To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / 25109
25108  |  25110
Subject: 
Re: Politicians allowed to veto use of news footage?
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Wed, 28 Jul 2004 10:29:10 GMT
Viewed: 
1319 times
  
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Richard Parsons wrote:
   In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Ross Crawford wrote:
   Our largely taxpayer-funded free to air TV channel, the ABC, now says it can’t sell archival footage of politicians to 3rd party documentary makers, unless they get permission from the politician involved.

They think “...the ABC could be exposed to the risk of claims under the Trade Practices Act or pursuant to the tort of Passing Off.”

ianal, but I have had a passing association with both the TPA and torts, and this sounds like drivel, and not even very entertaining drivel.
  
Anyone else know of any news/media organisations that have the same policy? Seems a bit silly to me.

Mmmmm. Sounds like the ABC is only a step or two away from starting Winston’s work in the Ministry of Truth, hunting back through records and histories to expunge ‘errors’ in the name of ‘truth’. After all, if a politican indicates that she will never authorise re-use of the material, why bother keeping it. In the name of efficiency, it may as well be deleted.

Hansard, the official reporting service of parliament, sends drafts of transcripts of the happenings in the houses to politicians involved to enable them to confirm the transcript before printing, and there is some politic cleaning up of impolitic words here and there, but never to change the sense, much less try to conceal the evidence of what took place.

I’d say ‘watch this space’. I doubt that this will be allowed to stand...

I did a quick search, but could find no other reference to this story. I feel that ABC should only withhold material if there is a risk that it may be misused. I know the BBC no longer releases its Hillsborough footage due to the risk of misuse (See example of misuse). It is also not normal for UK media outlets to allow footage to be used in court cases unless a court order has been obtained.

Hansard in the UK is normally edited to clear up mispronounced words etc, but I’m sure the politicians are not involved in this process.

Scott A



  
Richard
Still baldly going...



Message is in Reply To:
  Re: Politicians allowed to veto use of news footage?
 
(...) ianal, but I have had a passing association with both the TPA and torts, and this sounds like drivel, and not even very entertaining drivel. (...) Mmmmm. Sounds like the ABC is only a step or two away from starting Winston's (URL) work> in the (...) (20 years ago, 28-Jul-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

5 Messages in This Thread:



Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR