Israeli Embassy, High Street Kensington, London
December 29, 2008
Every day outside the Israeli Embassy, pro-Palestine protesters are gathering to demonstrate against Israel’s air strikes on Gaza.
I haven’t been to a protest in quite some time, and I used a flash for the first time 
There were at least a few hundred people when I arrived, and it was difficult to get anywhere near the front, so I mostly stayed out of the main area.
This man below was pro-Israel and was questioning the beliefs of the protesters, claiming they were inciting hate with their chants.
The “Palestinian Jews” as they call themselves, arrived.
I’ve taken pictures of them before where I even interviewed them for someone! They seem to take part in all Pro-Palestine protests – the placard sums up their beliefs.
Bad composition, but I thought this was a cute moment:
This woman was giving quite a heated interview. It was interesting listening to her.. she seemed to be talking about peoples’ views on Islam, as opposed to the issue in Gaza. The two are definitely not mutually exclusive, I think it’s fair to say. Is a war on Gaza/Palestine, a war on Islam?
The road had been shut for the protesters and bystanders looked on bemused, but this street cleaner casually carried on sweeping while having a smoke – I loved that.
I’d normally provide a link that gives more information on the subject, but I’m not sure if I can find an unbiased article, or at least one that isn’t seen to be biased. Funnily enough, I’ve heard many anti-Israeli people claim that mainstream news channels such as the BBC are biased towards Israelis,but pro-Israel people claim the same.
I hear things like “the BBC always show the one Israeli that was killed, but never the hundreds that have died in Gaza, or the suffering there”. I also hear “the BBC shows all those people in Gaza injured and in despair, but never show how the Israelis suffer”.
I thought this Wikipedia article on the topic of media coverage surrounding this conflict was interesting:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_coverage_of_the_Arab-Israeli_conflict
I was also interviewed for a BBC report:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7805228.stm
According to Scoopt.com.. wait for it..
*drumroll*
$0.75.
Yes, I received a cheque for the grand sum of $0.75.
In March 2008, I posted a few images of a Tibet Protest to Scoopt.com, a citizen journalism agency owned by Getty Images. Given Getty’s reputation, I could only assume that this would be worthwhile. However, I was clearly under a misconception.
For starters, the site is ridiculous. Until this day, my pictures are still apparently “awaiting approval”. I can therefore not delete them, or edit them in any way, leaving them for Scoopt to basically do whatever they want with them.
Scoopt pays its users a 40% royalty fee. That itself in rather pathetic, however I’m not a professional, so I wasn’t too bothered by this.
A few weeks later I noticed a picture of mine was posted on a Polish news website with a Scoopt/Getty watermark. I had not been notified that my image was going to be used, so I called Scoopt up, but nobody was available to speak to me, let alone explain how an image that was still “awaiting approval” was being used by an external source.
A few months later, I received notification that two of my pictures had been sold. Scoopt could not disclose who had bought them, and I received around £40 (paid in Dollars even though I specified on my profile to be paid in Sterling).
Two weeks ago I received a phone call from Getty Images informing me that I had sold a picture, and asking what currency I’d like to be paid in. I asked how much it had sold for, but was told that this could not be disclosed. I now realise why.
So, let’s think about this. It cost Getty $0.94 to send me a cheque for $0.75. This is around 50p in UK Sterling, and it will cost my bank around the same amount to clear the cheque. Perhaps Getty thought that in these hard economic times, I’d appreciate whatever I can get.
Furthermore, I still received the cheque in USD, contrary to telling the representative over the phone that I’d like this in GBP. My profile also specified this.
All this leaves me wondering about the point of so-called citizen journalism websites. I’m not out to make money from my images. Having said that, I have sold a number of pictures (most recently through Demotix.com), for much higher sums than Getty’s generous offer.
I’m happy to let non-profit organisations use my images for free. Amnesty International, religious groups, and a television show are just a few of the organisations that have approached me after seeing my images on Flickr.com. I would much rather such groups make use of my pictures for nothing, than have the likes of Getty make a 60% profit from mine, as measley as the sums might be.
Right, well I’m off to spend my 75 cents! Credit crunch? What credit crunch?
