Embarrassing Cameron photo withdrawn from public use

Newsnight has commissioned a painting of the infamous Bullingdon Club photograph of David Cameron, Boris Johnson and their other Oxford contemporaries.  The photo of the members of the Bullingdon Club - which Newsnight describes as "the elitist Oxford University dining club whose public school members have become notorious over the years for vandalising restaurants and trashing students' rooms" - had embarrassed the Tory leader and there was speculation that Labour or, more likely, surrogates for Labour would use the photo for an anti-Cameron YouTube campaign.  That's now going to be illegal after Gillman and Soame, the Oxford photographers who own the copyright of the photo, announced that no further permissions would be granted for publication.  The photographers insist that they were not pressurised into making the decision but took the decision on commercial grounds.  I guess someone paid them a lot of money to withdraw it from circulation.

Comments

[Tony]

And I wonder how much the BBC paid to commission a painting of the image to ensure it could carry on giving oxygen to Labour's attempts to undermine Cameron?

The photo only has one use and the Beeb knows that. Time to break out the Che Guevara and CCCP t-shirts in the studios...

[Denis Cooper]

It's a long time ago, and if Labour really wants to dredge back into the past then as Tony says there's no shortage of ammunition which could be fired back.

[It also tells us ...]

... that Hilton & co know that Dave's Eton n' White's background *is* going to be a liability with the voters. You really couldn't have clearer proof of that than the panic this pic's repeated appearances has caused.

And copyright or no, any newspaper that wants will be able to use this photograph during the general election campaign, as long as they can claim a 'legitimate public interest' in its subjects, or their actions at the time.

[Old Hack]

Like it or not the Beeb has a story in the withdrawal of copyright permission. Shades of Gerry Adams being interviewed with voiceovers back in the bad old days when the Government tried to ban the broadcasting of Sinn Fein opinions by the media.

The real question is this: Who's the control freak who doesn't want this picture in the public domain and how bird-brained is he/she in thinking that the genie can be put back in the bottle?

[sjm]

I would have thought that Prescott's behaviour and the mockery of it on TV will have a far greater impact on Labour than a very old photo of an undergraduate will have on Cameron and the Conservatives.

And perhaps someone from the BBC could justify to me, a licence-payer, just why they are wasting my money on commissioning a painting of a photo? Could you, Tim, ask for a response from them?

[madasafish]

Seems like both political parties are as bad as each other.

And they wonder why the electorate is apathetic and despises politicians.

It's what you do, not what you say.... a saying obviously unknown to all political parties in the UK...

Even the dumbest member of the public...

[It also tells us ...]

Uh, because the BBC *has* a story, in that this picture so frightens Cameron that he's (vainly) tried to remove it from public view? And in so doing, by 'pretending' that its withdrawal has had nothing to do with him, Dave yet again demonstrates his very special skill for telling the truth.

[ToMTom]

It says Gillman & Soame have been photographing memories since 1840....I guess that is one of their earliest plates and can only be brought out to daylight once every 50 years

[simon]

i think the photos hilarious! crikey, it ain't that posh- it looks like a bad fashion shoot for Esquire! Let's face it , it could have been worse...They could have all been smoking canna...cigarettes!

[Machiavelli's Understudy]

Oh, really... As if that's going to stop its use in future?

Surely there's a public interest element to the photo?

Certainly in the US, this would be covered by their fair use covenent, which means activists would be free to go ahead and use the picture used to draw attention to Cameron's past.

Even so, the picture's in the public domain- lots of people care nothing for copyright, particularly when used for something like this.

This isn't rocket science, people.

[simon]

Oh, and i see that fat cretin Prescott has been taking the p*ss out of the photo.Hmmm. There is this crappy mag that Labour members get thru post every now and then. There is a q&a section with Prescott entitled 'Dear John'. Perhaps one could pose the following question ' My husband- an old fat minger- has been screwing his secretaries in his spare time.What should i do'? I'd love to see Prezza answer this one!

[floating voter]

Maybe the reason the BBC has commisioned a painting is because some idiot pulled copyright - adding to the story.

If some people think Cameron posing as a man of the people with this photographic evidence of a more privileged background isn't a story, then all I can say is thank god they're not journalists. It's just the same as Blair posing as a man of the people and having gone to Fettes

What I find more of a problem, however, is it suggests Dave is somehow ashamed of his background - its not his fault he was born to privilege, after all.

