| Get the EPUK Weekly News ! |
Once a week we put together a roundup of the week's photography, media and copyright news. It's interesting, free and you don't have to meet the usual EPUK membership criteria to sign up. We don't give your details to anyone else, and you can unsubscribe anytime. So what's stopping you ?
| This week we discussed... |
The above advertisers have not been endorsed by EPUK.
| Headlines | News | First Person | Opinion | Resources | The Curve | Showcase | Masterclass | WTD | Sqweegee's blog | |
About | Join
| Help
| Shop
| Lost And Stolen
| Discounts
|
Support EPUK
|
Advertise on EPUK
| RSS
| Atom
|
Why the NUJ election is an opportunity for photographers to show their strengthThe election to become the NUJ’s next Deputy General Secretary offers photographers a unique chance to use their voice and to show their strength, argues EPUK website editor Nick McGowan-Lowe |
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
26 May 2008
|
A few years ago, I was sent to photograph a prospective MP as he knocked doors on a housing estate in central Scotland. Two hours in, with instructions from my picture desk not to come back until I had enough to cover a double page spread, we turned a corner, and came across a friendly but stray dog on the pavement. Could we do a shot with him stroking the dog ? “No”, he said. I asked him to elaborate. “Dogs don’t vote”, he said. And in an instant, I understood what he meant: a picture of him with a dog in the paper would mean one less picture of him with a real voter. And that voter’s family, friends, neighbours and colleagues would see that photograph and feel a connection, and be more likely to vote. Dogs wouldn’t. This week, the NUJ will begin one of the most important elections in recent years. And in looking through the campaign materials of the three of the candidates, I’m struck by how all but one of the candidates have chosen not to try and attract the vote of photographer members, whereas they are deliberately courting other sectors of the union. It isn’t because they’ve forgotten that photographers exist. And it’s not just because only one in 17 NUJ members is a photographer. These candidates are chasing every vote in what is expected to be a close contest. It’s because the received wisdom within the NUJ hierarchy is that photographers may moan, but they don’t vote. They may complain, but they don’t seek change. Somehow we’ve become the dog that no-one wants to stroke. Difficult timeThe election comes at a difficult time. The NUJ’s credibility is still recovering from two public relations disasters of its own making over the Drogheda Independent House Agreement and the Israel boycott. The first 24 hour strike at a national newspaper in 18 years failed to increase a below-inflation pay offer. And membership, while now nudging 40,000 for the first time in recent history, remains lower than anticipated, adding to the financial problems.
|
|||||
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Comments on this article:
I’m a freelance writer and I’m backing John Toner. We freelances, whether writers or photographers, need a voice as high up the union tree as possible. John understands the issues that affect us. He’s the right person, at he right time, for the job. Comment #2 posted by Stewart McIntosh at 27 May, 11:48 AM Dear Brothers & Sisters, It is a little arrogant to say that the election of t he new NUJ DGS is a two-horse race between the London candidates. Even the big London branches have had a touch more diplomacy. By ignoring my candidature, you are airbrushing the only candidate who has negotiated a big regrading deal for photographers, has consistently recruited photographers for the NUJ – and will be happy to work with them if elected. I am asking all my supporters to vote YOUETT 1 and STANISTREET 2Comment #3 posted by Chris Youett at 19 June, 03:29 PM @ Chris Youett. Undiplomatic it may be, but it’s certainly accurate. Unlike the other three candidates, you’ve run for the top two posts in the NUJ at every available opportunity, and have never come even close to winning. When you last ran in 2003, a little over 1% of the NUJ's membership voted for you. The time before that, you were actually disqualified from standing due to a small matter of unpaid subscriptions. Leaving aside your other somewhat surprising claims, you’ve not been ignored – look at the sidebar. If you’d have had a website, we’d have linked to that there. But in the interests of balance, I’m more than happy to add links to your election leaflet which you kindly sent to my office – and which can be seen here and here. Comment #4 posted by Nick McGowan-Lowe at 29 June, 02:13 PM Add your comments here:
|
||||||
| Headlines | News | First Person | Opinion | Resources | The Curve | Showcase | Masterclass | WTD | Sqweegee's blog | |
About | Join
| Help
| Shop
| Lost And Stolen
| Discounts
|
Support EPUK
|
Advertise on EPUK
| RSS
| Atom
|
| Site design and CMS integration © Dundee photographer Nick McGowan-Lowe. Site content is © original authors. To reproduce any content on this website, contact editor@epuk.org who will put you in touch with the copyright holder. You can read our privacy policy here. Any advice given on this site is not intended to replace professional advice, and EPUK and its authors accept no liability for loss or damage arising from any errors or omissions. EPUK is not responsible for third party content, such as epuk.org adverts, other websites linked to from epuk.org, or comments added to articles by visitors. |
|
|
To have someone at the top end of the NUJ who understands both Freelances and Photographers is an opportunity that simply cannot be missed. To settle for anything less would seem foolhardy.
We don’t get a chance to choose our own officials very often. We must not waste this welcome opportunity to get some proper, reliable, proven experience into the Union management structure.
I have no hesitation is supporting someone of Johns proven track record and undoubted integrity.
Pete Jenkins
Comment #1 posted by Pete Jenkins at 26 May, 09:50 PM