#NoFreePhotos : 關於時尚界的慣老闆和勞權

我真的很久沒關注時尚界的新聞了,這一件在9月底被大肆報導的新聞,我直到現在才看到。要是以前資訊焦慮的我,應該最晚隔天就會知道了,看來我脫離的滿成功的。(嗯?)

9月底,WWD報導一群街拍攝影師在今年的米蘭時裝週期間在社群網路上集體對時尚部落客、意見領袖、品牌、媒體提出名為「#NoFreePhotos」的抗陳,表示他們所拍攝的照片被用於商業行為、讓影像中的人和物提高知名度,卻從未從中獲得應得的酬勞。

然後知名時尚部落客Bryanboy跳出來說,並不是每個時尚意見領袖在時裝週上都穿贊助衣服,而且這些攝影師向媒體兜售照片的時候,也未曾考慮過肖像權的問題。

#NoFreePhotos Has anyone read the WWD piece about street style photogs? How they are not being paid while the influencers are? To quote the collective, “disproportionate gain being derived by influencers". While I have enormous respect to all of these lensmen (and women), the notion that many influencers are being “disproportionately" paid to wear clothes is quite laughable. Do these photographers know how absolutely CHEAP and I mean CHEAP many of the brands are? They have budget to spend tens of thousands of dollars on a printed page on a magazine that only a handful of people read at the hair salon. But they clearly don’t have budget to spend on people online and they feel they shouldn’t be compensated. A lot of the girls I know are NOT being paid to wear clothes. Many spend money to go back and forth for “fittings", borrow samples and are often dressed by brands to be on their “good graces". Some even dress them and plonk them on second or third row. All for free! And influencers are happy to do all that shit to develop a (usually disposable) “relationship" with brands who are more than happy to move on to the next girl with even more followers. For the most part, brands often work with influencers on special projects either on the brands’ or influencer’s channels and more often than not, they don’t involve third party photographers. I obviously understand the photographers’ need to be compensated. But then again, when was the last time an influencer demanded a model release form from photographers who sell their images to magazines, retailer websites or the brands directly? Imagine if every influencer or editor or fashion person started complaining that their images are being taken AND sold without authorization? Class action lawsuit much? Point to ponder. I like to think that everyone should win in this symbiotic ecosystem. Think about it: girl gets famous online on her own, gains the attention of brands and starts to go to fashion week/month/circus looking like a clown. Street photogs then starts shooting the said girl, often in borrowed clothes and uncompensated, and her images are sold to different outlets… where’s the disconnect?

Bryanboy(@bryanboycom)分享的貼文 於 張貼

 

雙方各執一詞,但我會比較偏向Bryanboy這一方。並不是因為他有名,而是我覺得時尚界就是一個官官相護、弱弱相殘的產業,街拍攝影師勇於爭取自己的權益很棒,可是某種程度他們也在剝削他人的權益,然後最該負責任的決策階級一律噤聲。問題到底出在哪裡?明明各種剝削新聞層出不窮,但時尚界的勞權卻一直不被重視,也是我覺得很奇怪的地方。為什麼總是薪水那麼低?工時那麼長?追求完美、追求效率和追求公平難道無法同時並進嗎?

不過我想這問題可能就出在於,時尚產業的決策者,利用了時尚愛好者的崇拜,與前仆後繼。再加上這些層級,多半是擁有無數個頂尖精品或出版品的人,在擁有一切資源和話語權的情況下,他們可以形塑他們想要的產業,而不是一個公平公開透明且健全的產業。

因為如此,這些影響力層級才得以大而皇之地對這些無權無勢無錢的年輕模特兒、攝影師、彩妝師、造型師、特約寫手、實習生們說:「這是給你們累積珍貴經驗的平台,你們從這邊工作後可以把這經驗寫進履歷跟作品集,所以我們不會給你們任何酬勞,頂多給你們一套免費衣服、一餐飯,如果你們不願意,後面還有很多人排隊等著為我們賣命。」假若有人在事後察覺不對,向媒體爆料,還有可能會被反擊:「你們這些無法吃苦耐勞的年輕人,這個行業以前就是這樣的,如果接受不了就不要進來!」

看起來很熟悉嗎?這種慣老闆思維可不是台灣獨有。吃苦耐勞明明完全不等同於「拿不到酬勞」,不過如此邏輯奇異的事件,卻依然在21世紀上演。

所以你就會時不時看到辛苦陪試裝、走秀的年輕女模拿不到,或只能拿到很低的酬勞,或被送一套免費衣服就被打發,但這些女模在此之前卻要花錢投資自己的皮膚、體態保養,並購入一些基本的單品以供廣泛的造型搭配使用;看到年輕的實習生無酬或拿法定最低薪超時工作,或是做全職的工作內容;看到沒有經紀公司保護的彩妝師、造型師無酬或拿著與工時不成比例的酬勞,為美麗的造型賣命。

當然一定會有人說,「不爽不要做」,但不爽不要做並無法真正解決問題,也無法讓一個產業變得更成熟進步,因為永遠會有資源不足的人持續進入這個市場,繼續被壓榨剝削。

但儘管如此,我對於時尚界的勞權改革還是不樂觀,畢竟這些小蝦米要面對的是獨佔時尚市場的幾大集團,他們為了要鞏固自己的權勢,不平等的勞動關係對他們才最為有利。不是我要陰謀論,而是時尚出現了那麼久,除了美國設計師協會以外,你還曾聽過哪個像樣的工會嗎?

沒有工會,就沒有平等的對話空間。只是,能否有工會,也要看老大哥的臉色。

這真的是一件無比荒謬的事。

(首圖由fervent-adepte-de-la-mode拍攝,取自imcreator.com)