Just a floating voter shopping around...

[Prentiz]

Gilman & Soames could be worried that their involvement in its continuing use might discourage current students using their services...

[Matt Wright]

Don't think the photo is an issue. I think younger people will think it looks like a cool pop group. Forget it and concentrate on the positive agenda we have and leading the country forward,

Matt

[Peter Hatchet]

No-one cares about this.

Actually, my wife thinks he looks rather dashing and apparantly many of her female colleagues think the same!

I'm almost inclined to encourage continued use of this photo (sorry, painting). It seems to really excite the BBC and the Labour party and distracts them from attacking us where they might actually do some damage.

[Peter Hitchens]

The story is not the BBC's own, but a follow-up of my Mail on Sunday Column on February 25.
You should read the papers more.

[Og]

Good move to lean on the photographers to have the photo quarantined. Artists' impressions of anything always look terrible and I doubt anyone will use the painting in place of the photo.

I wonder if Gillman and Soame could find those annual photographs of me looking like a complete berk that they took each year in the 70s and dsetroy them as well.

[NigelC]

"And perhaps someone from the BBC could justify to me, a licence-payer, just why they are wasting my money on commissioning a painting of a photo? Could you, Tim, ask for a response from them?"

I agree. Why is my money being spent on this painting?

[Richard]

"Oh, and i see that fat cretin Prescott has been taking the p*ss out of the photo"

Well, we all know why. He has a massive chip on his shoulder and probably secretly wishes he went to Eton.

So what if this photo shows Cameron is a member of an elite? It is a good thing that society has elites. Yes, membership of the Bullingdon Club is a negative but most people who see this photo aren't automatically going to associate it with smashing up restaurants.

It just looks like a group photo of members of the upper class in traditional dress - unless you're a die-hard socialist how could you find that offensive?

[michael mcgough]

Having just seen the photo of Blair's crew on Guido I don't think Cameron should worry.
At least Blair and Cameron had mates.I doubt we'll see Gordon 'no mates' Brown in even a conventional college group photo.

[Og]

The painting has somehow managed to turn Boris into Andy Warhol.

[Not the Hitch]

"The story is not the BBC's own, but a follow-up of my Mail on Sunday Column on February 25.
You should read the papers more."

Since when does the Mail count as a newspaper?

[Editor]

Peter Hitchens: "The story is not the BBC's own, but a follow-up of my Mail on Sunday Column on February 25.
You should read the papers more."

I normally buy the MoS but didn't last Sunday so apologies, Peter, for missing your scoop.

You should have posted it on your blog and then I would have seen it!

[gillman]

i have to say that the copyright holding snappers have a point, even if they were leant on...
They'd lose a lot of business if people thought every snap was likely to get out at the most potentially dangerous time in the future...

[Mrs Voter]

I can't think why the Tories would think this picture is embarrassing. David Cameron looks even more gorgeous then than he does now. This is the man I'd like look at and listen to for the next ten years.

[Seth Gillette]

I think the photo has actually done more good than harm.

Labour expecting to play the 'class card' just goes to show how out of touch they are.

No prospective Cameron voter is going to not vote for him because he went to Oxford, or dressed up like Spandeu Ballet in the 1980s.

A complete non-event that the left-leaning media such as the BBC look to latch on to.

[TaxCutter]

Its what's not out there (yet) that worries me

[Andy Stidwill]

Censorship is always a bad thing, even if it helps one's cause.

This photo shouldn't have been banned. There's going to be a lot more people looking at the painting once they hear about the attempt at censorship.

[Ed Clarke]

This photo shouldn't have been banned. There's going to be a lot more people looking at the painting once they hear about the attempt at censorship.

The ban makes DC look insecure. The photo is "out there" so it's done any harm it can already. I doubt anyone in the wider electorate had any doubt that DC had a "privileged" upbringing before the photo anyway and I've never heard him claiming to be a Blair-style "man of the people"...

[jailhouselawyer]

I cannot see what all the fuss is about. It does not show Dave smoking a spliff. Perhaps, it has to do with Dave being embarrassed at having known Boris at school?

Withdrawing the licence is a pointless exercise as it is already all over the internet and I have a copy downloaded and would publish it and be damned and would welcome Gillman and Soame suing me.

