Principled Photographer or Bad Businessperson?

jdfaith

Interesting story that will probably generate more in publicity and long-term gain than the short-term loss of income. Personally, I feel she did the right thing and will benefit from those actions.

Your perspectives are appreciated.

Photographer Says No to Bullies

littlebayzombie

Good for her!

Molotov Everything

Well she did the right thing, and even though I'm sure it wasn't her intention, this is probably going to end up as a good business move for her. I saw this story hit the main page of Fark this week, which means tens of thousands of people probably saw it. That's just fantastic free advertising. So hopefully she gets some good karma from this and picks up a few more clients from this story.

kd2

I was just coming here to post this story. I think what she did is awesome. It's about time we started upholding morals and ethics instead of glamorizing and promoting bad behavior.

ThatCanonGuy

I'm happy for her. I know, everyone is saying this, but guess what, she deserves it. That decision couldn't have been easy. That's hundreds of dollars. It's so good to know that there are some people in this world who care about doing the right thing, at any cost. Just goes to show, choosing right always pays. It might take awhile, it might not be obvious, it may seem impossible, but you always get rewarded for it. Now, like Molotov Everything said, her business gets publicity in front of thousands, probably millions, of people. I think the business this gets for her will far outweigh the profit she would've gotten.

FlyNavy

What would you do?
http://news.yahoo.com/photographer-refuses-portraits-facebook-bullies-163500977.html

A Pennsylvania photographer canceled senior photo sessions with four high school girls after spotting nasty comments they made on Facebook.
Jennifer McKendrick says she came across a 'burn book' Facebook page, created by teens for writing negative comments about their classmates. You might think it's a phase every gossipy high schooler goes through, but this one went a little too far, at least for McKendrick. Appalled by the cruel comments, the photographer also realized that the names on the screen matched the names of the clients who made an appointment with her for their senior photos.
(MORE: How to Bully-Proof Young Girls)
McKendrick decided to cancel the sessions and posted on her blog that she doesn't want to photograph "ugly people."
"Realistically I know by canceling their shoots it's not going to make them 'nicer people,'" she wrote. "But I refuse to let people like that represent my business."
Then, she emailed the four girls and their parents. She sent them explanations of why she was canceling the appointment along with screen shots of the mean Facebook comments as a proof. Later, she reported on her blog that two parents replied with apologies and saying that they were shocked by their daughters' actions.
(VIDEO: Chris Colfer Talks, Glee, Bullying and Being Yourself)
In an interview with WTAE-TV, McKendrick said that the students' comments crossed the line.
"It was beyond 'your clothes are ugly' or 'you don't have any brand clothes' or 'you are ugly, your hair is not right,'" she told WTAE-TV. "It was vicious. It was talking about sexuality."
So far, McKendrick's received floods of support on Facebook and her blog, but she said she is ready for criticisms.

DavidTO

I merged two threads on the same topic.

Snowgirl

Good for her! I hope Karma smiles on her and frowns on the nasty girls.

Sam

Yeah, it all sounds good now but wait until the ACLU gets wind of this and the multimillion dollar law suits begin.

Sam

mercphoto

This could truly have been a big mistake. Was there a morals clause in the contract? I can honestly see how this could be a legit discrimination issue. We can legally pick and choose who we do business with to a point. And contracts can only be broken for certain reasons. Moral repugnance might not be one of them.

Turn the table, what if a client discovered something about you that they did not approve of and tried to get out of a contract and demand the deposit back?

dbveto

Mercphoto you are so correct, although I agree with her it could have went the other way for her.

Demian

I think it's a smart move on her part. She avoids having cruel people represent her business, it gives her a reputation as an ethical photographer, and it shows she's in enough demand to be able to turn down business.

I can't imagine she would have many legal issues. There's no slander (as her accusations are true and documented), and I assume any paperwork was to protect her, not the client. Even if she did have a contract, there aren't really any actual damages to sue for...

r3t1awr3yd

mercphoto wrote: »

This could truly have been a big mistake. Was there a morals clause in the contract? I can honestly see how this could be a legit discrimination issue. We can legally pick and choose who we do business with to a point. And contracts can only be broken for certain reasons. Moral repugnance might not be one of them.

Turn the table, what if a client discovered something about you that they did not approve of and tried to get out of a contract and demand the deposit back?

Not if it's a non-refundable deposit as per the contract lol.

Why not though? I asked a while back on here whether anyone else decided to pass on certain wedding clients because of conflicting personalities and people wholeheartedly agree that if I felt like I couldn't work with a certain person, that I could choose not too. Just like people get to choose the businesses they frequent, businesses and pick the markets they are shooting for. I think that's what demographics are for

(Ever read just about anything that's come out of the mouth of the owner of holister? He doesn't care if you get any attention in the store or if you can't fit in their 30" men's jeans...)