Royal Parks Permits

In letters signed by The BPPA, the News Media Association, the Chartered Institute of Journalists, the British Association of Journalists and the Foreign Press Association in London and sent to the Editor of The Times and the Director of Communications, Marketing and Engagement for the Royal Parks the five organisations made it clear that restrictions placed upon news-gatherers excluding them from areas open to the public were unacceptable. The text of the letter to the Times said the following:

Sir, 

We are writing on behalf of professional photographers and journalists spanning the breadth of the UK news media industry.

This week, we have written to the Royal Parks to raise concerns about a clause in their news permits which prevents filming and photography at the back of No 10 Downing Street from Horse Guards Road or Horse Guards Parade.

This clause, which has recently been further tightened, unnecessarily restricts the legitimate activities of photographers seeking to report on hugely significant events happening right at the seat of power in this country.

The back entrance to Downing Street is an extremely important location for public interest news, particularly around a general election when a Prime Minister may change, or for reporting on activities taking place within Downing Street such as the Partygate.   We are asking therefore that the permits are updated to remove these restrictions. 

  • Owen Meredith, NMA chief executive;
  • Dominic Cooper, Chartered Institute of Journalists chief executive;
  • Matthew Myatt, British Association of Journalists general secretary;
  • Deborah Bonetti, director, The Foreign Press Association in London;
  • Paul Ellis, chair, The British Press Photographers’ Association.

The Times then followed this up with an editorial on page 9 of today’s edition (Thursday September 1st 2022). The letter to the Royal Parks made the same points.

The Royal Parks in London have (for a fee) issued permits allowing photographers to take pictures in their open spaces for many years. This always made it difficult for those wishing to cover the rear entrance to Downing Street but, in a recent revision to the rules, it became almost impossible.

The BPPA has been involved in several attempts over the years to sort out this issue and we hope that this latest effort will make the working lives of our members that little bit easier. In an ideal world the Royal Parks Permit would become a thing of the past and hope that this latest chapter in the long-running saga brings us into that world.

News gatherers are key workers

News gatherers are key workers. That was made clear by HM Government during the original COVID-19 lockdown and our Police forces acknowledged the vital role media workers play by recognising the UK Press Card Authority’s official Press Card as sufficient evidence that the holder is a working journalist.

Members of The British Press Photographers’ Association and their colleagues with UK Press Cards issued by other bodies were regarded with contempt by a significant number of officers of the Metropolitan Police Service as they repeatedly failed to recognise carriers of the UKPCA card, harassing and threatening them with arrest for non-compliance of lockdown rules as they covered the Million Mask demonstration in central London on 5th November.

At a time when HM Government and the emergency services of the UK continue to rely heavily upon the free press as trusted sources of vital public information during the COVID-19 pandemic, for officers to bully and inhibit working press photographers is both irrational and counterproductive.

The BPPA welcomes the apology to the Society of Editors but we are still concerned that MPS staff members are either ignorant of the arrangements in place or are deliberately choosing to ignore them.

The BPPA calls upon the Metropolitan Police Service and the National Police Chiefs Council to commit to adhering to governmental instructions regarding the recognition of UK Press Cards and their holders as key workers.

An open letter to the Premier League

The BPPA represents the interests of over 400 full-time press photographers, many of them working in sport as freelancers. To that end, we have written to The Premier League to highlight the impact on our members should plans go ahead to severely limit the number of photographers at stadia when football returns.

The BPPA has offered suggestions on Project Restart match coverage with health and safety at the forefront of consideration, which would help both increase the coverage of the Premier League as well as help photographers recover from the crisis.

The BPPA urges the Premier League not to use one photographic media source exclusively, as not only would it severely affect the variety and richness of coverage in our national game it would also adversely affect many members of The BPPA’s and the wider freelance community whose income is totally reliant on football. The BPPA wrote to the Premier League last Monday and are still awaiting a response to this concerning issue for the sporting media community.

With this in mind The BPPA has joined with other organisations who want to be involved in Project Restart in this common goal and welcome further dialogue with The Premier League as a matter of urgency.

A Statement from The BPPA on the role of press photographers during crisis.

During any crisis, up to date trustworthy and impartial news is vital to all governments and authorities worldwide in communicating important advice and information to their populations.

The role of newsgathering falls upon the respective countries’ local, regional, national and the international media. Made up of photographers, reporters, broadcast reporters, camera operators and news crews working tirelessly out in the field supported by a plethora of editors, researchers and production staff covering the events and breaking news on a 24/7 basis.

Without these accredited mainstream media organisations operating, providing the public with vital and timely information in such crises, gossip and misinformation spread quickly, causing panic and potentially life-threatening situations with an added burden on the country’s already struggling authorities.

The UK government recognise the vital role that the press play in their battle against the Coronavirus pandemic and as such, awarded them the status of keyworker, along with other essential services seen to be imperative in the fight. Be it transport, utility, education, healthcare, local/national government and public services -the media, they each have their unique role to play.

Research conducted by The BPPA on interactions between bona fide press photographers and the general public during their coverage of the COVID-19 crisis revealed some very disturbing results in a number of regions across the UK, where photographers reported being threatened with violence, physically assaulted, trolled on social media, death threats, incitement to attack, even being spat at by members of the public whilst working on Coronavirus-related assignments.

