Let's Play A Game: Anarchist Or Photo Op?

from the take-your-pic dept

Last week, there were student protests in the UK, concerning massively increased fees, and apparently on the fringes of the protests there was some violence, which of course the press picked up on, because "if it bleeds, it leads." Or, in this case, if it "kicks in a glass window, it leads." Apparently a whole bunch of newspapers all carried the same photo on their front covers. I've posted all nine such covers after the jump, but here are a couple just to give you the idea:
However, as some have noted, what may be more interesting is that if you look at a wider lens version of a similar image, you see that the guy kicking in the glass appears to be surrounded by a ton of photographers. In fact, the whole thing almost looks like a setup, with every single newspaper cropping out the photographers:
It looks like the wide angle shot was taken either seconds before, or seconds after the shot used by all the papers, but it's pretty close. Of course, with so many photographers, it does seem a bit odd that the newspapers all seemed to use a single photograph for their covers. What happened to the images from the others? Anyway, see the nine covers after the jump.

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 16 Nov 2010 @ 10:42am

    Is that a police officer just looking on as well?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Jackie Danicki, 16 Nov 2010 @ 10:47am

    They also took over the roof of the HQ of the ruling party, the Tories, and dropped two fire extinguishers onto the ground below - narrowly missing killing a police officer, from what I've read. This photo is pretty darn perfect, so I can't really fault them all for using it - a bunch of upper-middle-class white boys on the roof of a building isn't nearly as evocative.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Yogi, 16 Nov 2010 @ 10:48am

    Nothing new

    So MSM journalists staged a scene of violence - what else is new? and what's your point anyway?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 16 Nov 2010 @ 10:48am

    Sorry I missed what "other" photographs there are. Care to elaborate?

    From the perspective of the editing, the photographers in frame aren't interesting, and detract from the feeling of 'pure rage' from the protesters.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 16 Nov 2010 @ 10:59am

      Re:

      There's 50 photographers all in a semi-circle waiting for this guy, and you're wondering what other photographs there are?

      I suppose 49 of them are just prop actors, and only 1 of them is a professional.


      ....actually, that wouldn't surprise me.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Gabriel Tane (profile), 16 Nov 2010 @ 11:00am

      Re:

      the other photographs taken by the dozens of photographers surrounding the scene?

      And the photographers spoiling the 'pure rage' feeling? well, we wouldn't want something like reality or even reader-interpretation to de-sensationalize the news, now would we?

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        ChurchHatesTucker (profile), 16 Nov 2010 @ 11:46am

        Re: Re:

        Isn't there a law about 'inciting to violence?' Shouldn't these photogs be charged?

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          Free Capitalist (profile), 16 Nov 2010 @ 12:23pm

          Re: Re: Re:

          Isn't there a law about 'inciting to violence?' Shouldn't these photogs be charged?

          They have been good fear-mongering mouthpieces for decades, no sense starting to hold them accountable to the law like commoners.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    PhotoOp, 16 Nov 2010 @ 10:50am

    Get my best side...

    Yep, that's a Bobby in the background. And in front of the Bobby is a photographer with a tripod all ready for the "spontaneous outrage" from the "student".

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      ac, 16 Nov 2010 @ 11:56am

      Re: Get my best side...

      that's a good point. there are a bunch of people surrounding this one "rioter" all with what appear to be enthusiast class cameras, one with a tripod set up and a bobby watching. Random acts of violence happen too quickly for this sort of scene to set up. that or this person was kicking the window for 5 straight minutes trying to break it, in which case, that bobby is in no hurry.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        Jason Sands (profile), 17 Nov 2010 @ 5:16am

        Re: Re: Get my best side...

        Anyone who's looked at video of the event will have seen that it took multiple kicks to break the glass, so there was plenty of time for the photographers to move forward.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Jake, 16 Nov 2010 @ 11:15am

    If anyone's wondering why the police aren't reacting, there were about twenty protesters for every cop and the riot squad was nowhere nearby (something the right-wing papers have been collectively ripping them a new one about), so they were ordered not to intervene unless it looked like the rioters were going to lynch someone.

    Mind you, the political party whose headquarters is being wrecked in that picture is also slashing the police budget, which will mean lay-offs and a gutted pension scheme. One can't help but feel that even if the police had been capable of putting down the riot, their hearts wouldn't really have been in it.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    John Doe, 16 Nov 2010 @ 11:17am

    Actually, the Guardian and Daily Express ran a different photo than the others. Can't really tell if they both ran the same photo as each other though it appears they did.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 16 Nov 2010 @ 11:45am

      Re:

      They are different (the upraised arm is posed differently).

      The Express pic actually seems to be from a slightly different position as well, a bit to the right.

      Only the Express pic seems to show the expansive gaggle of photogs as well.

