The Joke's On The PAGB

[Mike Farley]

The second page of the PAGB newsletter might have worked better if the original e-mail sent early on 1 April had actually linked to the newsletter. As it was, the e-mail with the correct link did not go out until later in the day after the traditional midday deadline.

http://www.pagbnews.co.uk/sites/default ... _01Apr.pdf

[davidc]

This link doesn't work either.

[Mike Farley]

This link doesn't work either.

The newsletter seems to have been something of a rush job to hit the 1 April deadline, with the result that the PAGB kept stumbling over itself. Apparently some links were omitted from the initial version and it had to be re-issued, together with a new link to the bulletin. Here's the latest one, which is OK for now at least.

http://www.pagbnews.co.uk/sites/default ... _01Apr.pdf

[Rose]

I still think the joke was in bad taste... or am I just being a sour grape ??
Maybe it's because my birthday is on 1 April and I grew up being the butt of April Fool joke 'presents' - and having people not believe it was my birthday at all !

[Mike Farley]

I still think the joke was in bad taste... or am I just being a sour grape ??

Not so much bad taste in my view, but casting doubt on the credibility of the PAGB distinctions seemed like poor judgement and was not especially funny. Whatever words we use, you are right to be dubious about the whole affair.

Oh, and a belated happy birthday by the way.

I hope that you didn't get what you didn't want.

[davidc]

Just seen it. Not funny and if you hadn't told me it was a joke I'd have believed it real. The PAGB are about as po-faced as it comes in UK photography so this is double-bad!

[Mike Farley]

Just seen it. Not funny and if you hadn't told me it was a joke I'd have believed it real. The PAGB are about as po-faced as it comes in UK photography so this is double-bad!

My initial thought was they were off their trollies, but the dubious attempt at humour became apparent as it got more extreme towards the end. Further on in the newsletter there was another "funny" about banning the use of Photoshop. There does seem to be a mismatch between the standards the PAGB demands for its distinctions and the far lower bar it sets for itself when it comes to "comedy".

[Peter Boughton]

For those at last night's meeting about the PAGB awards, here's the April Fool mentioned - page two of the PDF...

http://www.pagbnews.co.uk/sites/default ... _01Apr.pdf

[Mike Farley]

Amazingly the PAGB's ill thought out attempt at humour was not the most bizarre of this year's round of April Fools, an honour which definitely went to Pixsy for its curious straightfaced "announcement" that it had been acquired by Getty Images. The company did try to rectify the situation, but when it followed up it tried to justify its actions rather than simply apologise for what was a significant error of judgement. Since then I have not been able to think of the company as a serious player.

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=2088&p=9954&hilit=pixsy#p9954