Become a protest photo stringer for BBC
February 14, 2003 3:07 PM   Subscribe

Going to anti-war protests this weekend? Become a photo stringer for the BBC! "The BBC is asking people attending Saturday's anti-war protests who are carrying new combination camera/cell phones to relay their pictures to its newsroom at (44) 7970 885089 or email them to yourpics@bbc.co.uk. The broadcaster said that it hopes to provide coverage of the demonstrations 'from a protester's perspective.' It is also accepting photos taken with digital cameras."
posted by me3dia (30 comments total)
 
via highindustrial.
posted by me3dia at 3:08 PM on February 14, 2003


unpaid stringers, mmmmm.
posted by luriete at 3:10 PM on February 14, 2003


At least they are plannig coverage. The networks in America are planning to cover golf.

If you are going to be there, make sure you have a protest poster.
posted by DragonBoy at 3:12 PM on February 14, 2003


Has protesting officially become a hip social thing completely devoid of any real substance, or am I missing something?

Holding up a sign that says 'NO IRAQ WAR' and chanting a slogan over and over makes about as much an argument, even en masse, as belching.
posted by xmutex at 3:39 PM on February 14, 2003


As opposed to what, xmutex? That's what people do at protests; always have.
posted by Potsy at 3:48 PM on February 14, 2003


Would the BBC be interested in any pictures of me in my home (or similar pictures of millions of other Americans) who won't be participating in any protest marches?
posted by Durwood at 3:57 PM on February 14, 2003


Durwood: Only if you're holding a sign.
posted by RobbieFal at 3:58 PM on February 14, 2003


It is also accepting photos taken with digital cameras.

Oh, good, I thought I'd have to take photos with my film camera and email the canister to the BBC.
posted by msacheson at 4:00 PM on February 14, 2003


Oooh...I got it: a photo of me, in my home, holding a sign that says, "GO TIGER!" while watching golf!
posted by msacheson at 4:01 PM on February 14, 2003


unpaid stringers, mmmmm.

Well, the BBC isn't omnipresent, even if the TV detector van people want you to think that they are. And it looks like there's a fairly forward looking policy here:

In contributing to BBC News Online you agree to grant us a royalty-free, non-exclusive licence to publish and otherwise use the material in any way that we want, and in any media... It's important to note, however, that you still own the copyright to everything you contribute to BBC News Online. This means you are perfectly free to take what you have produced and re-publish it somewhere else.

Most newspapers would want you to sign over the copyright or agree an exclusive licence, knowing that you weren't clued-up enough as an established photo-stringer to negotiate.

I know from friends that the first pictures to come out of the Chancery Lane tube crash were from people with the new camera-phones. So you don't knock it.
posted by riviera at 4:04 PM on February 14, 2003


Photo of massive crowd at this weekend's first peace demo, in Melbourne, Australia. Hope to see you in NYC tomorrow.
posted by gametone at 4:52 PM on February 14, 2003


Would the BBC be interested in any pictures of me in my home (or similar pictures of millions of other Americans) who won't be participating in any protest marches?

No, but maybe they'll accept photos of people getting hard watching CNN cover the invasion. (rolls eyes)
posted by LouReedsSon at 5:02 PM on February 14, 2003


I predict disappointment for the DC protest. Due to that snowstorm coming in.
posted by RobbieFal at 5:05 PM on February 14, 2003


Has protesting officially become a hip social thing completely devoid of any real substance, or am I missing something?

Maybe you're missing the part about people wanting to demonstrate in a very visible manner that they feel very strongly about an issue. I'm not sure what your concern is. Is it the fact that people who own cellphones are going to be participating?

Holding up a sign that says 'NO IRAQ WAR' and chanting a slogan over and over makes about as much an argument, even en masse, as belching.

What do you recommend? Blogging?
posted by 4easypayments at 5:13 PM on February 14, 2003


Blogging might not be bad ... I spotted lots of surrealistic news floating about the net this evening. If you can tear yourself away from the computer, there's always the candles-or-flags vigil with a few buddies at a nearby intersection or bridge (with appropriate signs, depending whether you are for-or-against military intervention). At least one person with a friend or relative caught up in this madness is certain to drive past and notice your show of concern. Naturally, if you can spare a few hours this weekend to generate immense quantities of dollars and employment opportunities like our fellow MeFi denizen MidasMulligan, that would be even better.

There is no major rally scheduled in DC tomorrow on the United for Peace Feb. 15 event calendar. Try mellow Baltimore instead.

I think the point of all this is finding some way to move the public mood worldwide from endless grim paranoia and hostility back towards kindness, trust, and the co-operation of ongoing daily life. Whether this requires leaving the house on your part, only you can tell.
posted by sheauga at 7:24 PM on February 14, 2003


I'm taking copies of this flyer for a bit of dissent against those who consider themselves the voice of dissent. I made it myself. I'm dead proud. Hopefully I won't get in any trouble. Go people protest!
posted by tapeguy at 12:22 AM on February 15, 2003


The BBC seems to discover the power of blogging and mobile phones with cameras. I had this story linked on my weblog and the next day someone from the BBC visited my site from Blogdex.

I think they see the value in an army of mobile phone users with cameras as opposed to the occasional tv-crew in the crowd. Bloggers even add the value of having a nice story to it usually.

