B&H Photo -- workers conditions

[AcutancePhotography]

This situation needs to be investigated and if guilty, punishments levied.

But right now we are only reading one side of the story.

 

[ahsanford]

It is amazing how a single uncorroborated report, short on facts and first-hand evidence, has brought out various underlying political biases on all sides.

Well, in retrospect, not so amazing.

I would like to recommend that either this entire thread be closed down, or if not, that at least people should take a wait-and-see approach rather than projecting their own opinions and speculations as to what is going on or what it says about Qatar, Jews, Muslims, immigration illegal or otherwise, labor unions, consumer greed, corporate greed, labor practices in China or labor practices in general, and the availability of fake Hitler mustaches for this Halloween season.

A number of us have been clear that we need to hear from a 2nd news organization before this starts to look real.

But people blasting AJA for anti-semitic intent are almost certainly out of line. The author is American, for starters, and the photographer is Jewish man from New York. I see activism at play here -- nothing more.

But let's wait and see. Right now it's just re-linking + forum commentary at this stage. But if NYT, WaPo, Reuters, AP, etc. pick this up, look out.

- A

 

[AlanF]

Personally, I think one of three things will occur:

• B&H will sue Al-Jazeera if they are making this up.
• B&H will publish a statement defending itself if some of it is true but there were extenuating circumstances or if AJ has rendered something that we know happened in an overly negative manner.
• B&H will say nothing, which will invite other investigative journalists to dig deeper / corroborate the story.

In all three cases, it's in B&H's best interests to act immediately before this story gets legs.

- A

I don't think your advice is good. First, B&H won't sue because to win a defamation case in the USA, unlike in the UK, you have to prove that the libellers acted either negligently or with actual malice, and that is usually nigh impossible to prove. So, libel suits are very rare - the usual winners in libel cases are the lawyers.

Secondly, when dealing with organizations of low repute like AJ, ignoring them is the recommended course of action. It's only when a reputable organization starts making claims that defence is required.

 

[YuengLinger]

Unions, Arab/Israeli, Moslem/Jewish, illegal immigration, news media bias...

Isn't there a critical mass of flashpoints here to close this thread as political? It is only a matter of time before it gets ugly.

Please, mods, there has to be a way to keep us posted on relevant business issues without risking a lot of hostility with this type of thread.

I've said it before: CR is a sanctuary, a place to learn and have good-natured debates about photography. At least that's what I've thought.

 

[ahsanford]

And something remotely resembling legitimacy -- PetaPixel -- has now picked up the story:

http://petapixel.com/2015/10/13/bh-slammed-with-accusations-of-mistreatment-and-discrimination/

Again, just a re-link and update. No pickups from other news agencies or added evidence.

I was expecting folks who might court B&H dollars to avoid this like the plague, but they surprised me here.

- A

 

[ahsanford]

Unions, Arab/Israeli, Moslem/Jewish, illegal immigration, news media bias...

Isn't there a critical mass of flashpoints here to close this thread as political? It is only a matter of time before it gets ugly.

Please, mods, there has to be a way to keep us posted on relevant business issues without risking a lot of hostility with this type of thread.

I've said it before: CR is a sanctuary, a place to learn and have good-natured debates about photography. At least that's what I've thought.

Respectfully, I started this thread devoid of any opinion on:

Al-Jazeera vs. Jewish businesses

Free markets vs. organized labor

I just want to share visibility to the story, find any corroboration / rebuttal to it folks may have found, and possibly discuss the criteria we use when we choose our photography retailers. Nothing more.

I think that topic is 100% appropriate for this forum and should continue.

And with respect to our moderators, the topic is radioactive for posting as a CR story as CR may use / may want to use B&H as a sponsor someday. A forum is the place to discuss this.

- A

 

[YuengLinger]

And something remotely resembling legitimacy -- PetaPixel -- has now picked up the story:

http://petapixel.com/2015/10/13/bh-slammed-with-accusations-of-mistreatment-and-discrimination/

Again, just a re-link and update. No pickups from other news agencies or added evidence.

I was expecting folks who might court B&H dollars to avoid this like the plague, but they surprised me here.

- A

How is a "re-link and update" anything like confirmation?

Your posts are fanning the flames of a little fire you chose to start here. I'm not questioning your motives, just observing. You seem to be on a mission.

Which is a great reason to lock the thread. Hopefully B&H will make a statement, and it will get reposted just as often as the accusations--for balance.

I have no affiliation with B&H, other than as a customer, but I really like to see CR remain free of political controversy, racial controversy, religious controversy...And this thread is cleverly attempting to spark them all.

 

[unfocused]

I find it disturbing that so many want to shut down debate and discussion.

The discussion has been fair and not in the least bit out-of-hand. Life is controversial. Get over it.

That said, I fully expect this thread to get shut down. Censorship is beloved on this forum.

 

[AlanF]

In the UK where you don't have to prove malice to win a libel case, people have been successfully sued for re-tweeting a libellous tweet on Twitter.

We are in the middle of an unpleasant episode here where a politician, from the safety of parliamentary privilege, had vilely accused a dying former senior politician of child abuse and rape, based on unsubstantiated evidence, which was subsequently ruled out by the police as unreliable (and the dying man not told). The unpleasant politician isn't backing down and is claiming he was in the right to hound in the interest of the "victims". It's best to be sure of ones facts before pressing a case.

 

[YuengLinger]

I find it disturbing that so many want to shut down debate and discussion.

The discussion has been fair and not in the least bit out-of-hand. Life is controversial. Get over it.

That said, I fully expect this thread to get shut down. Censorship is beloved on this forum.

It's not about what is said, it's about where the discussion is held. A non-political gear rumors site has a right to remain non-political and civil.

There are thousands of websites to discuss politics endlessly.

Other than either spreading unsubstantiated accusations and generating speculation, what is the point of the thread? What information was provided by the OP or any who followed that informs customers of the validity of claims made by a union looking for leverage going into a battle with B&H?

We don't know what efforts the reporter made to get B&H's side of the story. The "several attempts" could have been a few phone calls during a lunch hour.

The OP, just based on a one-sided story, has told us he/she is going to reconsider doing business with B&H. ahsanford, did you email B&H with your concerns?

All of these aspects, the flashpoints, the bias of the people telling their story as part of a union campaign, and, sadly, the source of the story, make this a political thread.

If CR wants political threads, fine--just restrict them to the appropriate sub-forums.