Improving images used to depict ME/CFS

You have to understand the process by which journalists and editors obtain these photos. I don't know how it works; I suspect it involves some sort of software or online program to access images, probably from respositories like Getty that host stock images. The first step is to understand the process. Anyone got any friends who work in a media room?

We've been through this before. The images of patients have been collected. The ME Association ran the Real M.E. campaign a couple of years ago, but I was told that the images could only be used by the ME Association (which they have been).

Edit: Peter White at Forward-ME was looking into this. We spoke about it over Twitter in summer.
 
Last edited:
InitialConditions said:
You have to understand the process by which journalists and editors obtain these photos. I don't know how it works; I suspect it involves some sort of software or online program to access images, probably from respositories like Getty that host images that have no copyright. The first step is to understand the process. Anyone got any friends who work in a media room?

We've been through this before. The images of patients have been collected. The ME Association ran the Real M.E. campaign a couple of years ago, but I was told that the images could only be used by the ME Association (which they have been).

Edit: Peter White at Forward-ME was looking into this. We spoke about it over Twitter in summer.
Click to expand...


They likely have licenses for obtaining stock images from providers like Getty. Cheaper than paying for individual photos.
 
InitialConditions said:
So what are the barriers? Lack of access?
Click to expand...

Complex consent and licensing issues will cause most of the obstructions. Asset libraries have all this resolved already, and each image comes with the conditions under which it can be used. Almost all major websites and publications have multiple library subscriptions, and they can simply download images and run them. I've often used stock assets myself, and it only takes a couple of minutes to obtain them.

Library photos are taken professionally and supplied in a number of different resolutions. This is because an image may be used for everything from a glossy coffee-table book to a website (and everything in between).

The key here is probably not going to be creating our own assets, but rather finding the tags that identify suitable existing stock.
 
Sly Saint said:
maybe we could tackle the problem from the supply end?
Have had a brief online chat with shutterstock and they say when I asked who decides how photos are categorised
"All of our images go through a review process by our content team"
"submit@shutterstock.com. Our contributor support team will further assist you."
Click to expand...
I don't think we know how we should tag our photos, because we don't know what photo editors are searching on. When you look at how they illustrate any health story, it's not disease-specific; it's generally just somebody in a hospital bed, or attached to a drip, or in a wheelchair, or whatever.

We need to ask a photo editor what they do when they have to illustrate an ME/CFS story.
 
Adrian said:
It can even be cheaper than using free photos where they would need to spend time checking out a license wo it seems important to get the right pictures in the repositories they use.
Click to expand...
The right photos may already be in those repositories. I found quite a few for the Phoenix Rising project. We just don't understand the problem from the photo editors' point of view, and I think we need to do that before we do anything else.

It's no good getting photos onto those stock libraries and getting them tagged with what we think are the right tags if those aren't the ones that the photo editors use for ME/CFS stories.
 
Sasha said:
The right photos may already be in those repositories. I found quite a few for the Phoenix Rising project. We just don't understand the problem from the photo editors' point of view, and I think we need to do that before we do anything else.

It's no good getting photos onto those stock libraries and getting them tagged with what we think are the right tags if those aren't the ones that the photo editors use for ME/CFS stories.
Click to expand...

It may be a case of getting someone to add better search terms. But I agree understanding the process that photo editors go through to select a photo is essential
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Sasha said:
But that would only be useful if we knew what tags photo editors would use to search.
Click to expand...

I'd think it would be "fatigue" in many cases, if they're left to their own devices.

But they're not left to their own devices, strictly speaking. Many articles come about following interviews where this could be discussed, and press releases can contain image suggestions.

Off the top of my head:

"Most stock photographs used to represent people with ME trivialise their illness by presenting a well-dressed model looking tired. In publishing these, editors unwittingly contribute to the prejudice, marginalisation, and dismissal aimed at patients, many of them women, who suffer from poorly-researched but devastating conditions. Please consider avoiding stock photographs of people altogether, and instead using the generic medical, science, and research images and graphics used to accompany items about other serious illnesses."
 
Kitty said:
Off the top of my head:
Click to expand...

Apologies, I posted that before I'd finished, because my cat was yelling into my ear that it's tea time. It's not, but anything for a quiet life.

Anyway...I'm not suggesting this would be a quick process. But the errors sometimes come about simply because picture eds don't realise they're representing a marginalised group. When they do, most of them are perfectly capable of engaging their brains before selecting images.

So where the charities, or the patient groups, or researchers, send out information to the media, I'm suggesting a nudging process. Once the thought is planted, some media outlets might be a bit more selective, a bit more aware of the underlying social and political messages they're conveying.

Some won't, of course. We probably know who they are already. :laugh:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom