|
BFP Campaign For Photographers...
BOTH amateur
and professional photographers in the UK are facing an up-hill
struggle when trying to take photographs in public places, after
misinformation has been taken as fact by so many organizations and
the public. Even the police have been warned by the UK government to
stop interfering with photographers.
As more than 200 MPs put their signatures to Austin Mitchell’s Early
Day Motion, condemning police harassment of photographers in public
places, the Bureau of Freelance Photographers (BFP) launched a major
initiative in an attempt to tackle the problem on the ground. As
part of its campaign for photographers’ rights, every UK member is
being issued with the BFP “Blue Card”.
This card asserts to people the photographers’ rights to take
pictures in public places. "The card is written in
simple language; it is short and to the point and has been legally
validated. It is small enough to be slipped into a camera bag or
pocket. The Bureau feels that members may find it useful to show the
card to the particular police officer, security guard or other
official.” said the BFP
In the UK, at present, there is no law that stops a photographer or
in fact anyone from taking pictures in public places, in the
majority of circumstances. Not even the new Anti Terroris
legislation stops the use of photography in public places, but
misreading and misuse has confused people. Sadly, the misinformation
does not stop at that: EU rules and American Laws have again added
to the confusion. Add to this, the Children's Act, again being taken
out of context by many in authority, and it is no wonder why the
public is highly confused. The PCC rulings, about photographers
harassing stars and legal cases being successfully tried regarding
this, have muddied the waters even further. But even where a
photographer has taken photographs and been sued, it has not led to
changes in the law. So, it is true to state that no law stops
photography in public places. Successful cases to date have centred
on harassment.{Example
Ref}
One suggestion by a member of the public to us was that:- “All
public events should clearly have banners stating the fact that
photographs are being taken and that if the people do not want a
photograph taken of them , they should not be there. As signs
saying, “You cannot do this or that…” and that you agree to CCTV
etc. are all over the place, why not do that as well, to help the
public understand more and also to help avoid problems with people
who do not wish to be photographed?” A good
suggestion, but why do we have to spell everything out all the time.
Common sense dictates you might be photographed at an event!
The loss of such freedoms, to take photographs in public unhampered,
would stop photographs at all public events, from carnivals through
to street parties and also documentary photography. In recent years,
a boom in street photography has taken place and is seen by many as
a good thing, and the photographs are becoming a valuable record for
historians. Also they are an art form, like Henri Cartier-Bresson’s
street photographs, where he took photographs of people, without
consent, and used them in his art. Even photographic work,
such as the shots taken by Edward Chambre Hardman and now regarded
as very important to the historical records of Liverpool and indeed
the UK, would never again be taken, if a such a law, requiring
explicit permission for every photograph, had existed.
One member of
Southport Photographic Society, at the Jazz Festival, made these
remarks:- "I have been stopped now often and asked why am I
taking photographs. The fun is going out of photography
as a hobby. The implications for loss of
photography in public would devastate the freedoms of us all, and
people do not realize this. They need to wake up and stop focusing
on isolated issues and also realize that people are photographed all
the time, without consent, on every street corner of every major
city and town. Even in most shops now, as CCTV takes off. So why are
people so afraid of a camera within the hands of a photographer?"
We decided to ask the public what they thought about the Blue Card
via
Southportchat.com It was
interesting to see the feedback we received.
One well-known chat room poster and owner of Southport chat, Babs,
who lives in Southport said:- "So let's get this straight.
Anyone can take photos with anyone else in them if they are in a
public place? Are there any rules about how they can use them?"
{Ref.}
The reply to this is, “Yes”; there are rules as to how
they can be used by the media in the UK. For that you should take a
look at the Press Complaints Dept. "Code of Practice",
which was set down by the NUJ and is used to give legal guidance to
the public, media and legal professionals alike. "I have never
had any problems taking photos, but I usually wait until there are
as few people as possible. I would like to have the right to ask not
to be included in a......"
...continued... |
...continued...
"......photo in certain
circumstances.” said Babs.
EPUK (Editorial Photographers United Kingdom & Ireland) have
published a very useful page, about the guidelines, which were first
introduced by the Metropolitan Police, in March 2006, following two
years of negotiations between the BPPA, the NUJ and the CIJ. These
same guidelines were later adopted by all police forces in Britain
in April 2007. These guidelines also state, "Members of the
media have a duty to take photographs and film incidents and we have
no legal power or moral responsibility to prevent or restrict what
they record. It is a matter for their editors to control what is
published or broadcast, not the police. Once images are recorded, we
have no power to delete or confiscate them, without a court order,
even if we think they contain damaging or useful evidence."
