MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Brain storming : What else we can do to be heard  (Read 6993 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: June 16, 2020, 10:52 »
+2
So while profile activation and deactivation will happen lets stay ahead of the curve and figure out how else we can get our point across to Shutterstock.

Some ideas seen till now
1. Contact buyers, suggest move to Adobe
2. Media - especially places that buyers frequent
3. Youtube, Insta influencers talking points
4. Spread the word on deactivations

We are supposed to be creative people, what else comes to mind

Sent from my HD1901 using Tapatalk



« Reply #1 on: June 16, 2020, 11:00 »
+5
I like your direction on this. We do need to find out where the buyers are! We also need to highlight where they can go!

« Reply #2 on: June 16, 2020, 11:09 »
+3
Continue complaining in the SS forum

I think that if the thread become massive (in negative replies) it could have some impact.

« Reply #3 on: June 16, 2020, 11:21 »
+5
The bigger problem is that SS seems to be betting on all of us pouring energy initially and then getting tired and coming back to them like beaten sheep.

The question is how do we ensure we migrate money & spends to where it helps us also.
- App ratings influence buyers
- Honest reviews that SS keeps charging even after a subscription ends also moves them
- Lets also push the positive, how good Adobe/Pond5 is
- Maybe a dialogue with Adobe, Pond5 could help start a buyer referral scheme, I'm sure even the non active folks would push buyers there for a chance to earn (incidentally something SS did well)
- How do we stop being faceless to the buyers?

Sent from my HD1901 using Tapatalk


« Reply #4 on: June 16, 2020, 11:25 »
+1
Perhaps someone could write up a very short and concise request that we can all use via copy and paste and send this to any publication we see that uses a Shutterstock photo credit.

A short paragraph that requests the publication etc why they should not support Shutterstock and the damage that it is doing for creative content with a suggestion of other images distributors to use instead. contributor-friendly agencies that include Adobe Stock, Pond5, Dreamstime, Stocksy, Alamy as well as most rights-managed and many niche agencies. I'd also add Istock and Getty for a few reasons a)I am still exclusive and b)love them or hate them they do have a good selection of editorial which Stocksy and Adobe do not.

Jo Ann? Are you up for this?

For example, I saw an online story the other day https://biv.com/article/2020/06/paper-excellence-closing-mackenzie-pulp-mill that used a Shutterstock photo. If we emailed them with the short and sweet request to support "contributor-friendly" agencies for the sake of keeping content up to date and fresh.

I think if we all sent one common request that is professional and consistent maybe we'd get some traction on this.

Thoughts?




« Reply #5 on: June 16, 2020, 11:37 »
+2
So while profile activation and deactivation will happen lets stay ahead of the curve and figure out how else we can get our point across to Shutterstock.

Some ideas seen till now
1. Contact buyers, suggest move to Adobe
2. Media - especially places that buyers frequent
3. Youtube, Insta influencers talking points
4. Spread the word on deactivations

We are supposed to be creative people, what else comes to mind

Sent from my HD1901 using Tapatalk

First point is Wrong.
You have too much trust in adobe. They will do the same later on. Put my words in a frame.

As for ss, downvote every content and action they will make: markets, instagram, twitter, utube..

Les

« Reply #6 on: June 16, 2020, 11:39 »
+3
Continue complaining in the SS forum

I think that if the thread become massive (in negative replies) it could have some impact.

Complaining on SS forum won't help. And many of those comments and threads will be sooner or later removed.
Keeping the buyers informed about the SS treatment of their contributors will be much more effective.

« Reply #7 on: June 16, 2020, 11:55 »
+4
I still don't think we can get across to Shutterstock in any way. They made sure that they have more profit than before even if they lose millions of images and even potentially millions of sales, so they really have no reason to listen to us.
However, what I see as the only possible option that might change something is if we manage to get the message across not to Shutterstock, but to customers. If customers start purchasing from, for example, Adobe, everyone, expect for Shutterstock wins. We get better payment there and we don't miss out on sales on SS if the customer does not purchase on SS in the first place. And, if they lose enough customers, even SS might get the message eventually, though that should not be the main focus. The main focus should really be redirecting sales to other agencies.

Unfortunately I don't have any brilliant ideas about how to acomplish this. I know some photographers are active on social media, some have webpages and youtube channels and I know some have been using these methods to urge customers to purchase from other agencies. But I am not sure that customers are their main audience. Probably rather other contributors, but even if it just reaches a few customers, that might be a start. Every photographer, videographer or illustrator who works outside of stock and has to do with customers could also try to get the word around.
The aim from the Stock Coalition to make press releases regarding this matter is probably also a good step in the right direction, as long as they try to urge customers to purchase from other agencies as well, and don't just focus on protest on the contributor site.
I am not sure what else individual contributors, who don't have social media channels, can do regarding this matter, I just think if we somehow acomplish that a lot of customers turn away from SS, that's the only way we will be able to really hit them and do so without personal loss at the same time.
« Last Edit: June 16, 2020, 11:57 by Firn »

whtvr2

« Reply #8 on: June 16, 2020, 12:12 »
0
I like your direction on this. We do need to find out where the buyers are! We also need to highlight where they can go!

