AddThis SmartLayers

Johnston Press shows 'poverty of ambition' says NUJ

The National Union of Journalists has accused regional publisher Johnston Press of showing a “poverty of ambition” over plans to axe ten photographic roles in its southern division.

As reported by HTFP earlier this week, staff photographers across JP’s Sussex and Hampshire titles are at risk of redundancy following a review of our photographic content is generated.

According to the NUJ, 13 photographers are under threatat the southern titles which include The News, Portsmouth, the Chichester Observer, West Sussex County Times, and Hastings and St Leonards Observer.

However three new roles are to be created across the division, one covering Hampshire, one in West Sussex and one in East Sussex. It is thought that the 13 photographers whose jobs are at risk will be able to apply for these new roles.

Laura Davison, NUJ national organiser, said: “Johnston Press shows a poverty of ambition in this announcement. The company does not appear to recognise the importance of high-quality pictures in attracting readers to their publications, whether print or digital.

“It is questionable whether readers will want to pay for content which they have provided themselves. Outsourcing the taking of pictures to the public, or offering photographers inferior freelance arrangements, with low rates and few rights, as has been done elsewhere in Johnston Press, is counterproductive.

“These jobs should be done in house by staff. This is particularly true in light of the continuing emphasis which the industry is placing on video for web and mobile devices.

“Many Johnston press photographers have gone the extra mile in engaging with these digital initiatives and the company is wrong to put this in jeopardy.”

The current proposal follows similar content reviwes in other JP divisions which has seen staff photographer roles disappear across Scotland, the North West and the Midlands.

JP said in a statement earlier this week: “A number of photographic roles have been placed at risk in the South Publishing Unit of Johnston Press following a proposal to change the way photographic content is generated.

“Local managers are making these difficult decisions to help ensure a sustainable, multi-platform future for local journalism. The company is committed to being as supportive as possible in making this transition to a successful digital future. Consultation is now under way with affected staff.”

Today a spokeswoman said the company had nothing to add to its earlier statement.

12 comments

You can follow all replies to this entry through the comments feed.
  • October 15, 2014 at 2:08 pm
    Permalink

    Jeepers, that JP statement says so much more than they probably intended.
    I used to envy photographers. Nowadays, not so much…

    Report this comment

    Like this comment(0)
  • October 15, 2014 at 3:53 pm
    Permalink

    “…the way photographic content is generated”? Is JP trying to say “who takes the pictures”? All we need now is a “going forward” to mark this backward step. Prepare for a series of passport pictures and holiday snaps on the pages of JP’s titles. Terrible decision.

    Report this comment

    Like this comment(0)
  • October 15, 2014 at 3:55 pm
    Permalink

    More like ‘Johnston Press just shows poverty’ really

    Report this comment

    Like this comment(0)
  • October 15, 2014 at 4:40 pm
    Permalink

    I’m a photographer. Not at JP. Where I work you can setup a photo, someone from the council or whoever stands behind you and takes the same photo (plagiarism). Then by the time you get back to the office you see their photo all over the bloody shop on the website. Madness.

    Report this comment

    Like this comment(0)
  • October 15, 2014 at 4:51 pm
    Permalink

    JP is expert at managing decline. Here is another negative move dressed up as progress. Do they think staff and readers are thick?

    Report this comment

    Like this comment(0)
  • October 15, 2014 at 9:20 pm
    Permalink

    Shares down 10% since Monday, looking at LSE shares site, it looks like Mr Highfield didn’t exercise his shares rights. Confidence in the company?

    Report this comment

    Like this comment(0)
  • October 15, 2014 at 11:21 pm
    Permalink

    Editors need to stand up to the people running this industry, and be counted, instead of keeping their heads below the parapet in an attempt to stay in the job as long as they can. If editors fought to return to the days when they were the decision makers and put the product first, then our profession might not be the shambles it is today.

    Report this comment

    Like this comment(0)
  • October 16, 2014 at 11:12 am
    Permalink

    Northern Hack you are so right. Lots of pathetic changes have been forced on papers that should have been resisted, but it’s too late.
    Problem is many papers don’t have proper editors. many have creatures called content editors, who are basically production people fiddling around making stories fit pre-prepared shapes and have little time and often little talent for proper editing and guiding staff.
    I worked for two editors who were prepared to stand up to all the top management nonsense thrown at their once-respected papers. They are no longer employed by the company.
    But editors are like rest of us, they have to pay the rent or the mortgage and would rather bow to every missive than lose their jobs. Not great for their papers or all that professional, but understandable in today’s mouldy jobs market.

    Report this comment

    Like this comment(0)
  • October 16, 2014 at 11:19 am
    Permalink

    Looking at my local weekly paper there is not one staff photographer picture on the sports page. All contributed, presumably for nil cost. (accountant runs hands with glee).Some pix are usable but others should have been clicked to the recycle bin pronto. No pride anymore JP?

    Report this comment

    Like this comment(0)
  • October 16, 2014 at 11:21 am
    Permalink

    sports PAGES, I meant. things are not that bad yet! Coverage is half decent decent word wise but oh! some of the pix.

    Report this comment

    Like this comment(0)
  • October 17, 2014 at 9:50 am
    Permalink

    Focus in this. Ten years ago JP shares about 600p. Today a pinch over 3p. Allowing even for last share issue this is worrying for surviving staff.
    Maybe group editors can be dispensed with and have regional editors. They do little hands on work anyway, mostly meetings and creeping round local worthies.

    Report this comment

    Like this comment(0)