Read on Twitter
For one, it improve s credibility/trust in your business. It is ALWAYS better to hire a professional photographer/graphic designer/creator for content for businesses and organizations - and that goes for government, too. Why?
For one, it improves trust in your business. Think shopping on Amazon/eBay. Are you going to trust the seller that has gone to the effort to take a picture/hire someone to take one of their product/service, or the stock image 18 other sellers are using and may have stolen?
For another, it shows you're invested in your community by supporting local creators/business owners. Chances are, if you invest in them, they'll invest in you.
I'm not going to lie - it has actually really bugged me how every level of government is guilty of using stock photos.
I'm not going to lie - it has actually really bugged me how every level of government is guilty of using stock photos.
This isn't a partisan issue - all stripes have done it. And I get it to an extent - stock photos are easy to find, typically cheap or even free, and if you're looking to save $ any way possible, it often looks like the best option.
But there is a trade off.
But there is a trade off.
Most stock sites don't tell you how many times a photo has been used. Sometimes you have no idea where a photo is actually taken, or where the photographer is from. Are you paying a foreign-based photographer/stock agency & inadvertently promoting their work, or someone local?
For government, especially any govt. wanting to claim they're investing in the economy, trying to spur and attract business, it's especially important to actually hire photographers/creators, because it's an industry like anything else, and often there's a disconnect with that.
Photos have huge power in sending messages. They're the first thing people notice when picking up a newspaper, or clicking on a website. Social media posts that have images are much more likely to attract attention than those without.
Yet, there are 'photographers' out there who have cheapened the industry by giving work out for free, or putting their images on stock sites where the licencing fees are minuscule, because they're OK with making pocket change.
But photos have a lot of value, particular when you're trying to convey a certain message. A good photographer will understand there can be subliminal messaging sent through composition. Using stock photos....you don't have control over that messaging.
I've seen a local business try and sell shirts with messages promoting diversity - with minority 'models' standing in front of a background that had a garbage can. This legit sent the exact opposite message of the product they were trying to sell. I refused to buy for that reason
I'm not saying money should be spent frivolously on photography/art (don't pull a Catherine McKenna), but the return on having photos,artwork by local professionals is way better than on stock images. And you're supporting your economy, and not wherever the stock site is based.
