Perhaps this “cute brothers at the beach” photo should have been used to illustrate an article about Jesse James instead of Henry James and his brother.
Psychology Today (Online) c. 2010 • Article originally published 1995 (Screen Shot on 7/21/10)
Life is like that — full of serendipity.
The boys’ father took the picture in the 1990’s, as part of a group taken for a North Carolina print magazine they published at the time. The magazine isn’t archived online. The photo hasn’t been living on some random family Facebook album, at least not until today when the Dad posted about it. So It’s unclear how the photo got pushed out into the world – or even how long it’s lived on the magazine’s site.
But the parents say they know without a doubt that it’s their picture of their boys.
Twilight Zone, the Digital Image version.
Don’t get me wrong — no one involved thinks the magazine did anything wrong knowingly. And the Mom and Dad aren’t mad – in fact, its been kind of fun for them. They’re not looking for the website to make a change or anything.
Since it is a cute picture, no faces, no harm done…..just a sweet memory of an era gone by. We are SO not worried about it!,” said the boys’ mother on Wednesday.
Proof: Boring Imagery is a Bummer
Thanks to a local college, I found a hard copy of the original 1995 version of the James Brothers article this afternoon. It has different artwork, photos of older men with hats and others. A nice magazine layout, but not the kind of thing that plays as well as a screen shot.
Likely the magazine bought rights to the photo of the boys. And it’s just as likely that the vendor they used to get it thought they owned rights to it. The boys in the picture are men now. Who can say how many degrees away the person who first put the photo into play is?
No harm, no foul? Then why am I writing this post?
Because I know what I’ve known since I met my friend in college — there are very few people as nice as she is. So it’s a good idea to be thoughtful about online imagery. There are lessons here for the rest of us.
Images = Necessary… but Time Robbers.
Google might not be able to see images, but the rest of us can. Images make posts and articles more compelling. But they can also be time robbers to create. Yet, how often can we use the same free Microsoft ClipArt?
Other short cuts are everywhere. An entire industry has blossomed to sell images, at various creative quality and budget points, Royalty Free and otherwise. There are also sites we can pull pictures off to use for free, but with attribution and/or other detailed permission requirements.
Still — some people just surf and snag. Those of us that use a lot of our own photos know, people often enter our online content through a Google Image Search, particularly if the images’ Alternative Text matches search keywords.
Image Idea: Make your own cartoon.
Image Posting Lessons for all of us:
- Create your own imagery when you can. It doesn’t have to be a photo; it can be a chart. Just something to catch the eye and break up the text. Extra credit if it can extend the related article’s message.
- Upload with caution: The world is small. If you upload and post on a public site, hoping no one will notice, know: Someone probably will.
- Mistakes happen. Not everyone is as nice as my friend. Pick vendors wisely. If you use multiple image vendors, keep good records. That way, you’ll know who to ask if issues arise.
How do you illustrate your online content? If you’re buying photos, let us know — what’s your favorite source?
A former Corporate 750 client manager and journalist, Certified Social Media Coach and Inbound Marketing Specialist Robin S. Fox helps clients achieve their business goals.