ASMP/NY dedicates this page to Joseph Pobereskin, a truly dedicated ASMP member and one who has inspired us to think about this particular subject. ASMPNY invites you to send us your opinions about whether you are a content provider or a photographer.  webmaster

 

"Attention please everyone: I think the time has come for us to stop calling ourselves 'content providers,' even in jest. It's demeaning and, I think, insulting. We are photographers!"
Joseph Pobereskin

"Stock is a nickname for 'stock photography.' We all know what that means. 'Content' can mean anything, like what's inside a jar. Tomato growers are content providers. Photographers and illustrators don't need new names. But if you want to refer to them as a collective group, 'contributing artists' suits me just fine."
Tim Olive

"D*** it, we're photographers and that stands no matter whose brilliant idea it is to change the terminology of a time honored profession. I haven't just spent 50 years of my life as a working photojournalist to have myself called a "content provider!" Help hold my head I'm about to puke!"
Ted Grant

"We all have a right to be emotional about terms like content provider. Actually, each and every photographer ought to be outraged by the devaluation of our profession. It is definitely degrading- without question. And once again, it is an example of photography being viewed as a commodity. A can of beans, a frozen diner, or such. And we just seem to go along with it. To wit, are chefs sustenance providers? Are writers text providers?"
George Fulton

"Everyone is so hot under the collar about being called a content provider. For years companies have put me on their list of "vendors." Sounds like something you feed a few quarters to get a stale cookie."
Jonathan Clymer

"I think perhaps some companies have coined the term "content provider" to reduce the value of what photographers do so that our work isn't worth as much. If the 'photograph' is taken away from 'photographers' and we are labeled merely "content providers", why pay us as much as if we are photographers and authors of what we create? A content provider isn't an artist, after all. But I won't buy into that new terminology."
Penny Gentieu

"They call themselves "art buyers" and call us "content providers." In this equation, Art (Buyer) > Content (Provider). Can that be so? I thought: Art = Content & Content = Art  Now, condense the equation: Art (Buyer) = Art (Provider). This is how it ought to be. In calling us "content providers" while calling themselves "art buyers," the clientele reduces our standing and therefore devalues our work."
Joseph Pobereskin

"Its up to all of us NOT to allow people to think of us as content providers, but as conceptual thinkers whose valuable craft elevates perceptions, whose images influence people, who touch the sub-conscious of the audience, who illustrate moments in history, and create invaluable impact in communications. 'Cause that's exactly the way it is. LETS UNITE AND USE TERMS THAT REFLECT OUR VALUE! Not in terms of how we fit into someone else's grand scheme of the marketplace! Lets start right now."
George Fulton