Comments on: Marking up the NUJ’s new media verdict

By: Neil McIntosh

Neil McIntosh — Sun, 16 Dec 2007 20:32:29 +0000

That last line gives you away…

By: Donnacha DeLong

Donnacha DeLong — Sun, 16 Dec 2007 16:19:36 +0000

Firstly, I was only one of a number of people who worked on the Code – it’s largely other people’s work. Secondly, I wrote an important part of the Commission report that, as I discussed with you in person, is a full development of my deliberately contentious Web 2.0 piece. There’s no change in policy at all, my article, the Commission Report and what I argued at ADM two years ago about the Code of Conduct, are totally consistent to those not deliberately misinterpreting them. I’m not going to bother debating this further, as you seem to be determined to be deliberately contentious here, but I will reiterate – if Guardian editorial actually read the full Code and paid proper attention to it, they’d avoid embarrassing u-turns like the first I pointed out. A lot of people far more expert on these issues (copyright, professional standards, moral rights, etc.) have had input into union policy than the people who commented on the report in the Blogosphere.

By: Neil McIntosh

Neil McIntosh — Sun, 16 Dec 2007 14:28:26 +0000

Donnacha – well done. Great play on words. Hadn’t thought of that. Hope you didn’t spend too long, etc.

You might have had a lot to do with the union’s new media policy over the years, but the union has come a long, long way in only a few weeks – the short time between publication of that early draft in the Journalist a couple of months back, including your “Web 2.0 is rubbish” piece, and the final report of this month. It’s a substantive change, not a change in presentation, and it’s a shift to a far more informed position than the one you’ve ever offered here or in print. If that’s down to you, I’d still offer my congratulations, but wonder why you don’t reflect that new position here.

I’ve said the recommendation on the witness contributor stuff is an irritation, and not compatible with the rest of the very promising report. That’s hardly slandering the union, although it is – I suspect – criticism of your work, and that’s why you’re being so touchy about it. But it doesn’t change the fact it’s shite.

The code fails to define what it’s talking about, applies a crazy set of rules to whatever it has just failed to define, and thus would cripple the community efforts of any organisation that adopted it. That’s not parroting a line. It’s applying common sense.

I’m not going to retread an old debate. My full objections to the document, from almost two years ago, are here:

http://www.completetosh.com/we.....ributions/

Plenty others had their say about this at the time; it’s a dead document, a failed attempt. This attempt at reviving it seems almost weird.

By: Donnacha DeLong

Donnacha DeLong — Sun, 16 Dec 2007 12:12:52 +0000

Neil, for f’s sake, I was on the Commission, as you know well. I’m still the New Media Rep on the NEC. You criticise the code, which is included in the Commission Report and one of the Report’s recommendations. The union hasn’t “moved on”, it’s simply communicated its positions more clearly – positions I’ve had a lot to do with formulating over the years. You can continue to slander the union, parroting Guardian management as much as you like (though they, apparently, are the ones who have “moved on”), but it doesn’t change the fact that you’re talking complete tosh (as it says on the tin).

By: Neil McIntosh

Neil McIntosh — Sun, 16 Dec 2007 09:48:08 +0000

Donnacha – you appear to have been left behind. With the most recent paper the union has mode some excellent progress, despite your previous “web 2.0 is rubbish” outbursts. Now it’s in a position where it can claim to have some understanding of new media, and even start influencing – for the better – how it develops. Yet you’re determined to pick a fight over a really dumb piece of work from nearly two years back. I think you should seriously think about trying to move closer to the union’s new position on these things, instead of attempting to defend the indefensible. And if you’re really concerned about this picture rights issue, I don’t think comments left on a blog in the small hours are the best way to resolve them, do you?

By: Donnacha DeLong

Donnacha DeLong — Sun, 16 Dec 2007 01:45:49 +0000

Let’s see what happens the first time you reject a photograph from a professional NUJ-member cameraperson in favour of a free picture of the same thing from a member of the public, under the Guardian’s rights grabbing terms & conditions, and see whether my union colleagues at your paper are happy with it. I also note you’ve made no comment on my confirmation that the Code did, in fact, influence the BBC T&Cs. You continue to bang on about the Code or more specifically about the absolutely valid defense of our members’ interests (which is what unions are for) and ignore the rest of it – which, if the Guardian paid more attention (and surely as a member of Guardian editorial, you have some say) to them, would prevent embarasing u-turns like the above and the previous similar case.

By: Neil McIntosh

Neil McIntosh — Sat, 15 Dec 2007 14:01:11 +0000

donnacha – i speak for myself here, not my employer, and whatever the truth of that case the code is rubbish. Get over it – your union colleages appear to be managing to.

By: Donnacha DeLong

Donnacha DeLong — Sat, 15 Dec 2007 00:04:09 +0000

Perhaps, Neil, if the Guardian paid a little bit more attention to the Code of Conduct you apparently despise, embarrassing u-turns like http://www.epuk.org/News/772/g.....ompetition wouldn’t happen.

By: links for 2007-12-10 « David Black

links for 2007-12-10 « David Black — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 02:22:54 +0000

[...] Marking up the NUJ’s new media verdict – Completetosh.com “I laughed when I saw m’fellow j-blogger Paul Bradshaw had also been annotating a print-out of the NUJ’s Shaping the Future report – the product of their commission on multi-media working.” (tags: internet newspapers journalism research reports nuj) [...]

By: The NUJ - journalists neet to brand themselves « Tom Scotney

The NUJ - journalists neet to brand themselves « Tom Scotney — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 20:34:43 +0000

[...] I’m planning to read the report in full over the weekend to see if there’s anything else worth picking out myself. But for some proper heavyweight comment I can heartily recommend Paul Bradshaw and Neil McIntosh. [...]