{Ref.}
So the "Code of Practice" is key to the understanding
of the rules in the UK for dealing with the press. As for the
public, the same applies. Interestingly, Nigel Waring from Sydney,
Australia commented:- "It is not a simple as that. There have
been cases where people have successfully sued someone for taking
their picture; it is well established in law that, without the
subjects’ consent, it is an assault unless it can be proven, in law,
that it is in the public interest. The landmark or test case
involved some horses and trainers at Epsom. The media really needs
to get its act together and show a bit of respect for the public, we
often see someone in the news stating that they do not wish to make
a statement but the news media races after them often obstructing
and bombarding them with questions when they are trying to get away,
they've made it very clear that they do not want to give an
interview but the media thugs still harass them; it is not just a
few rogue reporters, but the majority of them. The law is very weak
and confused on what the media can do and on the protection of
people in the public eye, it is certainly a problem that needs to be
addressed but the BFP & NUJ taking the law into their own hands will
not help. It will be a very difficult situation to resolve, because
there are so many conflicting and vested interests."
{Ref.}
I do not recall this one, but, from what I have been, told it was
not a landmark case that has stopped any type of photography in
public. The only incident that the we could find which has hit the
papers, is the case brought against Sporting Life, together with Mrs
Ramsden and her gambler husband Jack, after their horse Top Cees had
won the prestigious Chester Cup by five lengths, at generous of odds
of 8-1. The paper, “Sporting Life”, was found to have
had falsely claimed that Top Cees had been deliberately held up in
his prep race three weeks earlier, so that the odds available at
Chester would lengthen. {Ref.}
This is a good example of the confusion we face in the UK.
Interestingly, it came via an ex-pat, living in Australia. Also,
they are not “taking the law into their own hands”,
they are trying to protect the public’s freedom. Most of the media’s
rights fall under section 3 of the "Code of Practice"
{Ref.}.
The fact is that it is not just the media that is being affected by
this misunderstanding but also the public. Even to the point where
say, in 2007, a couple in Manchester were banned from taking
photographs of their baby daughter on a swing, by a park warden, who
declared it `inappropriate.'
{Ref.}
Steve Brook, an off-licence manager from
Clarksfield in Oldham told the Manchester Evening News that:-
"A man in a high-visibility jacket came over and told us we couldn't
take pictures. I asked him why and he said it was illegal to take
pictures of children in the park. I explained it was my own daughter
but he still said it wasn't allowed."
What the BFP is trying to do is to stop the misinformation and to
help people to enjoy photography again, as well as making life
easier for photographers and preserve the freedom we have to take
photographs.
BFP chief executive John Tracy says:- “With the increasing
number of members being stopped by police officers – or more
commonly, police community support officers – from legitimately
taking pictures, we felt we had to do something. We have written to
the police, we have lobbied MPs, but ultimately, whether a
photographer is prevented from taking pictures, is down to the
individual officer on the ground. We feel that the card, if used
with tact and discretion, may have the desired effect of emphasising
to an officer the fact that photography in public places is a
legitimate and, in 99 cases out of 100, legal activity.”
The organisation is
now asking members to:- “report back on their experiences of
using the card – whether positive or negative”.
John Tracy added that:- “The BFP will report on these
experiences through the BFP’s /Newsletter /and if the majority of
members find that the card does help, all well and good. If, on the
other hand, the majority find it doesn’t work, or even exacerbates
the situation, we will report that too. But personally, I don’t
think the latter will be the case. I think it’s more likely that, in
some circumstances, members will find the card helpful and, in other
circumstances, they won’t.”
Meanwhile, the BFP campaign continues. We hope to be part of a
delegation, being put together by Austin Mitchell, to see Home
Office minister, Tony McNulty, to urge that clear instructions be
issued:- “to make it clear that there is a right to take
photographs in public places.”
Only time will tell if the “Blue Card” will work and
if it will have the desired effect… As we are
continually being told:- ”If you’ve nothing to hide,
whyworry?” when it comes t quotes from the public with
regards things like ID cards and CCTV, so this indeed so about
photography?
Please do continue to post your comments on Southport chat and we
will try and point you all in the correct direction to get the
information you require. Also, feel free to email your views to
news24@southportreporter.com. |
