Tag: filming

BBC launches consultation on collaboration with hyperlocal blogs but do bloggers know there's a consultation?

BBC launches consultation on collaboration with hyperlocal blogs but do bloggers know there’s a consultation?

BBC launches consultation on collaboration with hyperlocal blogs but do bloggers know there’s a consultation?

                                                             

Liverpool City Region Combined Authority meeting 19th June 2015
Liverpool City Region Combined Authority meeting 19th June 2015

I’ll start by declaring an interest in this piece as I write for and run this blog. Earlier this week I got an email from a well-known journalist about a consultation the BBC is running. More information on this is on the BBC’s website.

Personally I’m not sure what to make of it. I don’t have the benefit of working for a media organisation like the BBC that is funded by taxes so gets a guaranteed income. Tomorrow I’ll be filming a public meeting of the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority.

At the previous meeting (19th June 2015) there were three filming the meeting itself:

a) myself
b) Knowsley Metropolitan Borough Council and
c) the BBC for the Sunday Politics show.

However out of those three the footage I took was available to the public first. However I am getting off the point a little. The BBC just used clips of the meeting with a voice over during its Sunday Politics show.

Below is my footage on Youtube (which can be viewed in resolutions to 1080p HD). It has at the time of writing 19 views.

Please accept YouTube cookies to play this video. By accepting you will be accessing content from YouTube, a service provided by an external third party.

YouTube privacy policy

If you accept this notice, your choice will be saved and the page will refresh.

In comparison here is the footage on Youtube filmed by Knowsley Metropolitan Borough Council (at the start of each meeting the Chair generally announces they’re filming and the meeting can be watched on their Youtube channel). It can be watched in resolutions up to 480p. As you can see when they uploaded it to Youtube it’s resulted in a blank black area right, left and top. Generally my view is that if there’s a natural source of light in the room you should try to film with the light behind the camera (this was what the BBC cameraman was trying to do at the start too). Some of the time they film pointing at the windows. However at the time of writing they have 28 views.

Please accept YouTube cookies to play this video. By accepting you will be accessing content from YouTube, a service provided by an external third party.

YouTube privacy policy

If you accept this notice, your choice will be saved and the page will refresh.

Now I’m definitely biased but I think my footage is better (but not as good as the BBC’s (unfortunately I don’t have a link of their video footage to hand to show)).

It’s very hard for me to fairly compete though with Knowsley, who have a Twitter account with 8,842 followers compared to my Twitter account with 970 followers.

I do see competition in the media as a good thing though. If people want to watch footage of this public meeting they have a choice.

That’s why I don’t fully understand what the BBC is proposing. We’re all competing with each other, which means over time we learn from each other and get better. Providing people with a choice is good. It’s how the marketplace and media works.

Collaboration between competing bodies could work to reduce that choice in the long-term if two or more previous competitors collaborate.

Links from the BBC’s website to a hyperlocal blog (through this proposed external linking system) would cause a spike in traffic to the hyperlocal blog as links from the BBC’s website carry a lot of weight.

However hyperlocal blogs who weren’t collaborating with the BBC would lose out on this source of visitors.

What’s really needed is not what the BBC propose. A lot of hyperlocal blogs have filled a media void once occupied by the newspapers. Newspapers get a guaranteed income from the taxpayer through things like public notices as the legislation specifically refers to public notices being published in local newspapers.

Considering the community benefit of hyperlocal blogs what’s really needed is a decent discussion about their long-term sustainability and how essentially their community benefit is priceless. They’re doing media work that otherwise wouldn’t happen. Hyperlocal blogs (including this one) have written stories that lead to front page news stories in newspapers, have highlighted extremely important issues and contributed to greater scrutiny of public bodies.

Apart from the first of these issues, the two latter have a “community benefit” can’t be easily measured or quantified. Anyway going back to the BBC consultation I was asked a further few questions so I thought I’d do a poll here (or you can leave a comment).

http://johnbrace.polldaddy.com/s/bbc-consultation-on-blogs

If you click on any of the buttons below, you’ll be doing me a favour by sharing this article with other people.

Why are Wirral councillors trying to kill off press freedom by a new public meetings filming ban?

Why are Wirral councillors trying to kill off press freedom by a new public meetings filming ban?

Why are Wirral councillors trying to kill off press freedom by a new public meetings filming ban?

                                              

Please accept YouTube cookies to play this video. By accepting you will be accessing content from YouTube, a service provided by an external third party.

YouTube privacy policy

If you accept this notice, your choice will be saved and the page will refresh.

