Journalist' "boycott" of the Berlin show

[tina]

http://meedia.de/print/djv-ruft-medien- ... 09/04.html

I just found this article.
The "Deutscher Jounalisten Verband" NRW (German Journalist association in North Rhine-Westphalia) ask the German journalists not to report on the concerts.
They complain the hard conditions the management of Leonard Cohen has given to get an accreditation.

[mirka]

Tina, would it be possible for you (or any other German speaking Forum member) to give details of why they want to boycott the concerts ?
Thanks !

[musicmania]

i'd be interested on hearing exactly what this is about too as the Google translate is not making sense?

[swisschris]

Photographers who want to take pictures at one of Leonard's German concerts had to sign an agreement, that they will use the pictures only ONCE and determine in the agreement in which publication they will use the pictures. In the same agreement, the management gets the rights to use the very same pictures as they wish - without any payment to the photographers of course....

In another case, a journalist who wanted to get an accreditation for one of the concerts was asked to publish a pre-report about the concert...(in other words: Do some promotion for the concert...)

As I study journalism and write for different newspapers and online publications about music, literature and film myself,I have to say that agreements like this are TOTALLY UNACCEPTABLE !!! And I would advise every journalist not to sign such an agreement! Things like this tell a lot about Leonard's current management...

[musicmania]

I find this very hard to believe as Leonard is very generous about letting the fans take photos and publish them wherever we like so I find it surprising that it would be a different rule for the "official photographers". I know I am only an amatuer but I get reviews I write of Leonard's concerts published on an Irish online music magazine and never had any issues and I know for a fact Leonard has seen at least one of them. I spoke to his management about fan photography and was told as Leonard allows it they allow it once we don't use a professional camera and keep the flashes off and I have seen photos by fans that would rival any of the "official photographers"!!!

[tomsakic]

I think that all 246 shows in 2008-10 had same agreements for the professional photographing during the opening song. In 2010 for sure (I was asked by one photographer to remove the photo from my website because of that contract, but the photos remained on Speaking Cohen website with no problems). No problems whatsoever, it was just a piece of paper, you could later use your photos according to your conctract (i.e. photos belong to photographers or to the agency/media which sent photographer to the show) - and of course, if Leonard's management wants use some of those photos in his booklets or releases, LC has the right (as he is on the photo!) but he credits the photographer.

I don't see any problems with it - it is the standard contract in music industry nowadays. I do not see any problem with it - after all, it's Leonard who's on the photos they're taking.

As for the pre-show articles, it is usual that local promoter has some local newspapers as media partners and they're running the articles about show and artist prior to the event. Local agencies often do attach your accreditation to that - actually, if the journalist wanna get an accreditation, he has to fill a page or two of questionnaire how often and in which way will his media cover the event... Nothing new or unusual there as well.

[musicmania]

I agree regarding the fact it is Leonard in the photo and if he gives credit then there is no problem. I know if he ever wanted to use any of my photos if I had any good enough I'd be more than happy with him doing so!! I didn't realise this was an industry standard but now I think about it, it does make sense, especially regarding photography.

[yoeri]

Now I understand why yesterday there wasnt even a mere mention of the concert in a concertlist in a berlin (!) newspaper....

[jarkko]

The same document was in use also in Finland --- and about every "big" artist uses the same --- but all major Finnish newspapers printed both great photos and reviews that couldn't be any better!!
(...and we have hundreds of great shots from the Helsinki show, shot by Maarten and several others. Maarten has already uploaded his photos. I will post a selection from several other photographers as soon as I get those over 700 photos sorted in some way!)

[coolfadda]

I think its perfectly acceptable to know exactly who is taking photographs of you and where photos of yourself are going to be used. I'm not in the public eye at all and would hate to find photos of me randomly appearing in a magazine or newpaper. Leonard and management are well within their rights. As for the nitty gritty of the contract - is everyone just losing the plot. This should be a win win all round - great photos for the publication and great photos for Leonard.

[BlizzardofIce]

viewtopic.php?f=28&t=11529

It is not the first time this has happened, during the Bislett concert in 2008 all the photographers and journalists walked out before the concert.
It was a collective boycott bacause of the restrictions.

But, as Jarkko says, the same document has been used all the way during the tours, so it looks as it all depends on how you read it, I think.

http://www.dagbladet.no/kultur/2008/07/01/539729.html

Et kvarter før konserten fikk fotografene valget mellom å signere en fotokontrakt som bryter helt med norske pressetradisjoner - eller dra hjem igjen.

translate: Fifteen minutes before the concert the photographers were given the option to sign a contract that violates completely with Norwegian press traditions - or go home.

