In recent years, there has been an increasing opinion by the masses, that anyone can get shots as good as professionals, if they have the right gear. This has been one of the drivers towards the slashing of budgets by (or for) photo editors. Yes, the recession has played its part, but how many previous recessions have resulted in photo editors trying to do things on the cheap? The digital age has certainly played its part in the exposure of photography, allowing people to take photographs with good gear to an extent that wasn't previously possible, but this has led to a number of myths and misconceptions. Perhaps this incident will act as a wake up call to photo editors and to organisers of such shoots, that the results achieved are important and to get good results, you have to have the proper planning and expertise. You may not have to have formal qualifications to get memorable photographs on a regular basis (as opposed to one-offs), but you certainly need to gain experience through hard work and practice and above all overall talent. Hopefully, it will make those in charge of budgets, that it is in their interests to pay for the level of photography that is needed, you get what you pay for and ultimately quality is what sells. If you have better imagery than your competitor magazines (for example), then provided the content is what the potential customers want, then you have an advantage.