Video of the Standards and Constitutional Oversight Committee from 3rd March 2015, the item on filming starts 43 seconds into the meeting

Surjit Tour (Monitoring Officer at Wirral Council) gives councillors his opinion at the meeting that he doesn't think the draft policy banning filming breaches the Human Rights Act 1998 3rd March 2015
Surjit Tour (Monitoring Officer at Wirral Council) gives councillors his opinion at the meeting that he doesn’t think the draft policy banning filming breaches the Human Rights Act 1998 3rd March 2015

Last year I wrote a piece on this blog headlined The day democracy and freedom of the press died at Wirral Council: 28th October 2014 and earlier this week published my email to councillors on the Standards and Constitutional Oversight Committee detailing my concerns about a proposed policy banning filming at public meetings of Wirral Council.

Last night councillors (as you can see from the video above) on Wirral Council’s Standards and Constitutional Oversight Committee agreed to bash the final nail in the coffin of press freedom to report on public meetings of Wirral Council and recommended to all councillors at the next Council meeting on the 16th of March that press freedom remain dead and buried (that is they recommended a draft policy on the reporting of all public meetings of Wirral Council).

Around the time a new law (the Openness of Local Government Bodies Regulations 2014) came into force last August, which prevented local councils stopping filming of their meetings, Eric Pickles was quoted as saying "How can we criticise Putin’s Russia for suppressing freedom of the press when, up and down the land, police are threatening to arrest people for reporting a council meeting with digital media?"

Labour councillors on the Standards and Constitutional Oversight Committee last night repeatedly prevented any discussion by opposition councillors on the controversial subjects of the closure of Lyndale School and library opening hours. If councillors from the ruling group can’t respect and listen to viewpoints they may not agree with, how can democracy actually function at all on Wirral Council?

Despite concerns I expressed at the meeting itself about the lack of consultation and concerns over whether the draft policy breached both section 6(1) of the Human Rights Act 1998 (in respect of Article 10 on freedom of expression) and Regulation 4 of the Openness of Local Government Bodies Regulations 2014, councillors agreed to recommend it to the next Council meeting.

The draft policy (if approved by Council) will mean that at the start of the meeting the Chair will ask anyone if they have any objections to the meeting being filmed. If someone does object the Chair will stop the meeting being filmed. However any legal powers Chairs may have had to stop filming of public meetings were repealed by the Openness of Local Government Bodies Regulations 2014 last year.

The policy goes much further and states a ban on editing filming, photography or recording of a meeting that could cause “reputational harm”.

Wirral Council seem to not recognise the importance of the independence of the press and councillors on the Standards and Constitutional Oversight Committee don’t seem to think there is anything wrong with this policy.

If you’re from the Wirral and would like to make your views known to your local councillors ahead of the Council meeting on the 16th March, their contact details are on this page. As emails to councillors are no routinely filtered, I would suggest phoning or writing by mail.

If you’re have a WordPress blog, please feel free to reblog this post. If you’d like to write about the draft policy it is on Wirral Council’s website and the other papers and reports for the meeting can be found on Wirral Council’s website here. The code to embed the Youtube video of the meeting can be found by visiting Youtube and clicking on share then embed.

You can also give your opinion whether you think this policy is a good idea or not in the poll below:

If you click on any of these buttons below, you’ll be doing me a favour by sharing this article with other people. Thanks:

Why after Pickle's #righttotweet law will Wirral councillors soon decide on restricting reporting of public meetings?

Why after Pickle’s #righttotweet law will Wirral councillors soon decide on restricting reporting of public meetings?

Why after Pickle’s #righttotweet law will Wirral councillors soon decide on restricting reporting of public meetings?

                                                            

A photo of Councillor Phil Davies at the last Council meeting announcing a council tax freeze, an example of the sort of photo covered by a new draft policy on reporting on Wirral Council's public meetings
A photo of Councillor Phil Davies at the last Council meeting announcing a council tax freeze, an example of the sort of photo covered by a new draft policy on reporting on Wirral Council’s public meetings

Below is an email from myself to those on Wirral Council’s Standards and Constitutional Oversight Committee about a proposed policy on the filming of Wirral Council’s public meetings.

To: Councillor Bill Davies
CC: Councillor Moira McLaughlin
CC: Councillor Robert Gregson
CC: Councillor Denise Roberts
CC: Councillor John Salter
CC: Councillor Les Rowlands
CC: Councillor Gerry Ellis
CC: Councillor John Hale
CC: Councillor Pat Williams
CC: Shirley Hudspeth
CC: Tayo Peters

subject: Standards and Constitutional Oversight Committee meeting 3rd March 2015 Agenda item 3 Summary of the Work and Proposals of the Standards and Constitutional Oversight Working Group

Dear councillors (and others) on the Standards and Constitutional Oversight Committee,

Attached to this email should be a copy of the Openness of Local Government Bodies Regulations, the explanatory memorandum to the regulations, the report to Tuesday’s Standards and Constitutional Oversight Committee meeting and the appendix to the report which is a draft policy.

