PetaPixel

USA Today Sending US Presswire Photographers to the London Olympics

Over the last couple of weeks, USA Today has been under fire for deciding not to send their seasoned veteran photographers to cover the London Olympics. Having just bought US Presswire last September, parent company Gannett have decided instead to use the photographers and contractors at their disposal through them.

That in itself wouldn’t be an issue if the Presswire photographers that have been chosen were in the same league, experience wise, as their USA Today counterparts, but most evidence points to the contrary. According to Photo Business News and Forum, most of the photographers going are “wet behind the ears,” including the teenaged daughter of US Presswire photographer Richard Mackson.

All eyes now are on Larry Kramer, the new President and Publisher of USA Today, to see what if anything he will do about the situation.

(via Photo Business News and Forum)


Image credit: London 2012 Banner at Bankside (1542) by oobrien


 
Get the hottest photo stories delivered to your inbox.
Get a daily digest of the latest headlines:
  • http://twitter.com/angusbooker Angus

    Sad for the pro photographers no-doubt, but this sounds nothing more than cost savings and sour grapes. Get over it folks.

  • Tttulio

    Petapixel, please add a “spam” butom, so users can do the clean up. or block URLs.

  • Stevenewport

    “teenaged”?!

    Look who’s shooting for diesel.
    There are very young, very talented photographers out there willing to shoot for cheap. No big deal

  • http://www.facebook.com/JeffreyCatt Jeff Catt

    Willing because they don’t have the experience to realize they are being bent over the table…undercutting reasonable industry wages will only bankrupt these young photographers before they even get off the ground.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/3ZV452XCQPKR3PAZ3JZYUIPNFI Kozmo Nauta

    Always somewhere a cheaper guy/girl who will do the job if this the point not he quality.

  • Stephen

    Meh, I began working for cheap, only led to more work, experience, standards and happiness that I was able to work for myself. Do I respect those who took advantage of that? not really. But if the client’s concern is not pro-quality, why should they pay for it? It would be like a chef complaining that McDonalds is corrupting the food industry. Well, McDonalds offers something 5-stars can’t, namely price and speed, and that certainly hasn’t made them bankrupt.

    I say, if it’s your dice to work for cheap clients with low standards, don’t get mad at those charging the right price for that type of work.

  • Stephen

    Oops, that came off wrong! *I* work for those types, I just try and raise their standards when I do!

  • haohe382
  • Pryere

    Thats why they still put rubbers on pencils. Wait, hang on, er.

  • http://www.article19.co.uk/ Article19

    Get over what exactly? the fact that a newspaper can’t be bothered to send professional photographers to an event? You need to apply the “am I being a prat” test before posting comments.

  • http://www.facebook.com/JeffreyCatt Jeff Catt

     Expecting amateurs to even come back with usable images consistently is a stretch…this is the Olympics…a big dollar event. A place where professional images are EXPECTED!  You are talking like “Oh it’s just a kid’s soccer game no need to hire anyone Timmy’s mom has a Nikon…”