I wish I could join the protest today, however have to work.
posted by sebas at 1:10 AM on February 15, 2003


Holding up a sign that says 'NO IRAQ WAR' and chanting a slogan over and over makes about as much an argument, even en masse, as belching.

I disagree. I'm going to be going out there tomorrow to send a message to my government, a government that's too busy running after the big boys in the playground to care that 94% of Australians do not support participation in the war on Iraq without UN backing. (Sydney Morning Herald poll, Jan 18.) Australian troops have already been sent to the Gulf, and the only way they're coming back home without seeing combat is if we make the government understand that we will not forgive them for dragging our country into this war.

In Melbourne, they estimate 200,000 - 250,000 people turned up. From a city of less than 4 million people, that's between one in twenty and one in sixteen, and that's definitely making a statement. I have to believe, living in a democracy, that the majority's views can only be ignored for so long.

I'm not going to be waving a sign, and I'm not the chanting type. I'll be adding my protest simply by being there, and I hope others who feel as I do will do the same.
posted by Georgina at 6:17 AM on February 15, 2003


At least they are plannig coverage. The networks in America are planning to cover golf.

Or has the BBC staked out a bias? But since it's a government run, non-U.S. news outlet I guess they can do no wrong.

Please see here. Looks like the evil American, corporate media is giving the protests a lot of play. So much for golf. I guess ESPN just wants to blind America to evils of Bush. DragonBoy, perhaps you should check things (like facts) before you post, or has your dogma blinded you to the facts?
posted by Bag Man at 10:25 AM on February 15, 2003


I asked a student handing out flyers for the protest why she was against the war. All she did was give me a couple of slogans - "War is bad" stuff. That's fine for a march, but it doesn't seem like many protesters can cogently talk about the situation beyond a couple of catchphrases.
posted by xammerboy at 10:53 AM on February 15, 2003


I asked a student... doesn't seem like many protesters can cogently talk...

Studied statistics much, xammerboy?
posted by normy at 11:41 AM on February 15, 2003


The BBC isn't government run. Domestic services are not even funded by the state.
posted by kerplunk at 12:24 PM on February 15, 2003


"Protestors are stupid. Wave signs. Chant. Uninformed. Standing around."

I love the sweet smell of cynicism in the morning.
posted by iamck at 12:35 PM on February 15, 2003


I really fail to see what some peoples problem with this is. If there's going to be protest, be it left or right wing, pro or anti war, I'd like to know about it and I'm heartened that people feel strongly enough to get off the couch and make a point.

Dismissing a protester because they couldn't come up with (or maybe be bothered) to recount their arguments to you is just plain stupid, or would you like to see some sort of IQ means testing before people are aloud to protest?

For or against the war I welcome your views and I'm always glad to see someone with enough passion to do something about it.
posted by ciderwoman at 3:30 PM on February 15, 2003


This is about a fourth to a fifth of the people I saw today. Something I forgot about marches: the overwhelming emotional impact of being in a large group of people with a common cause. I hadn't experienced anything like since being in a crowd at Bumbershoot singing along with Al Green on Let's Stay Together. The latter, of course, had more impact as the common focus was so much narrower.

Personally saw the following:

Paper mache puppets and guys on stilts: two of the former and one of the latter.

Number of annoying chanters with bullhorns: above ten. Most annoying.

So were couples pushing huge three wheel strollers, wearing enormous backpacks who suddenly stopped dead still and turned sideways when answering their cellphones--in the middle of the march.

Lots of dogs were there, many overwhelmed by the crowd, others just digging it--People, I love me some people!. Dogs wearing signs: 4, dogowners thereof carrying signs: 0.

I also saw 2 large groups of Muslims at the center rally.

Lots of gray hair. 3 moussed out punk sputnik haircuts. Tattoos and piercings--surprisingly rare, ditto hair colors not found in nature.

The speakers at the Center went on and on--only one was an effective public speaker. But that's when you circle the crowd looking for friends anyway. Well over 10,000 people and I recognize maybe nine or ten total. So much for my six degrees.

They were callling the International Fountain the Fisher Pavilion Fountain on the radio this morning. Did I miss a memo here? Has Channel 4 bought naming rights for the Fountain at the Center? Man, if true, that sucks. I hate that crap.
posted by y2karl at 6:13 PM on February 15, 2003


KOMO 4 says tens of thousands, KING 5 wussed out with thousands, KIRO 7 says 20,000.
posted by y2karl at 6:33 PM on February 15, 2003


Woohoo, we had a million, well, or there abouts.

Not too many piercings to report here, either, though we did have a lot of muslims, but sadly no dogs with signs (at least that I saw).

Although we did have Eubank in his truck with anti war posters all over it, parked up at Trafalgar square, though not sure how much of a good thing that was.
posted by ciderwoman at 6:52 PM on February 15, 2003


Ok, maybe I'm just stupid, but did the BBC put many of the submitted photos on their site? I see they have a 10-photo gallery showing early rallies, but that appears to be it. They also have this page with some photos, but I don't think those are cell-phone ones.
posted by gluechunk at 1:27 AM on February 16, 2003


IQ means testing before people are aloud to protest?

No, but maybe an IQ test before you can run the country.

/snark
posted by notsnot at 9:50 AM on February 16, 2003


Stuff like this really makes me wanna go to war
posted by Degaz at 1:30 PM on February 16, 2003


« Older Chatbots and AIML. AIML?   |   Johnny Sokko and his Flying Robot Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments