Storm in a teacup
Pierre C. Meier, editor-in-chief of *Werbewoche*, on *Impressum*'s complaint against *Keystone*.
Some time ago, Impressum filed a complaint against Keystone with the Swiss Press Council. The media union's accusation was that the photo agency was mixing advertising and press images and thus violating journalistic professional ethics. The union based its complaint on an article that appeared in the Fribourg daily La Liberté at the beginning of February. The article was picked up by the WOZ shortly afterwards. In it, the journalist complains that Keystone (the PR subsidiary of Keystone) does not consistently identify images of sporting events with sponsor logos in the background as advertising images. Keystone Managing Director Jann Jenatsch rejects this accusation. PR images are created by the Keystone subsidiary Photopress and are explicitly labeled as such with the note "Photopress". If there is a risk that the PR interests of covering an event with only one photographer would prevail, Keystone would send a second photographer, Jenatsch continued. If the mixing of advertising and press is confirmed, this would mean a violation of Article 10 of the "Declaration of Duties and Rights of Journalists" for Impressum, as the union writes in the communiqué. This article stipulates the strict separation of journalistic and commercial content. A scandal?
Specifically, this involves Emmi, which has entered into a sponsorship commitment as a partner for the FIS Alpine Ski World Cup. Emmi is therefore present at the major FIS World Cup events along the slopes and at the venue. Emmi also pays the Photopress photographers. The pictures are distributed free of charge by Photopress, but they are also available from Keystone for a fee. That is certainly unattractive. But if you take the trouble to look at these pictures more closely, then the whole matter is put into perspective. As with any sporting event that depends on sponsors, it is naturally difficult to find pictures that do not show a sponsor's logo. This is the case for life at the event and therefore also for the corresponding photos. Of course, there are differences. They range from a racer in action, where you can see the logo on the overall, to a photo with a large advertising banner in the background, to a photo that shows a large logo in the foreground and a blurred skier in the background.
Every editor is free to choose the picture that seems appropriate. It is so obvious which pictures are pure PR photos and which depict sporting news that the accusation of mixing advertising and press is ridiculous. Such an accusation could at most be made against the editor selecting the photos, as it is ultimately his responsibility which pictures he chooses. And he has a free choice. If he then pays for an effective PR image that has already been paid for by the client, he really has only himself to blame. This is not a scandal, but stupidity or naivety. It's a bit like the countless PR texts that end up in editorial offices. One takes them as the basis for a story, the other copies/pastes them and adopts them in their entirety. The uncritical adoption of texts and images by journalists - that's the real scandal.
Specifically, this involves Emmi, which has entered into a sponsorship commitment as a partner for the FIS Alpine Ski World Cup. Emmi is therefore present at the major FIS World Cup events along the slopes and at the venue. Emmi also pays the Photopress photographers. The pictures are distributed free of charge by Photopress, but they are also available from Keystone for a fee. That is certainly unattractive. But if you take the trouble to look at these pictures more closely, then the whole matter is put into perspective. As with any sporting event that depends on sponsors, it is naturally difficult to find pictures that do not show a sponsor's logo. This is the case for life at the event and therefore also for the corresponding photos. Of course, there are differences. They range from a racer in action, where you can see the logo on the overall, to a photo with a large advertising banner in the background, to a photo that shows a large logo in the foreground and a blurred skier in the background.
Every editor is free to choose the picture that seems appropriate. It is so obvious which pictures are pure PR photos and which depict sporting news that the accusation of mixing advertising and press is ridiculous. Such an accusation could at most be made against the editor selecting the photos, as it is ultimately his responsibility which pictures he chooses. And he has a free choice. If he then pays for an effective PR image that has already been paid for by the client, he really has only himself to blame. This is not a scandal, but stupidity or naivety. It's a bit like the countless PR texts that end up in editorial offices. One takes them as the basis for a story, the other copies/pastes them and adopts them in their entirety. The uncritical adoption of texts and images by journalists - that's the real scandal.