      The cropped version is a great shot, imo, if not telling the whole story. Not surprised it's being so widely used.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 16 Nov 2010 @ 11:23am

    Looks like the guardian used a different photo then all the rest, look at the guys arm above his head. The angle is the same, so it was probably still from the same photographer.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    weneedhelp (profile), 16 Nov 2010 @ 11:23am

    agent provocateur

    Lemme guess, the "student" is wearing the same boots as the cops.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=St1-WTc1kow

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    bishboria (profile), 16 Nov 2010 @ 11:24am

    Most of those 9 pictures are the same photo, you can see the way the "window kicker" is holding his arms. The Guardian, and maybe The Express, has a different picture (again based on how the kicker's arm is held), but even then I only noticed by studying it.

    I wonder how many of those Newspapers Rupert Murdoch owns...

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      crade (profile), 16 Nov 2010 @ 11:39am

      Re:

      Yes, it looks like they used at least 3 photos.
      I'm sure they only used the ones from that side because they capture that little fire there as well.
      It looks like he kicked the glass several times, which is probably why everyone had time to set up.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    SLK8ne, 16 Nov 2010 @ 11:41am

    Knock, knock Neo.

    This post perfectly illustrates why I hate the "news" media. (I never refer to them anymore without quotes) How much of what we see from ALL the news outlets is manufactured? Most of what is put out by the "news" industry is illusion. This is only the tip of the iceberg.

    Wake up, the Matrix has you Neo!

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Jackie D (profile), 16 Nov 2010 @ 11:46am

    One more thing

    These protesters aren't "anarchists" - far from it. They advocate for a huge government that takes care of them from cradle to grave. (The NUS is notoriously socialist.) As a near-anarchist, I am a little sickened at the idea of people like this being associated with anarchism.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      crade (profile), 16 Nov 2010 @ 12:00pm

      Re: One more thing

      Anarchism is a myth. Without rules, whoever can will obviously just take over and makes their own rules. It's not like we haven't seen this happen before. You can call them a gang instead of a government if you want, but it doesn't change anything.

      Everyone just wants the government to enforce their own version of what they think the rules should be. People who claim they want "less" government are full of crap and just want differently focused rules.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        Free Capitalist (profile), 16 Nov 2010 @ 12:30pm

        Re: Re: One more thing

        Everyone just wants the government to enforce their own version of what they think the rules should be. People who claim they want "less" government are full of crap and just want differently focused rules.

        You would make a terrible anarchist.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        akston, 16 Nov 2010 @ 12:42pm

        Re: Re: One more thing

        @crade

        > Without rules, whoever can will obviously just take over and makes their own rules
        > Everyone just wants the government to enforce their own version of what they think the rules should be

        You should look up Libertarianism - by which I mean the modern sense of the term. It avoids both these pitfalls by making it the government's job to protect individual rights and *nothing else*. The principle is to remove the initiation of force and fraud from human relationships.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          crade (profile), 16 Nov 2010 @ 12:50pm

          Re: Re: Re: One more thing

          Exactly. Differently focused rules.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • icon
            crade (profile), 16 Nov 2010 @ 1:02pm

            Re: Re: Re: Re: One more thing

            You might find this focus of rules to be "natural", but someone who thinks differently (plucked from a communal tribal society for instance) might think this particular focus of rules is very restrictive on their rights and lobby for "less government" where the government isn't controlling what things they are allowed to use and where they are allowed to walk.

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          out_of_the_blue, 16 Nov 2010 @ 2:40pm

          Re: Re: Re: One more thing: Libertarianism is a disguise for plutocracy.

          Those who are Rich make the rules *unless* the general populace keeps them strictly limited. -- I make no bones about advocating that gov't be *used* as a weapon against the obvious and historical enemies of the people.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        PunksUndead, 16 Nov 2010 @ 3:07pm

        Re: Re: One more thing

        "Anarchism is a myth. Without rules, whoever can will obviously just take over and makes their own rules." Obviously you have no idea what Anarchism means. "Anarchy: It is NOT bombs, disorder or chaos. It is NOT robbery and murder. It is NOT a war of each against all. It is NOT a return to barbarism or to the wild state of man. Anarchism is the very opposite of all that." ~Alexander Berkman

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          crade (profile), 16 Nov 2010 @ 4:16pm

          Re: Re: Re: One more thing

          You might be right. I always though anarchism meant one of these things (you know, from the dictionary):
          1. The theory or doctrine that all forms of government are oppressive and undesirable and should be abolished.
          2. Active resistance and terrorism against the state, as used by some anarchists.
          3. Rejection of all forms of coercive control and authority:

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          • identicon
            Anonymous Coward, 17 Nov 2010 @ 1:32am

            Re: Re: Re: Re: One more thing

            Stupid man. Why are you using a dictionary to understand the well defined meaning of a word. The poster above you clearly knows better...

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            • icon
              crade (profile), 17 Nov 2010 @ 10:58am

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: One more thing

              Uh.. Yeah sure. Its a magic fairy world in which everyone agrees on everything and no rules are needed because everyone just automatically never does anything that anyone else doesn't agree with. It's still a myth.

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          Gabriel Tane (profile), 18 Nov 2010 @ 8:43am

          Re: Re: Re: One more thing

          I'm with crade... except I wouldn't call it a myth, I'd call it an excuse to be angsty. The only 'anarchy' I've ever seen (outside of setting up a 5 year-old’s birthday party) is rebellious youth who flock to anarchy as a way to do whatever they want without consequence.

