Selling your videos to Sky, Daily Mail, The Sun...
Tower block fire - london
- Thread starter robfosters
- Start date
Selling your videos to Sky, Daily Mail, The Sun...
TBH i'm glad. Some goul live streaming a child being thrown out of a 7th story window doesn't need to be seen. All for live streaming, live streaming snuff video's not so much.
Yes i know the baby was caught. We didn't know that until after it happened though eh ?
The media encourages it. Tweet us in your photos! Approaching them for their films for a fee. The people flock to it. Look at every incident and you see all the phone footage. Loads and loads filming rather than getting out of the way or helping.
Look at Sky even talking to people that were filming hidden behind balconies with gun incidents. Live via Skype. It wont change with money to be made from it all.
ultimately other people encourage it - anyone who watches these feeds encourages it... 'the media' doesn't' even need to play a role any more (and in fact tend to be rather sensitive about what they will publish) - people can happily live stream on Facebook, youtube, twitch etc..
I think it's disgusting personally. Like the London bridge attack. That tourist wondering around recording the worst moments in someone's life and the media gleefully replaying it. I get there was nothing the tourist could do but stay out of the way and leave them alone ffs.
I dont like the idea of media regulation but stuff like that and posting the private details of people innocent of any crime is beyond what is needed for a story.
Absolutely right.
The bbc film crew at the Bradford Stadium Fire received terrible abuse for continuing to film, but the footage was invaluable in the investigation.
The Intelligence services are the ones who are gleeful, potentially infinite video evidence that they never had before. I agree its distasteful, but the benefits indeed overwhelm the problems to society.
There is a level to it - the video of someone going from person to person lying on the ground was ghoulish and unnecessary to publish - same with the Shoreham Airshow crash where bystanders were having to tell someone to stop filming due to the sensitive nature of what they were doing - but I don't see a problem with a general recording of what is going on it can be useful to give people an idea of how to react to or avoid these situations, etc. potentially saving lives.
It is free for all now. It needs to be regulated because it is proven they cannot police themselves.
I imagine getting an accurate casualty figure is very hard. Compare it to the tragedy in Manchester which took place at a concert. The authorities had a starting point of a list of ticket sales and staff. They could contact potential victim's families to find out if their loved ones had made it home or called them. Even with the Manchester tragedy it was still a few days to confirm several of the victims. Here they have official tenants but no guarantee that they were home, no idea what visitors they might have had at any given time, who is flat-sharing or subletting unofficially. They can't call Mr. X's home to see if his family have heard from him because it is the home that has just burned down. They can go to NHS records or equivalent and look up next of kin - but often times that will again be the address that just burned down. If they enter apartment of Mrs. Y. and find a dead body maybe it's her. But it could be her sister, her housemate, a friend, someone from another apartment who fled to hers... Identifying a body in a crime scene is easier than identifying one of very many. Especially with those that burned rather than died of smoke inhalation, I'm very sorry to say.
And then you come to the fact that they haven't been able to access all areas yet. It's a reasonable guess that when they found they couldn't stay where they were and when they found they couldn't go down - a lot of people fled up. And the top is still unstable last I read.They don't want to start announcing people as dead who might yet be alive. And there are many people who would be in there that nobody alive knows they were in there. It's very sad. It doesn't surprise me that casualty figures are slow in coming.
THis interview makes me feel a bit queasy about the potential number of casualties. Plus the video mentioned a few posts ago from people stuck on the 23rd floor
https://twitter.com/UKGrime/status/875301073015230464
Her account isn't necessarily consistent with what we've heard about fire crew response times, but the way so many were stuck in the building....
https://twitter.com/UKGrime/status/875301073015230464
Her account isn't necessarily consistent with what we've heard about fire crew response times, but the way so many were stuck in the building....
Indeed. I couldn't bring myself to watch much of the BBC coverage, which was from a distance. I kept abreast of developments, but I had no desire to watch every second of footage knowing I was watching people dying. I wouldn't want to see anything in more detail, it's too ghoulish.
That said, it's important that people do film these events (in a respectful manner) because the footage can be useful for investigations afterwards and it prevents cover ups. And it's also the case that sadly we can't trust the bias and honesty of the traditional media anymore. So until the media are properly regulated, people will have to do the reporting for themselves.
It's London I can't imagine much of the attack wasn't on camera already. There are also ways of submitting videos to intelligence services rather than ********/daily mail.
I do agree there could well be a benefit but I sincerely struggle to see what the intelligence services could have learned from the video I mentioned.
No don't get me wrong I have no issues with general recording especially if it serves the purpose you mention but all too many seem to be aimed at being as graphic as possible.
General recording I can see a use for as it adds to an article getting up close and filming some poor sods fighting for their lives while a paramedic is working on them just seems wrong. I realise I'm arguing an emotional argument but there really isn't much of a logical one to go with it.
Sadly the media in general seem to lap up the latter so it's a never ending cycle.
Don't really see a problem with people filming, in fact quite the opposite. History should be preserved and filming is one of the best ways to do that. I also think the press should show more than they do. We're so protected in a giant bubble in case anyone gets slightly offended, then when stuff does happen people get traumatised because they've never even realised stuff can look the way it does. Plus there's how the videos could be used as evidence.
There's much more important things to worry about.
There's much more important things to worry about.
Oh great so lots of blood and gore on the news becomes the new acceptable norm? That has nothing to do with living in a bubble or being offended. I don't want to see that stuff if I watch the news which is another reason I rarely watch it these days. Well one of many reasons. "Please look away as its very graphic" You rarely hear this nowadays. Straight to the footage to report reactions from twitter to share across everyones TV sets.
Desensitise the nation.
One time on the news blood wasn't even allowed to be shown.
It was bad enough hearing bodies crash off the buildings from 9/11 that I refused to watch this event as it reminded me a lot of it on a smaller scale. Nor did I go looking for any footage online.
any evidence that they post more gore than any other papers?
What, with the Murdoch empire? Good luck with that.