Magnum snubs Olympics
Magnum Photos president Stuart Franklin says a contract to photograph the site of London's 2012 Olympic Park is 'absolutely unsignable'.
Speaking exclusively to BJP from an assignment in Turkey, Franklin explained that he had penned a letter to the Olympic Delivery Authority (ODA) after receiving an invitation to tender for a commission to photograph the site's construction.
Copied to the Mayor of London, Ken Livingstone, and MP and chairman of the 2012 London Organisers' Committee Sebastian Coe, the letter lays out the four clauses, which Franklin says 'make it absolutely impossible for Magnum Photos, and any group concerned with documentary photography at the highest level, to participate'.
Clause 6.6.3 of the contract demands the ODA be handed 'all image rights ... and associated copyright'. Franklin writes: 'This automatically prohibits us from tendering since the entire raison d'etre of Magnum is to retain both authorship and copyright of our work. This right was fought for 60 years ago at the time of our inception.'
The second point of contention is what Franklin terms a 'gagging clause', insisting that bidders refrain from doing anything 'which would have an adverse effect on or embarrass any games body or any official sponsor of the Games'. This, says Franklin, simply denies the photographer the right to 'report the truth'.
The ODA also insists on the right to 'edit, alter, adapt, modify or deal with the work in any manner in which we see fit', which Franklin says '... goes against our own rules to give anyone the right to alter or modify our pictures'. He adds: 'Doing so automatically allows that truthful elements of the pictures may be replaced by untruthful ones. Thus, the clause is positioned against the basic tenets of the documentary tradition.'
Finally, Franklin attacks the ODA's evaluation criteria for the tender. It states that quality will account for only 10% of the overall evaluation, while price commands 30%. Franklin admits a need to protect taxpayers interests by looking for value for money but adds: 'The contract is more applicable to the construction of low cost housing than the building of a national legacy for the Arts'.
Franklin also adds as an aside that several of Magnum's photographers have already encountered problems trying to photograph the Olympic site. 'It is a fact that without the official contract to photograph the construction of the Olympic Park issued by the ODA, no photography is permitted on the site and security is conscientious in removing those attempting to work independently,' he writes. 'This is simply unacceptable'.
In a statement sent to BJP, the ODA refuted this: 'The ODA currently provides significant access to freelance, agency and staff media photographers to record the development of the Olympic Park. We will continue to do so as the project moves forward'.
A spokesman added that it is confident that it will find a photographer happy to sign to its terms, saying: 'Following substantial interest we are at the moment separately considering a high-quality shortlist of ten companies to deliver a corporate photography service to the ODA'. The Authority also defended its right to edit images to 'remove associations of London 2012 with unapproved branding'.
The statement concludes: 'The contract includes a number of important and normal commercial provisions that prevent the commercial exploitation of ODA intellectual property and protect the integrity of the 2012 brand'.
Franklin says that the response is unsatisfactory. 'All of this "associated branding" stuff is just rubbish. The ODA delivered a document to us littered with terms such as contracts and suppliers - we don't work using these terms.
'The ODA sees the photographer as a corporate contractor and, tellingly, not as an independent documentary maker.
'At the end of the day, I want to know who are the photographers who would actually sign these contracts?'