          My favorite illustration of this is from Something Positive: http://somethingpositive.net/sp12102002.shtml

          "This is anarchy! Where the strong rule the weak and guess where your place is Puglsey? Anarchy is your sixth grade gym class for all eternity!"

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    akston, 16 Nov 2010 @ 11:51am

    Photo Ops

    This is certainly interesting, given the exact same thing happened at the London G20. See here - http://statismwatch.ca/2009/04/01/g20-protests-riot-police-or-rioting-police/

    I don't know if this is a smoking gun, since at the Toronto G20, the photographers almost outnumbered protesters and police combined. It wouldn't have taken them long to close ranks around this guy.

    Anyways, the experience here in Toronto proved that the thing to look out for is the feint rather than outright provocation. The police drove a bunch of police cars up, menaced the crowd briefly, then fell back - an open invitation to douchebaggery in the service of globalization. http://www.cp24.com/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20100626/100626_G20_protests/20100626/

    From the article:

    James Ruehle, a 49-year-old contractor from Pickering, a half hour's drive from Toronto, saw the burning of the three police cruisers.

    Ruehle was stopped in his truck at the lights at the corner of King and Bay streets in the city's financial district as the protesters approached.

    Three police vehicles zipped past the line of traffic into the intersection, where they stopped with lights flashing. A group of about 20 to 30 police then began to congregate but an officer Ruehle thought was a police captain ordered them back.

    "The cop was yelling at them 'Back up!' 'Put your batons down!"' said Ruehle.

    The police in the cars, he said, then amazed him by backing off, leaving the cruisers running in the middle of the intersection with their lights flashing and doors open.

    "It was like an invitation G(to the protesters)," said Ruehle.

    ~~~~~~
    Guess what images were all over the media?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    gojomo (profile), 16 Nov 2010 @ 12:13pm

    This just in: pointing a camera at someone changes their behavior

    You see this lots of times at protests and picket lines. As soon as filming (or a live news 'stand-up') starts, behavior changes: chants start, marching begins, signs are repositioned, people crowd around. Cameras off, back to waiting around.

    Of course the same applies to officials and law-enforcement: as soon as there's awareness of a camera, postures/tone/behavior changes.

    You can't fully trust any photo or video as an accurate representation of the same area without a camera.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    iamtheky (profile), 16 Nov 2010 @ 12:25pm

    indeed, anarchy measurements do not exist, as the mere observation causes enough of a change in state to render the measurement invalid.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 16 Nov 2010 @ 12:34pm

      Re:

      Quantum Anarchy? :)

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        Gabriel Tane (profile), 16 Nov 2010 @ 12:56pm

        Re: Re:

        Many behaviors would fall under that definition... although I do like it!

        Take a small child sobbing and sobbing because he or she didn't get their way. They stop long enough to look out of the cradle of their arm to make sure you still see them and cry even louder.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Chronno S. Trigger (profile), 16 Nov 2010 @ 1:11pm

    What's up with the glass?

    Looking at the pictures that are different I notice that the glass isn't different in any of them. One would think, if he's in the middle of kicking in a window, the glass position would change at least a little in the quarter of a second it took him to lower his arm.

    Now that I look even closer, those aren't three different pictures taken within a fraction of a second, those are three different kicks. That's why the one guy isn't in the Guardian picture, he had time to walk out of frame.

    Unless that guy was acting, that glass should have changed is some significant way. That guy didn't do that damage to that window.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 16 Nov 2010 @ 1:31pm

    If that's how Europeans kick, no wonder soccer isn't catching on here.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    J, 16 Nov 2010 @ 2:15pm

    call it....

    ...journalismish.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Vic, 16 Nov 2010 @ 2:44pm

    I was able to count at least 15 photographers and at least 5 (and probably up to 7) uniforms there in this wide angle picture. All the real protesters have already left this spot (I guess), the poor guy is just angry that he was left alone...

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    xenomancer (profile), 16 Nov 2010 @ 7:08pm

    Back to School

    It looks like its just another photojournalism class in the wide angle picture. Maybe the tuition raises were an elaborate ruse to "diversify" the department...

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 17 Nov 2010 @ 3:52am

    So glad you posted about this! The Sun actually posted the full version of the pic in their online story, and my first thought as soon as I saw it was that it was "setup".

    http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/3221110/Rioting-students-storm-Tory-HQ.html

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anarchist, 21 Nov 2010 @ 6:49pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: One more thing

    Anyone who advocates either 'individual' anarchy or small-government 'minarchy' is a fool who doesn't know what they're talking about. Anarchism has always advocated a *highly organized* society of federated communities and collectives, not a stupid utopia where everyone just gets along by magic.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    MikeD, 24 Apr 2011 @ 10:55pm

    Who cares. British people are irrelevant.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Use markdown for basic formatting. HTML is no longer supported.
  Save me a cookie
Follow Techdirt
Insider Shop - Show Your Support!

Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads

Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.