I do not have email addresses for the independent members on the Standards and Constitutional Oversight Committee, so I’m copying this email to Shirley Hudspeth in the hope that they can receive a copy at the meeting itself.

I would also like to speak at Tuesday’s meeting of the Standards and Constitutional Oversight Committee on agenda item 3 as the issues raised here can be rather technical in nature and it is possible that people may wish to ask questions on what I’ve put here.

The report states at 2.10 “The Council’s position with regards to reporting/filming at Council and committee meetings is in essence determined by The Openness of Local Government Bodies Regulations 2014 (“the Regulations”) which came into force in August 2014. A copy is attached to this report.”

Unfortunately a copy of the Openness of Local Government Bodies Regulations 2014 has not been attached to the report as stated in Surjit Tour’s report. Continue reading “Why after Pickle's #righttotweet law will Wirral councillors soon decide on restricting reporting of public meetings?”

Royal visit today changes time of Mersey Fire Authority meeting & leads to bungle on filming petition

Royal visit today changes time of Mersey Fire Authority meeting & leads to bungle on filming petition

Royal visit today changes time of Mersey Fire Authority meeting & leads to bungle on filming petition

                                                                 

Despite being the lead signatory on this petition which is on the agenda of today’s Merseyside Fire and Rescue Authority meeting I won’t be able to go to the meeting today to speak for five minutes on the petition and see what is said about it.

Usually meetings of the Merseyside Fire and Rescue Authority start at 1.00pm and this had been down originally scheduled as starting at that time. However because a member of the Royal Family is coming to open the building today, the time of this meeting starting was changed in the very recent past at some point to 11.00am. Unfortunately the letter (see below) inviting me to the meeting didn’t mention the changed time (or indeed the time the meeting was supposed to start at all) and despite this being mentioned at least once at a recent public meeting of the Merseyside Fire and Rescue Authority neither of us changed the original time was starting in our diary (1.00pm) when we got back or received formal notification of the changed time!

letter from Merseyside Fire and Rescue Authority about filming petition received 6th December 2014
letter from Merseyside Fire and Rescue Authority about filming petition received 6th December 2014

So I only realised the meeting was starting at 11.00am at around 11.00am this morning when I looked at MFRA’s website and was about to leave (for a meeting I thought started at 1.00pm) leaving no time to get there at all as by the time I get there it will be finished! So apologies to the petition signatories in that I won’t be able to speak for five minutes at today’s meeting or film it as originally planned!

So below is what I would have said if I had indeed been been more organised over the time of the meeting starting and got my five minutes to speak. As you can see here meetings of the Authority are normally at 1.00pm! Apologies for missing the altered time of the meeting, changed because a member of royalty is officially opening the building today.

“The petition (and accompanying letter) should be in people’s agenda packs at agenda item 3 (pages 7-8). In addition to the two on the paper petition included there, there are a further seven signatories on an online version of the same petition, however the lead signatory signed both versions making a total of eight individuals.

On the 18th November 2014 Merseyside Fire and Rescue Authority published on its website as a library item a seven page document titled MFRA Meeting Reporting Protocol and Procedure. This didn’t formally go on the agenda of a public meeting of the Merseyside Fire and Rescue Authority to be agreed but was published as a library item.

The issue of filming meetings was discussed at a meeting of the Policy and Resources Committee on the 23rd September 2014 (agenda item 6 The Openness in Local Government Regulations 2014). The minutes of that meeting state “The committee were advised that a report will be submitted to a future Authority meeting to approve amendments to the Authority’s Constitution following the impact of the Regulations.”, however there has not been a report to either the Authority meeting on October 2nd 2014 or today’s meeting to approve amending the constitution, which is what this petition calls for in asking for standing order 19.4 to be deleted.

Standing order 19.4 requires permission from the committee concerned before the public meeting can be recorded. As outlined in the government’s guide titled “Open and accountable local government A guide for the press and public on attending and reporting meetings of local government” the new regulations about filming apply to fire and rescue authorities in England such as Merseyside Fire and Rescue Authority.

Regulation 4 of the Openness of Local Government Bodies Regulations 2014, which came into effect in August of this year changed the legislation. “Principal council in England” in the legislation also refers to fire and rescue authorities in England. The legislation was changed to state “(7A) While a meeting of a principal council in England is open to the public, any person attending is to be permitted to report on the meeting.”, “(7C) A person attending a meeting of a principal council in England for the purpose of reporting on the meeting must, so far as practicable, be afforded reasonable facilities for doing so.” and “(7E) Any person who attends a meeting of a principal council in England for the purpose of reporting on the meeting may use any communication method, including the internet, to publish, post or otherwise share the results of the person’s reporting activities.” with reporting implicitly referred to as “filming, photographing or making an audio recording of proceedings at a meeting”.