This is hard because everyone have a different agency of preference to suggest. And i only say "you can find me here and there" i do not promote any agency that tomorrow might also drop.

As a youtuber you know that even dislkes and negative commenting does in fact count positively as traffic. No harm.

I would suggest downvoting and commenting to all those SS guides on how to upload and succeed that can be found in Youtube, blogs, sites everywhere SS was promoted or mentioned as a good fair agency.

Especially everywhere active SS "become a contributor" referral links exist. SS didn't became a big pool of copycats and crap by clients refering artists to the agency but from "earn some easy money" guides.
« Last Edit: June 16, 2020, 12:37 by whtvr2 »

« Reply #9 on: June 16, 2020, 12:49 »
+7
People who live in New York City can go to the Empire State Building to protest...

« Reply #10 on: June 16, 2020, 23:48 »
+8
I feel most buyers do not care about contributors in general. Also, other agencies are also keeping a close watch on this, if SS wins they will also follow suit and lower royalties. In worst case scenario the low earning agencies like Dreamstime, Alamy, 123RF  etc will become the next Unsplash or Pixabay.

« Reply #11 on: June 17, 2020, 01:54 »
0
Right. So the question we should be asking is what do buyers care about and what will influence them.

My guess is relevant updated content, good pricing, good buying experience (which SS seems to be bad on from all the reviews), being seen as supporting a social cause.

What do they fear?  getting overcharged?

Please do shoot down or add to this list.

Sent from my HD1901 using Tapatalk


« Reply #12 on: June 17, 2020, 03:17 »
0
The only way to get through to them is to breach the trust between them and buyers. I suggest everybody setting up fake accounts and then taking photos of random people who look like they have expensive lawyers and then upload those photos with fake MRs. It won't make us any money, but it could result in a fun sh**storm to watch.

« Reply #13 on: June 17, 2020, 03:43 »
0
I feel most buyers do not care about contributors in general.

I agree, most probably don't. But I am sure some do, or, at least, don't care where they get their images from as long as it is not more expensive to them. I know for example from a SS contributor who works full time in an company that purchases from SS, he told them about the new royalities and asked them whether they would mind using a different agency and they agreed. I think as long as they don't have to pay more for the images (which is why I don't think Alamy is a good choice to try to redirect sales too. That, and some other issues I have with them.), it's all the same to them and most stock agencies have similar plans to offer to their customers, otherwise they would not be competitive.

The main problem with the new royalities seem really to be the huge yearly sub plans that are causing all the 0.10$ payments even at higher levels and I think, for now, there is not much we can change about that anyways, because these customers have yearly plans. They can't change to other agencies, even if they wanted to. But when their subscription plans run out, some might look into other options, compare prices, see where they can get the best deals, but also, the best images. And maybe, if we can get it stuck in their minds that Shutterstock treats their artsist like crap, that might at least consider looking at other agencies.

At Adobe, for example, a yearly plan with 750 images is 159,99 per month.
At Shutterstock a yearly plan with 750 images is 199,00 per month.

(At least these are the prices in Germany. I know they have different prics in different countries)
So, why should customers not switch to Adobe if it means better deals for them, better images (as Adobe never let in the mass of crap that SS let into their database, even though their standards also don't seem to be all that high) AND better payment for contributors. It's a win-win situation for contributors and customers and only Shutterstock loses. That's exactly what we want, so that's the word we need to spread around!
And, hopefully at some point Adobe will also accept all editorial content. It does not affect me much, but I know it's a big problem for contributors who do lots of editorial content and I think it's also one of the reasons that might keep potential customers away, who need this kind of content.
« Last Edit: June 17, 2020, 10:08 by Firn »

« Reply #14 on: June 17, 2020, 04:25 »
+11
The only way to get through to them is to breach the trust between them and buyers. I suggest everybody setting up fake accounts and then taking photos of random people who look like they have expensive lawyers and then upload those photos with fake MRs. It won't make us any money, but it could result in a fun sh**storm to watch.

That's your solution? To make life miserable for random innocent people who have nothing to do with this? I suppose you think they deserve it because they look rich?

Just as brilliant as joining a peaceful protest and destroying stores and neighborhoods who have nothing to do with what you're protesting against (or as someone else here suggested, make the lives of innocent neighbors unsafe by vandalizing property).

You really don't care about other people, you just want to watch the world burn.

There are many offensive words one can use here, but I'll let you pick your own.

