Trump Makes Headlines

...But not in a good way. Click past the break at your discretion. (Don't want to make anyone upset.)

The headlines:

"She Took the White House Photos. Trump Moved to Take the Profit." (The New York Times)

"Trump swooped in to profit from White House photographer’s book deal—report" (The Guardian, UK)

"Trump Swooped In and Published Own Book Using White House Photographer’s Portfolio" (The Wrap)

"Trump's team asked 'for a cut' of his White House photographer's book deal before he sold his own version for $230: NYT" (Business Insider)

"Ex-White House Chief Photographer Won't Release Her Own Book After Trump Released His: Report" (People)

"Trump tried to take profits from book of photos published by White House photographer, report says" (The Independent, UK)

"Donald Trump tried to profit off former White House photographer's book, sold his own instead" (DPReview)

"Trump Undercut White House Photographer’s Plans to Sell a Photo Book" (PetaPixel)

It isn't the first time a photographer got screwed.

Eric Lipton and Maggie Haberman did the original reporting.

Mike

Book o' the Week

It's Not About the F-Stop by Jay Maisel. Jay was suggested by Moose and this book was suggested by Albert Smith—it's actually my favorite too (I got mixed up before). I got to meet Jay Maisel once. Everybody should meet him in his books, if they haven't already. Might help; cannot hurt. Jay's is some of the most positive, hopeful, and generous picture-taking advice you'll find.

This book link is a portal to Amazon.

B&H can do it all.

Original contents copyright 2020 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.

(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:

Comments

[Craig]

It’s Trump, what do you expect? His whole life has been a series of cons and ripoffs. It’s appalling that anyone ever thought for a moment that he should be President, even if the alternative was Hillary Clinton.

[Rob Griffin]

In my opinion, this doesn't seem like something that a TRUE "man of the people" would even consider doing. Just sayin'.

[Sal Santamaura]

Anyone who associated themselves with him deserves the screwing they get.

[Robert Roaldi]

Is his book selling?

[Kodachromeguy]

Well, there is no denying that the T administration refined kleptocracy to the heights of depravity. Did anyone have any doubt that this practice would carry over to reaming people, especially his supporters, after the presidency?

[Giovanni Maggiora]

Why is it I'm not surprised?

[Dogman]

"Stop the Steal!"
--His own words.

[darlene]

It's always been a man's world. This guy just flaunts it.

[Patrick Perez]

IIRC, this is a vanity press release. He (indirectly) is the publisher. So he's depriving the photographer of potential sales, while selling at an inflated price and retaining all profits, by selling to those that would purchase the book.

Patrick

[Herman krieger]

Trump with his bible-

[Amos]

The expressed viewpoint is as strange as thinking that a wedding is about the wedding photographer. Nope, its about the bride and groom.

Legalistically, these presidential photographs are probably a work for hire, and not the photographer's property. At least they should be, given their importance. Except when in public, it is also hard to imagine that presidential photographs could be obtained without presidential consent, or that consent would be given without thought to being able to use the images.

These are not artistic photographs by a creative photographer at their own initiative, and expense. They presumably are purchased, documenting an historic event, a presidency. A federal photographic record purchased at public expense, if I'm not mistaken, is immediately public domain, and may not be copyrighted. It's also odd to be attacking the former President apparently without any thought about such rights issues.

More importantly, presidential photographs are about the presidency much more than about the photographer.

Faulting the President for publishing about his presidency is just such weird thinking.

[We're faulting the former President for taking advantage of his photographer. We're on the side of photographers here, that's all. If you're on his side and not hers, that's up to you. --Mike]

[Andrew Sheppard]

'Don't want to upset anybody'? If that means people being told about things he actually does, I believe their phraseology would be 'suck it up, snowflake'. They just have to chew on it - if they don't like what they're hearing, then they shouldn't like him.