kakomu
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On
|
 p.1 #22 · Another photographer is raiding my Facebook friends list | |
benj wrote:
@ Kakomu - exactly...it's about being territorial. That's what personal space is all about. I've been talking about personal space...not private property. You seem to be confusing the two. One is physical and can be defended legally. The other is personal and emotional.
What you aren't getting is that when it comes to business, it's either public or private. In most businesses, a client list is private because they don't want competition to hone in on their lists. For instance, a business I work with purchased another business simply for the list of clients and to sell spare parts to those clients. they closed production of the product the competitor made because they made another product that was superior.
If a competitor gets a copy of this list through some illicit means (either through some sort of industrial espionage or security leak), real and actual consequences can be had. Conversely, if a business advertised their clients, there's nothing wrong with a competitor looking at the list and utilizing it for their own purposes.
However, the problem I see with this thread is that a lot of people want to treat photography for pay as somehow a quasi-business. It has all the perks of a business (pay, repeat customers, etc), but people act as though their work isn't a business, but more of a personal intercourse between people as though their clients aren't clients, but actually friends. Thus, people are hostile to competition of any sort shown by the derision directed toward "Uncle Bobs", non-pros (people like to make this distinction of whether they're a "professional" photographer), start-ups or people that just produce work that neither meets their artistic or technical sensibilities. So, people get all up in arms when someone utilizes a free, easy and legal method of looking up prospective clients and get pissy and spiteful.
But there's the rub, photography for pay IS a business. As such, there's nothing "personal" about a client list. It may be private, but privacy is thrown out the window when you publish it on Facebook and have it sitting next to your own advertisements. I could understand a personal argument for actions like finding out who you are and soliciting your family for photographs or stealing your personal photos for use elsewhere. However, this isn't the case.
benj wrote:
I'm curious as to why you are defending this photographer's actions. Is it because you've done the same thing he did? I believe that there is a line that he crossed that indicates that he's either lacking in respect of other people's personal space, or he's lacking the understanding of business tact, etc.
First of all, no, I have not done so, because I don't sell my photos. I've mostly photographed for myself or non-profit organizations.
I'm defending the actions for a few reasons:
A) Adding friends from someone else's friends list is not improper as it is
B) The OP has made no indication that any solicitations have actually been made
C) I see a lot of whining and spite in this thread combined with vitriol directed toward people who aren't "professionals" which seems to include me, by extension, because I'm not paid to take photographs.
D) It's hypocritical for the OP to claim they advertise on Facebook, but find it sneaky or underhanded for other people to advertise on Facebook.
If I see something that I feel is actually improper in a business sense, such as smearing the OP, then I would say so. However, if the only reason this photographer is adding people to friends lists in order to advertise, I see NOTHING wrong with that.
Just because person X was a client of the OP does NOT mean that someone else cannot direct their advertising to person X. The territorial claim is asinine and the "I got here first" claim is null and void. Moreover, it's pretty hypocritical to advertise on Facebook and then call it unethical when someone else advertises on Facebook using the tools that are available for networking!
The other photographer has a business too. If their photography sucks, then they will fizzle, but if they're good or cheap (and good enough for people's tastes) or close, or possess some trait that makes them attractive in the eyes and minds of prospective clients, there's no reason they cannot advertise. If the OP feels threatened by a photographer in his area, maybe he's not cut out for competition. As I wrote before, a little competition can't hurt.
For the record, I work in an office, and photography is a hobby of mine. As I mentioned elsewhere, I volunteer for non-profit organizations and frequently photograph events and people for their websites and/or newsletters.
|