I think it is a photographic record of social history, nothing more nothing less. Are there not more important issues politicians could be getting on with?

[Ted]

its a poor painting, waste of money for a fleeting report on newsnight.

[George Hinton]

The photo is no more embarassing than thousands of others of young people doing what they do....look at B-liars.
What is unacceptable is the BBC spending public money for a painting of the picture. That is a demonstration of political bias which is against their charter.

UNLESS...it stays under wraps and they indeed to present it to DC when he becomes PM.

[Seth Gillette]

Yet again, the BBC have excelled themselves at another dumbing-down exercise.

I'm sure if Cameron pledged to commercialise the BBC (and save us all £120 a year) if he became PM, he'd win on a landslide...

When it had been revealed Blair had been questioned by police for a second time, Newsnight's headline was instead regarding Cameron's wife, who stood to inherit a luxurious country home in the future, thus 'proving' that Cameron is another 'Tory Toff' who is 'out of step with the common man'. A particularly pathetic bit of broadcasting that was.

Reminds me of the Telegraph attacking Cameron's 'green credentials' because back in 2005 he had mentioned, in passing, that he owned an aga.

I mean, it's so desperate.

[jailhouselawyer]

Anyone who watched Tony Blair's speech at the last Labour Party conference can clearly see Gordon Brown's lips mouth the word "wanker". The photo of Tony Blair as a schoolboy in Today's Grauniad bears out what a lot of us have been thinking. If this was a game of cards, matching like for like, it would be Snap!

[Bill]

Despite all the special pleading here on "Dave" Cameron's behalf, I do not think the photo has helped him. He comes from an uber privileged background which the photo simply illustrates.

[barry]

Guido has the ultimate riposte!

[Scotty]

"I agree. Why is my money being spent on this painting?" Nigel C, must admit that was my first thought when I heard Crick announce this last night.

I would not withdraw the picture, how many graduates and now school leavers have a similar picture taken as they leave to go to a Ball?
I am laughing at the story that this photo has been "withdrawn", when after nearly 14 years as Labour leader we are now able to see Blair's "Oxford dining club" photo in full!
I would have included it in today's thread to balance up this non story by showing that it is only suddenly an issue, because its David Cameron leading a resurgent conservative party which has caused this interest.
Does anyone think this sudden outcry from Labour over Cameron and Boris's photo is hypocritical in light of Blair's photo?

[barry]

When will the Tory party realise that they are fighting the nastiest, most corrupt, vindictive government and that tactics need to change. This government has done NOTHING for 10 years but waste money and lie. The positive image DC has projected has worked well, we are now potential government stuff, but we must tackle the positive perception that this government has with the public. I have never heard anyone argue when GB's economic genius is mentioned. The fact that he can be ridiculed on any number of topics would dispel almost the last remaining myth about this govt. They have failed in Hhealth, in education, in foreign policy, shamed us all with its lack of ethics, and hidden behind the economic legacy we gave them. Trace the spending and it will show how imprudent BG has been.

[Bill]

Anyone here attended or been a member of an Oxford dining club?

[Bill]

And I mean a "seasoned" one.

[Hug a Druggie]

I think Dave Cameron looks terrific in the photograph, and he is doing a wonderful job leading the Conservative Party.

[Nicko]

More evidence of BBC Bias on this one. The photo of Blair clearly making an obscene gesture with his hand is being spun by the Beeb that "he may have been playing air guitar". Can't say I'm bothered either way personally, but it speaks volumes that the Beeb saw fit to try to give a ridiculous excuse to Tony Blair.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6410883.stm

[comstock]

guess someone paid them a lot of money to withdraw it from circulation.

And in trying to buy silence thusly you (or rather someone in your party) has just scored a massive, massive own goal.

That's made my weekend, that has :D

[Scotty]

"And in trying to buy silence thusly you (or rather someone in your party) has just scored a massive, massive own goal."
Comstock, watch last nights edition of newsnight, and pay particular attention to the response from the conservative party over this allegation. I am enjoying these desperate attempts by Labour to turn spin and smear into fact.

"That's made my weekend, that has", reading the latest entries from Guido on Brown always makes my day.

