National Portrait Gallery investigated judge-winner relationship

Wot?

Borden has received the support from the National Portrait Gallery, which said that Borden "did not at any stage speak in favour of this image."

So ... does that mean 'arry thought the pic wos crap or he recognised it and decided to keep stum?

More poor defensive battling by the NPG.

Objectivity?

How was it possible for the partner of one of the judges to even ENTER the competition in the first place. Surely that would be asking for trouble. One must not only be fair but BE SEEN to be fair by not putting the judge in a compromising position. We are used to such dodgy actions in politics and big business but I feel this discredits the entire NPG and the Taylor Wessing Prize. Shame on you.

games rules

How the NPG ever managed to stage a competition whose rules were/are so unusual is unknown, but whenever you enter a sweepstake, a TV prize draw, or the lottery, employees of the funding organization, and their relatives are usually excluded.
Perhaps this particular lottery could follow suit?

refund

I WANT MY ENTRY MONEY BACK.

lax morals

Even a simpleton knows that they should declare an interest when they have a connection to a subject under discussion. Harry Borden is no simpleton.

This distasteful saga seems to highlight the friends of friends connection which exist at many of the top galleries. The fact that Harry Borden does not appear to have declared an interest - and even worse, that none of his fellow judges found this unusual - speaks volumes about how these things are run. Since the gallery seems unable to find the backbone to investigate properly, I think we should all write to the exhibition's sponsors Taylor Wessing. They are, after all, a firm of lawyers. I can't imagine that they would wish to have their name linked to any suggestion of dodgy practice. So let's ask them to hold an investigation on behalf of us all. That's what we would expect from any competent lawyer.

Taylor Wessing

Good to read some socially responsible arts journalism.

I wonder was the merit of criteria to show the image by Panayiotis Lamprou for Portrait of my British wife which won a Second Prize of £3,000.

As one reads the panel had 6,000 submissions entered by 2,401 photographers.

What new wider audience do the gallery hope to attract by showing this crude rather nasty image to school children and the public?

Or is this sort of panel decision making is what we now have to expect in the future?

NPG: Taylor Wessing

The BJP editorial relating to the Taylor Wessing Portrait Award is welcome as socially responsible investigative reporting and in public interest.

The critique will no doubt enable the NPG to make a better job and selection of winning images) and reassertion next year.

One can only ask the press for more open scrutiny that will tighten up morals, ethics and motives of all organisations and people that work in public office.

Pippa Jane Wielgos

NPG: Taylor Wessing

The BJP editorial relating to the Taylor Wessing Portrait Award is welcome as socially responsible investigative reporting and in public interest.

The critique will no doubt enable the NPG to make a better job and selection of winning images) and reassertion next year.

One can only ask the press for more open scrutiny that will tighten up morals, ethics and motives of all organisations and people that work in public office.

Pippa Jane Wielgos

Endemic Interests

Surely this practice is endemic to all closed organisational and institutonal life - for which there is no universal panacea.

Endemic Interests

Surely this practice is endemic to all closed organisational and institutonal life - for which there is no universal panacea.

Refunds to Entrants

Each photographer pays £22 entry for each print.£22 x 6,000 prints entered = £132,000.

Have the NPG sent a letter of apology and a refund to all entrants?

The Exhibition for 2012

The Taylor Wessing prize is and was such a good concept for the UK arts and photography.

Just a dire shame when these things emerge to discredit and cloud greater ideals.

Perhaps a remedial strategy can be launched to enable the NPG to for a competition with a greater and national and international ideal for 2012.

The widening of photography in the UK and internationally is needed a push – why not use this occasion to do it?

A Perversion of Values

The portrayal of women – in the winning entries was rather thug-a-mug and apish this year.

Don’t the panel like or respect women – or is the political conspiracy in preference to degrade them for alternative concepts as the one by Panayiotis Lamprou of Portrait of my British wife which won a Second Prize of £3,000?

There’s nothing particularly distinctive or clever about any of it.

I don’t think it is what the public or photographic experts particularly wish to applaud as good or artistic panel decision making.

The NPG must get off its high horse of condescension and taking its public for granted.

Acquisitions Preference

Is it true that Borden also has an excessive buy up of prints by the NPG?

If so, why?

Dishonest Conduct

This is clearly not correct practice.

Open Competition

My Daughter was going to apply for an internship. It looks as if there will certainly be no career openings with peculiar closed-shop practices. What other ‘cloak in dagger’ tactics do these organisations and people connected with it engage in?

Collusive Corruption?

-

Closed Shop

The National Portrait Gallery appears as if it operates as a closed clique representing solely self-interested in-house parties.

Public Accountability

Is it possible for an organisation to run their own audit investigation?

Who was the independent member of the Gallery's Audit and Compliance Committee?

What is Taylor Wessing's press response?

Great Story, BJP!

Super story full of eccentricity, and farcical intrigue.

Presumably being a museum it forgot to update its application papers?

What other stories are in the woodwork?

Is the BJP on the judging panel next year?