This is absolutely despicable behaviour. It is completely unacceptable by any means and at any time and should not be tolerated by any member of the press. These are criminal offences and The BPPA strongly advise any of our members or any non-member to report such incidents to the authorities immediately.

No person, keyworker or other, should go to work with the fear of physical attack or abuse. Press photographers do not have the luxury of reporting from home, they have to be out in the field seeing and communicating what is in front of them and do this with a variety of camera equipment, be that with wide angle, standard or telephoto lenses. The misconception that telephoto lenses in some way give a distorted and more crowded view of a scene is as bizarre as it is ill-informed.

If you should happen to see a press photographer out on assignment during the current crisis and you are curious, please do not be afraid to ask for their credentials and have a chat (while observing social distancing advice please), we’re human like everyone else, with families and loved ones who are just as eager for life to return to normal as you.

Downing Street and the curtailment of press freedom

Photo: © Lindsey Parnaby


The British Press Photographers’ Association objects to any and all attempts by Government to exclude photographers, reporters and television from events where there is a reasonable expectation from the public that those events would be covered by independent witnesses on their behalf. 

Restricting access and replacing independent coverage with free images, copy and footage from special advisers, Government employees and heavily vetted individuals is wrong and represents a serious assault on our free media. Once any organisation and especially the Government has full control of the news and how it is reported then the perception of accuracy, trust and accountability will all suffer and democracy will be the ultimate casualty.

We ask that any and all plans to limit and eliminate the access of the news media to Government events be scrapped and that the system that guarantees the access of journalists becomes a bedrock of the relationship between the Government and the people of this country.

(Photo ©Lindsey Parnaby)

BPPA Response to Pride in London

This year, Press Photographers that applied for accreditation to photograph the Pride In London parade and celebrations received the following email:

Changes to accreditation in 2019:

Pride in London have been working with our agency partners to review the security arrangements for Pride in London 2019. We’ve made a number of changes to the parade route which will enable us to make the parade more secure. This includes significantly reducing the numbers of people with access to the route itself.

Your media wristband gives you priority fast track access to the public areas at the stages. It does not give backstage access
There is no access inside the parade barriers along the parade route or to the form up area.”

This is a change over previous years. We have sent the following letter in response:

‘Dear Pride London,

The BPPA would like to raise our grave concerns regarding Pride London’s proposed plans to severely impede media access to this year’s parade.

Photographers are accredited to the parade but not allowed to photograph the parade itself from start to finish.

We cannot see the sense in this. With an estimated one million attendees, this would be considered a major news event and very worthy of extensive coverage by all national and international media organisations and barring access will inhibit global coverage and ultimately, interest in the annual Pride event.

Moreover a parade which promotes freedom of the individual and freedom of expression should not be restricting the freedom of the press.

Finally we cannot see there is any necessity to alter previous year’s arrangements in this way.

We, The BPPA therefore urge you to reconsider before the event and look forward to hearing from you as soon as possible. Thank you.’

​UPDATE FROM PRIDE LONDON
​Press that have requested accreditation should have recived an updated email that includes the following information:

Following a letter from the BPPA and listening to the concerns we have reviewed our decisions and have confirmed an approach that ensures Pride is open for all, while ensuring the event stays safe and secure.

As such, we are pleased to confirm that you have been approved for:

1 pass(es)

This wristband gives you access to parade form up and along the parade route if you are carrying a professional camera.

As you may have noted in the media pack, there is no front of parade photocall this year. We will also have an area for photos near Piccadilly Circus and our team can advise on its location tomorrow should you want a fixed spot to photograph from.

We followed this up, writing to Pride London to confirm the position and received the following:

“Dear BPPA,

Thank you for your e-mail. I can confirm this is correct.

This year we revised our media accreditation process because of its impact on the speed and security of the parade. Not an easy decision but it is an operational choice based on ensuring 30,000 people can pass through London safely and securely.

Following your letter we urgently reviewed our decision with our production partner to see what possibilities there are. We have been contacting people directly who are impacted.

As the third largest event in London we try our best to accommodate the complexities of organising 30,000 people through the streets and it was never our intention to inhibit coverage and deny freedom of expression. I wanted to thank you and the BPPA for bringing this to our attention, and I hope this resolves the matter.

Pride in London

We would like to thank Pride in London for listening to all the organisations that voiced concerns and for changing your policy.

We wish everyone a Happy Pride 🌈

An open response to a recent social media post about gender in press photography

The BPPA has come in for some criticism from a group called Women Photographers of the UK about what they refer to as the uneven representation of women in the current Assignments 2019 exhibition. You can read their open letter here on Medium. This is a response from Lynne Cameron, Vice Chair of The BPPA.
 
Dear Suzanne, Anna and Susannah
 
We would like to reassure those expressing concerns about the representation of women in our industry that we are very aware of the issues and are currently working on projects to support and help current and future female members of the organisation. We were disappointed that these concerns were not directed to The BPPA in the first instance as we welcome all constructive criticism. It is one of our core values to work transparently with all parties in any matter related to photography.
 
The issue of gender imbalance is a complex one, not just related to photography but to wider society.
 
The association is proactively working to improve such imbalances. As an example The BPPA elected me as Vice Chair and Julie Edwards as our Social Media and Website Editor at last year’s AGM. We are both long-standing professional photographers who have first hand experience of gender related issues within our industry. Julie and I are bringing our experiences, energy and ideas to The Board and welcome further positive constructive comments which could help address this wider topic.
 
In relation to the exhibition (it is not a competition) we would like to reassure those concerned that images were curated by highly regarded members of the profession who were deliberately not given any information about the name or gender of the photographers in order to make the selection process ‘about the images’ as far as is humanly possible.
 
We are extremely proud of Assignments – an exhibition designed to promote and highlight the amazing work that is being produced by our members.
 
The Board of The BPPA welcomes constructive input from anyone who wants to help to promote and inspire great photography. If you have ideas on what more can be done on the issues raised then please get in contact with me or any of the other members of our Board.
 
Lynne Cameron
 
Vice Chair, The BPPA
 
 
 
Statistics:
 
1. The BPPA has 321 paid-up members of whom 40 are women – which is approximately 12.46%.
2. 16 photographers joined or rejoined in order to take part in Assignments 2019 of whom 25% were women.
3. 161 photographers entered photographs for Assignments 2019 of whom 18 were women – 11.2%
4. 1,351 photographs were entered of which 148 were entered by women – 10.95%
5. 110 photographs were selected for exhibition of which 10 were by women – 9.3%

Alamy – a follow-up

The UK Press Gazette quoted The BPPA’s open letter to Alamy’s CEO in their piece about his video signalling his intention to reduce the photographers percentage of royalties to 40%. This morning the UKPG asked us to provide a response to James West’s latest video where he offers to keep the 50% split for exclusive content. We provided the following text:
 
“Alamy’s move to alter their commission structure has brought a large number of other issues to the surface such as the low prices they sell pictures for, their broken promise that when they reduced the photographers cut to 50% they wouldn’t go further and their somewhat grudging acceptance that it is the commitment and buy-in from thousands of photographers that has got them to the positive position in which they now find themselves.
 
The BPPA welcomes Alamy’s decision to reconsider their reduction in the percentage paid to photographers but in making this only for exclusive content they are still going to anger many of our members. One of them has said “exclusivity is appropriate to a delicatessen, not a Walmart” and this sums up how most feel.
 
Should they push ahead with this plan the details of how they manage this will be complex. Will photographers have to make some sort of declaration for every single picture retrospectively? Will the burden for proving exclusivity rest with the photographers? Our opinion is that Alamy are still not listening and are still cutting the income of all those photographers who for very good reasons do not wish to, or cannot, surrender exclusivity.”

An open letter to Alamy CEO James West

Dear Mr West
When our members first pointed out that Alamy was reducing the commission that it pays to contributing photographers the first reaction was “oh no not again”. Sitting and watching the video that you posted on YouTube didn’t help. 
Alamy is a company whose success is built on its relationship with the people who have trusted you to handle their stock and live photography sales. Relationships built on trust are destroyed very quickly when one party moves the goalposts and that’s exactly what you are planning to do.
Many of our members are contributors to Alamy and a significant number of them have invested incredible amounts of time and money supplying images through your service. They have done this based on an expectation of an equitable split of sales. The graphs showing increasing revenue and turnover do not show the whole picture when it comes to the incomes of individual contributors. Very few of them have had the degree of income or turnover growth that Alamy can proudly boast about. We know many photographers whose income from Alamy has plateaued at best and, in a number of cases, reduced significantly.
We are not stupid. We are amongst that group of photographers that you mentioned who understand the market. We know that many individual images fetch lower prices than they once did, that it is a complex and competitive market and that sales models have changed since 1999. We understand that the financial uncertanties of Brexit mean that you have to be cautious over the next twelve months or more. We understand that Alamy wants to improve and grow. We understand that you want to fund those goals from within your own revenues but we don’t understand why you would do so at the expense of the contributors whose effort has been one of the key drivers of your rise to a turnover in excess of $30,000,000.
In essence you are asking hard working and dedicated photographers to take a 20% pay cut. It doesn’t matter that Alamy is selling more and has the potential to sell even more in the future if your investments in technology and research pay off. By reducing the photographers percentage you are asking them to pay for those developments and we would be interested to know if anyone at Alamy is taking a 20% pay cut to help fund their futures.
You will, no doubt, have read the comments underneath your video on YouTube. The anger is there for all to see and there are many photographers on there who are going to reconsider their relationship with Alamy. They don’t agree with your assertions that 40% of more sales is better than 50% of a slower increase in sales and, as individual photographers, they are probably correct.
We would ask that you reconsider this move and that you continue to pay existing contributors 50% of the sales. If new contributors want to join then maybe you could agree the 60/40 cut with them. There has to be a way to keep the trust of our members and still be able to fund development because, as things stand, Alamy keeping 60% of fewer pictures of lower quality is a distinct possibility which benefits nobody.
Kind Regards
The BPPA Board