[comstock]

Hi, Scotty

Comstock, watch last nights edition of newsnight

Is it me, or might that prove just a little tricky? (or do you have a flux capacitor hidden somewhere?) :D

[Richard]

"Is it me, or might that prove just a little tricky? (or do you have a flux capacitor hidden somewhere?) :D"

Try the BBC website? It usually has the previous edition available online.

"And in trying to buy silence thusly you (or rather someone in your party) has just scored a massive, massive own goal."

How? The photo itself is harmless. So Cameron and chums are dressed rather smartly. Is that a bad thing?

[Scotty]

Comstock, go to the Newsnight website and watch last nights edition which is available at the click of button until tonight's programme is put on line.
Also look out for the fact that Crick saw Blair's embarrassing hand gesture on his photo years ago, but funnily enough no one was allowed to show that in full!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsnight

[Ted]

if Iain Dale is to be believed I think this photo might soon be yesterdays news - injunctions, cash for honours.....

[Yet Another Anon]

And copyright or no, any newspaper that wants will be able to use this photograph during the general election campaign, as long as they can claim a 'legitimate public interest' in its subjects, or their actions at the time.
Copyright is absolute and unlike in the US there is no Fair Use options available, they might publish the painting but if they publish the photo then they will be successfully prosecuted. It will be shared online, but still many will not see the original - the revelations about the Bullington Club and it's behaviour certainly will impact on David Cameron and from a social status perspective make Gordon Brown and Menzies Campbell seem far more like the m an in the street - hard to say what factor it will play exactly.

[Gunther]

Is it time to form a Bullyboys Club, to raise money by the cause? Members could be invited to drink to excess and then smash up or trash homes/businesses which the owners are due to renovate. They would have to make generous donations to the Party for the priviledge, and could be fast-tracked to become parliamentary candidates or members of the Lords. Cameron could be President of the club.

[Gunther]

Sorry, for the cause, not by the cause. I am suffering from a hangover.

[Alex Forsyth]

I guess someone paid them a lot of money to withdraw it from circulation.

Precisely.

It's one way for an anonymous (for how long?) "benefactor" to favour the party without breaking the law, but of course he has in fact done the party a power of bad by drawing further attention to this obnoxious picture.

Nothing could demonstrate more graphically that as far as 99.99% of the British people are concerned "Dave" might as well live on another planet.

[Bishop Swine]

Its just to bad that this image is out in the open. Gad's when I was a boy the Bullington club was off limits. Mother simply would not let me anywhere those yobs. What a turn around now the party is in the hands of these "types". Now come on children had you not put two and two together, how does a no hoper like Boris get a good job in London without pulling a few strings.

[Gee]

I think its very important to be aware of a politicians background . AS a leader you can give the people what you think they want , you can give the people what you think they deserve , you can forget the people and maintain existing power structures - the decisions you make and laws you sign can all be influenced by your background

[Martin]

"The truth"

In the offices of Gillman & Soame:
"Apparently the BBC want to commission an oil painting of one of our photographs."
"DO they? Whatever for?"
"They want to make trouble for David Cameron, I think."
"Oh, really? Is that all? Why have you raised the matter with me?"
"I don't think we should let the BBC do it."
"To protect Cameron's reputation, you mean?"
"Good Lord, no! I am more concerned at allowing a fantastic marketing opportunity to pass us by! Just think of all the hundreds and thousands of images we have! If only 10% of them could generate oil paintings, I think we should grab a piece of that action and tell the BBC to go hang!"
"Excellent idea!"

[David Bailey]

If if someone joins a club that is notorious for criminal damage, I don't think they are suitable to be members of parliament - never mind PM!

When I was a student, I had to work quite hard (Cambridge rather than Oxford) and loutish behaviour like trashing restaurants just gets real students a bad name.

[Tony Hart]

Look, I just made a photo out of the painting

http://adifferentvoice.files.wordpress.com/2008/04/bullingdon-club.jpg

[Geoffrey Woollard]

"That's now going to be illegal after Gillman and Soame, the Oxford photographers who own the copyright of the [Bullingdon Club] photo, announced that no further permissions would be granted for publication. The photographers insist that they were not pressurised into making the decision but took the decision on commercial grounds. I guess someone paid them a lot of money to withdraw it from circulation."

How can they get away with that?

Mind you: I always thought that this was much more damaging to the Cameron/Osborne/Johnson image than the Eton association or, indeed, Hague's beer-drinking bouts.