- Dette er jo synd for Cohen selv og hans mange norske tilhengere, men nå presenterte arrangørene på svært kort varsel begrensninger vi ikke har hatt før på norske arrangementer. Her gikk grensen for oss og de fleste av våre kolleger, sier fungerende sjefredaktør Lars Helle i Dagbladet.no.

Fotografene måtte blant annet skrive under på at bildene bare skulle brukes en gang, at de ikke kan arkiveres og at Cohens management skal overta alle rettigheter til fotografenes bilder.

- This is a pity for Cohen and his many Norwegian fans, but now the organizers presented at very short notice limitations we have not had before in Norwegian events. Here the limit for us and most of our colleagues wass reached , said acting chief editor Lars Helle in Dagbladet.no.

The photographers had to include sign that the images would only be used once, they can not be saved and that Cohen's management will acquire all rights to the photographers' images.

[James T]

I don't exactly agree with these contracts, but they're used by most large acts now. The photographers should appreciate that just having a great photo of the great man in their portfolio is an honour.

[BlizzardofIce]

having a great photo of the great man in their portfolio is an honour.

The point is that if you follow that contract, you will not have that great photo in your portfolio.
It's not your picture anymore. You have no rights to your own picture. You are not allowed to use it more than once, right after the show.
You are not allowed to use it or show it again.

As we know it looks like nobody really cares about the contract, they sign it and then use the pictures as they want, save and show and spread online, but if they were to follow the contract none of this would be allowed,

[James T]

They are not permitted to publish it more than once, but surely they can use it as part of a portfolio.

[vlad]

The context might be a larger one, I fear.
1- German media (outlets like, if I remember well, e.g. Spiegel, Stern and even the leftish Die Zeit) tried to impose onerous contracts to photoreporters (employed and freelance). As far as I know, after much Union-ado, some strikes, some legal battling, the contracts went back to the old form/norm (re rights, payments, permitted use and due fee). Not so in other less politically active and less well organised countries, where contracts remained onerous. I'd like to know what happened in France where the Unions have always had a reputation of courage and strength.
2- By the way, no one can forbid a photographer to use his own material for the portfolio or in a photo-competition, a photo-course, demo etc. What media try to obtain is pay less, own the material and use it more extensively without explicit permission and therefore without extension fees (in consequnce, the author has no control over his work and no recourse).
3- This attempt at imposing such conditions upon concert reporters (who, by the way, are often also Cohen fans – this is my personal observation) might happen in analogy to the way the SOPA, PIPA, ACTA etc. stuff is happening. After successful protests in the US and EU, the various lobbies went around the back in less obvious and less publicly visible ways. These laws will come if noone fights them coinvincingly and successfully.
4- The analogy here being that what media (in Germany) were unable to force into generally accepted contracts, they impose in part through their “media-partners”, per ad hoc agreements, abuse of house rights (like: “this is my concert hall and tonight I can forbid whatever I want”), blackmail (“you sign or you go”). If this is tolerated, it will become “accepted/usual professional practice“ and finally find its way into official contracts – which, then, cannot be fought anymore by individuals or unions. I guess this is why, among others, colleagues in Berlin boycotted the concert. They deserve applause and thanks!
5- Years ago I could go with a semiprofessional camera as big as two bricks and a tall can in any concert that was taking place in relatively small venues and did not target notoriously agitated audiences. I'ld take photos, sometimes under the lenient eye of the bouncers – and occasionally with a wink from the artists. Some of you know what I mean. But this was before 9/11; and before Leonard Cohen started playing huge venues, where security is a serious logistical issue (in Germany, after some tragedies in the last years, more so). In M'gladbach, for intance, there were at least 10 m between the first row and the stage. At least a dozen polite but strict guys and gals stood or sat in front, facing the audience (what a job!) and keeping everybody seated. Some more, some real bouncers, were scattered around the place, which was well fenced in. Noone seemed to care whteher the toilets stank, but they made a point of not letting anyone attend with “a professional camera (with detacheable lenses)”, except 6 pros for the first one or three songs (as is usual). So no much boykott in the Rhineland – either because they had no reason, or because they chose not to – I'd like to find out which.
6- A last, not entirely unconnected point: 2012 ticket prices in Bucharest went up to almost 200 Euro for (I think) at least the first two rows of the centre block, if the plan I saw is correct. This is an incredible price for Romania. The rest of the front sectors was, by the way, a few Euro more expensive than in Germany. This is, I'll word it politely, onerous. Besides, I know the place and my guess is that many of these VIP-tickets were not bought, but distributed into various unofficial channels, some of which lead directly into the black market, some others into pockets of people who care about anything but Leonard Cohen, music or poetry. I hope I'm wrong. At the other two concerts in Bucharest a couple of years ago, organisers were more generous. Maybe I'll comment on differences after the 22nd.
7- Sorry for the quantity of steam. Hope someone may find it worth the read.

best,