Please think one step further, maybe even two steps further, next time a "brilliant" idea like this pops up. :)

« Reply #15 on: June 17, 2020, 04:34 »
+1
I feel most buyers do not care about contributors in general. Also, other agencies are also keeping a close watch on this, if SS wins they will also follow suit and lower royalties. In worst case scenario the low earning agencies like Dreamstime, Alamy, 123RF  etc will become the next Unsplash or Pixabay.
you right,customers don't care about contributors but they do care about what they need to buy...and now happens that they choose an image on ss and then realize that they can't buy it because the artist portfolio is deactivated...many artists are reporting mail from ss asking to reactivate the portfolio because a buyer want a picture from them..
This is a real pain for ss because as a buyer if i can't buy what i need and see in the library then i change agengy...

« Reply #16 on: June 17, 2020, 14:14 »
0
I have another idea...

Maybe several contributors are non-native english (as me) and maybe several of them also just dont speak english, we can create several posts in different languages and write in these languages posts in SS forum with specific link to the post in this forum that speak about the actions to do in specific language.


« Reply #17 on: June 17, 2020, 22:28 »
0
I have another idea...

Maybe several contributors are non-native english (as me) and maybe several of them also just dont speak english, we can create several posts in different languages and write in these languages posts in SS forum with specific link to the post in this forum that speak about the actions to do in specific language.
This makes a lot of sense, especially if these posts were also on facebook, twitter and everywhere else. Could be the reason we can't spread the word widely

Sent from my HD1901 using Tapatalk


« Reply #18 on: June 18, 2020, 01:48 »
+3
Some (most of?) these ideas are being discussed in the Coalition (name being decided!) Facebook group

https://www.facebook.com/groups/261369748434285/

For example, one person had made a list of buyers. There was also a list of publications to contact et.c

Rather than try and coordinate in two places, can those who want to help pick up the discussion there?

« Reply #19 on: June 18, 2020, 03:58 »
+2
Sure Jo Ann, thr only problem was that this discussion was getting lost there in all the deactivation updates

The urgency is that while most will deactivate for a week or two what happens if SS does not respond at all. Some next steps are critical and need to be thought of and discussed. Else this will become one more slight that will get forgotten



Sent from my HD1901 using Tapatalk


whtvr2

« Reply #20 on: June 18, 2020, 06:42 »
0
Quote
For example, one person had made a list of buyers

Just wondering. Who gives clients contact details in order to be informed by a community?  With all the reading i do there are many opportuniiets that if they get hands in this list will probably try to reach buyers for self promotion.

Not to sound negative, if trying to contact people why not reach past emploees of SS that could provide some accurate info with any respect to the whatever paper they have signed for sensitive data?

« Reply #21 on: June 18, 2020, 06:58 »
+4
The upload stream is down to 920 000 files a week, that is probably a 50% drop.

And the new uploads look ghastly.

I think to starve them of high quality new content for as long as possible, is in my opinion the only way to perhaps make ss come up with a better plan.

At the same time the quality and volume of the various competitors will go up.

Especially the professional buyers look very, very carefully at the new content.

A stream made of fresh low quality rubbish is not what they will pay money for.

Now imagine...if that upload stream drops another 30% to 600 000 a week...

It will really send a very, very clear message that it is not the number of registered accounts that matters, but the current producers.

And how well organised we are.

I think every month the upload stream will keep falling, while on other agencies it will go up. Once producers hve stronger streams elsewhere, ss will get even less content.

It will never drop to nothing, but the uploads could drop down to the volume of maybe 123rf or even smaller agencies.

The Upload stream is the future of every stock house.

Let us see how ss HQ feels with an upload stream of 500 000....

« Reply #22 on: June 18, 2020, 07:23 »
0
Keep in mind that storing the photos also costs them money. It is one thing to store quality photos that make you money and totally different when you store low quality photos that nobody wants.

Les

« Reply #23 on: June 18, 2020, 08:16 »
+1

Now imagine...if that upload stream drops another 30% to 600 000 a week...

Let us see how ss HQ feels with an upload stream of 500 000....

I don't think that the upload stream will keep dropping, since most disablers have already done so, so there won't be the same volume of disabled images reducing continuously the absolute number of new content. However, due to most new images being in the similar or junk category, the quality of total SS image inventory will drift lower and lower. 

whtvr2

« Reply #24 on: June 18, 2020, 08:28 »
+1
Keep in mind that storing the photos also costs them money. It is one thing to store quality photos that make you money and totally different when you store low quality photos that nobody wants.

A valid point for both sides. Us and SS.

Why don't we ask also as demands real curation on crap, dublication removal,  opening tickets for copycats instead of got punished, AI to remove obvious spammy keywords, all those things we read and write for years that negatively affect the client experience?  Even if  SS roll back to our precious earnings. Oops that was "previous" earnings. Anyway, the whole SS structure is a mess.  Why a client care if we got 10 or 30 cents when we mention nothing for a better service request for them?


 

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle