Be aware when a brand asks for your photo

Pretty oddly framed picture though isn't it? Cut everyone off mid leg and have a huge expanse of uninteresting building but I suppose all that space does leave room for a beer makers logo.
 
I have no idea how telling someone they want to "share their picture with the World" could be confused with simply sharing it on facebook.
It clearly says sharing it with the World, what is there to be confused about, there's certainly nothing misleading about their conversation, all I see is somebody with their head shoved too far up their own facebook arse......a common condition it seems.
 
hang on..
Guardascione, a wedding photographer who previously worked as a photographer and photo editor for AOL and NBC News
Click to expand...

She was a photo editor for companies like that.. yet still agreed to give her work away for free for a large company to use (for whatever reason) and then got all uppity when she realised she had been too thick to click what was going on..

No sympathy for her here and its a bit condescending to warn others.. Isn't that like saying.. warrning don't be as slow on the uptake as me?
 
Hmm I think it is a fair enough warning. The original request in context is reasonable to assume it is facebook.

The only thing that doesn't make sense is why they ask for permission on facebook. Surely if it was for the intended purpose, then all they had to do was click the share button. Heck even then the original source would be included automatically without having to do anything special.

So that to me is the part that should set alarmbells ringing.

Regardless of that, if they want to use it in an add then they should just say so.
 
I can see her point - 'sharing' is facebook jargon and when you 'share' a 'facebook photo' publicly, the symbol next to the picture used to represent the public or 'global' share is one of the earth - and as dejongj says, the original source would be seen by all facebook users seeing the shared picture. "Share with the world" and "displayed to all our fans" is not the sort of phrasing that I would expect a company to use when asking for the use of a photo for advertising purposes - and given the context (the picture on facebook and the request by Miller via facebook messenger), I find it dubious that Miller didn't put some thought into how they worded their request - no mention of TV or any other media; the use of the word 'fans' to describe what turns out to be not fans but television viewers (remember, facebook users can 'like' company/product pages if they are a fan).

But saying that, I would expect someone with her credentials to have enough nous to be suspicious and ask questions before giving her permission.
 
KIPAX said:
hang on..


She was a photo editor for companies like that.. yet still agreed to give her work away for free for a large company to use (for whatever reason) and then got all uppity when she realised she had been too thick to click what was going on..

No sympathy for her here and its a bit condescending to warn others.. Isn't that like saying.. warrning don't be as slow on the uptake as me?
Click to expand...


Exactly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top