB, but then her arguments were strange. Anyway, what she was saying made it seem like she was pro-SS/FB, hence the �spy� speculation. You had to be there. 😀

That�s disappointing about africastudio. In the end, everybody can be bought for a price. I�m sure it was all negotiating tactics between them and SS. Oringer has lots of toys to pay for.

Thanks, half the population of Russia is named Svetlana. (the other half is male) 

About the censorship. I don't agree, but quoting from recent news:

Under current law, platforms are allowed to moderate anything they find "obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable.� The DOJ, however, suggests that this standard is too vague and says the "otherwise objectionable" language should be removed from the law.

So for example, FB can find anything they want to be "objectionable" and remove it. Whether they are protecting a business alliance, the API which FB uses SS images, or something else, complaints, who knows what, I don't know. Apparently the first amendment doesn't apply to social platforms, unless it's someone trying to sue another person for what they post. But the platforms are not required to allow us to post, what they don't want and aren't actually liable for what individual users post.

You aren�t on FB anyway, you said. And yes, I know it�s a popular name. It�s irrelevant. 

He has 2 Facebook accounts, I found them in less then a minute.