Other public bodies on Merseyside that had existing standing orders in their constitution about filming such as Liverpool City Council and the Merseyside Police and Crime Panel changed either their constitution or rules of procedure after the new regulations came into effect back in August. The issue about the public making objections in the current MFRA Meeting Reporting Protocol and Procedure to meetings being filmed also needs to be changed, as it misleads chairs and others into thinking they still have the power to stop filming at a public meeting. They don’t have any legal power to stop people filming a public meeting of this body because of these new regulations. Therefore both the constitution needs to be changed and the existing MFRA Meeting Reporting Protocol and Procedure and I call upon councillors and officers to do so to bring both the constitution and the MFRA Meeting Reporting Protocol and Procedure up to date and in line with the new regulations. I look forward to hearing about your proposals for a way forward on this issue. ”

If you click on any of these buttons below, you’ll be doing me a favour by sharing this article with other people. Thanks:

Labour and Conservative councillors both say no to Greasby Fire Station plans

Labour and Conservative councillors both say no to Greasby Fire Station plans

Labour and Conservative councillors both say no to Greasby Fire Station plans

                                                

In an update to a previous story about the changes to filming public meetings of the Merseyside Fire and Rescue Authority, I have received a formal response from Mersey Fire and Rescue Authority about my petition on the subject.

The letter is included below. The gist of it is I can present my petition at the public meeting on the 16th December 2014. I’ve decided to present it myself and not through one of the councillors, considering that at least one of the Wirral Council councillors on the Merseyside Fire and Rescue Authority is well-known for his anti-public meeting filming views.

letter from Merseyside Fire and Rescue Authority about filming petition received 6th December 2014
letter from Merseyside Fire and Rescue Authority about filming petition received 6th December 2014

I also get up to five minutes to state how many people signed the paper and e-petition, what the petition is about and “further supporting remarks”. I’ve decided to not opt for the “deputation” option which would have allowed councillors (including Cllr Steve Niblock if he is present) to ask questions of me.

Whereas I could probably talk on the subject of filming public meetings for more than five minutes, this is certainly a positive step on the road to getting things changed and having a say at a public meeting on the issue thanks to the many who have signed the paper and e-petition so far and the many more who watch the videos I’ve recorded since September of the Merseyside Fire and Rescue Authority meetings.

Moving to more local matters, tonight’s Council meeting has unusually two notices of motion on fire related matters.

The Labour motion “Government’s Fire and Rescue Service Cuts” is down to be debated tonight, I’m not sure what’s happening to the Conservative motion “No Fire Station in the Centre of Greasby” as nothing is now next to it on the agenda published on Wirral Council’s website. This is what each notice of motion states:

2. NO FIRE STATION IN THE CENTRE OF GREASBY
Proposed by Councillor Tom Anderson
Seconded by Councillor Wendy Clements

Council acknowledges the overwhelming public opposition to a fire station on the site of Greasby Library.

Council notes that this concern relates to the specific site, not to the policy of merging of fire stations.

Council impresses upon Cabinet:
(1) not to gift, sell, lease the land concerned at the centre of Greasby, because of the value it has for the community; and
(2) to ask officers to work co-operatively with Merseyside Fire and Rescue Service in identifying and facilitating a more suitable site for operational purposes and to maintain the amenity of the local people.

=======================================================================================================
3. GOVERNMENT’S FIRE AND RESCUE SERVICE CUTS

Proposed by Councillor Phil Davies
Seconded by Councillor Adrian Jones

Council welcomes the announcement by the Leader of the Council to withdraw the Council-owned land in the centre of Greasby from consideration for a new fire station.

Given the Merseyside Fire and Rescue Authority’s obligation to maximise the protection of lives, and of property, it is inevitable that the location of Fire Stations may, from time to time, conflict with local preferences particularly where such structures may detract from the established scenic value of the MFRA’s preferred locations.

The Government’s devastating and unfair cuts to MFRA’s budget have resulted in the unavoidable need to cut the number of Fire Stations in Wirral. The Fire and Rescue Authority’s preferred location of a single Fire Station on a site in the centre of Greasby was based on its assessment of life saving response times. However, this would result in the loss of a much loved local green space.

The Council is asked to continue to work with the Merseyside Fire and Rescue Authority to identify an alternative site in the greater Greasby area.

=======================================================================================================

If you click on any of these buttons below, you’ll be doing me a favour by sharing this article with other people. Thanks: