Rumors of impropriety have swirled around Creating Keepsakes’ annual Hall of Fame contest almost from its beginning 9 years ago. But with the release of Vol. 9 of the Hall of Fame annual, featuring the 2007 contest winners, the whispers have become a roar that Creating Keepsakes and the scrapbook industry can no longer pretend not to hear.
The 2007 contest rules explicitly stated that all photos in the entry had to have been taken by the entrant. But when the book hit newstands recently, at least one layout by winner Kristina Contes was accompanied by a photo credit to past Hall of Famer Nisa Fiin. Outraged entrants have besieged online message boards, including the one on CK’s own site, asking why Contes was made a winner of the contest instead of disqualified.
Interestingly, an examination of the 2007 contest rules reveals that “Entries that do not follow the specified format, or that include more or less than 10 scrapbook layouts, will automatically be disqualified from the 2007 Scrapbook Hall of Fame contest…” The “format” reference appears to the way that the entry was to be compiled and presented for judging, not its actual content. Later, the rules state that “Entries, including photographs, must be the sole work of the entrant” and “The winner…will be required to execute an affidavit of eligibility, compliance with contest rules and release of liability.”
Nowhere does it state in the published rules what the penalty is for failing to complete the assignments as instructed. The only specific penalty listed is disqualification for failing to assemble and submit your entry as instructed. Whether there are penalties specified in the affidavit of eligibility for violating contest rules (or signing an affidavit that says you are in compliance when you weren’t) is unclear and would likely be a civil court matter.
Creating Keepsakes’ response to this controversy was unorganized and inaccurate. First, CK web hostess Erin Lincoln attempted to clean up the mess by claiming the photo credit was an “editorial mistake”. When it became clear that her explanation wasn’t going to stem the rising tide of public opinion against the magazine, CK Editor-in-Chief Brian Tippetts stepped into the fray with an official statement on the Creating Keepsakes message board. His initial statement apologizing to Kristina Contes for mis-attributing her pictures on the “Family of 3″ layout to Nisa Fiin was misguided at best.
Later that same day (Wednesday October 10th) Tippetts was forced to issue another statement retracting the earlier one by acknowledging that not only were the pictures on the “Family of 3″ layout taken by Fiin, but so were the photos on three other of Contes’ layouts published in the Hall of Fame book. In his second statement, Tippetts basically placed the sole blame for the scandal on Contes by claiming that at the time of judging “we had no information that the stated photos were taken by someone other than the contestant.” He goes on to stress that “Fairness in identifying the industry’s top talent has always been our top priority,” but makes no mention of any CK plans to take action against Kristina Contes for the rules violation.
So now, after years of rumors about the contest, something concrete is out there. Should Kristina Contes be stripped of her Hall of Fame win? It certainly seems that she didn’t follow the same rules as the other contestants. This brings to mind a similar debate in baseball – the Barry Bonds home run record. Barry’s record-breaking ball is being sent to the Hall of Fame after a fan vote to put an asterisk on it. Whether or not she is stripped of her title officially, Kristina Contes as a Hall of Famer will always have an asterisk next to her too from those who follow the industry.
Will there be wider repercussions from this controversy for the scrapbooking industry? For one, I think the fall out from this may well spell the end of the Hall of Fame contest. I wouldn’t be surprised if 2008 is the last one. Already because of the rules changes for that one, I know few people who are entering.
This controversy also may start a trend towards magazines requiring more exclusivity from their designers. Memory Makers cannot be happy about having the reputation of the author of one of their latest books dragged through the mud in a scandal that has to do with a competing publisher. To have more control over their designer’s activities – and thus reputations – publishers may see this as a reason to start requiring their headline designers to sign non-compete agreements.
Could this affect the reputation and growth of the industry as a whole with consumers? Possibly. CK Media is a big player and Creating Keepsakes is their flagship. Through the magazine and their events, CK does a lot to promote the industry to consumers. If the reputations of people like Lisa Bearnson and the other CK “names” are affected, the loss of goodwill could affect their ability to work to expand the scrapbook market.
Only time will tell what the entire fallout will be. But this bell of scandal has been rung and can’t be un-rung. Some things will definitely be different from now on. Good? Bad? We’ll have to wait and see.
Bonjour,
I’m french artist.
how are you?
PROLIX
{ThE fReNcH tOuCh}
http://prolix.typepad.fr
nancy, love your article on this. I do have to add though, that it just wasn’t Kristina that used photos from someone else. There were at least 3 others. Very obviously handpicked, as one was the young male scrapper.
Don’t just pin this on Kristina.
Thanks
Thank you for the informative article. I’m really struggling with this one! I can see both sides but, either way, the fallout will be bad news for all involved.
Thanks for the story….I had seen the hubbub on the message boards, but was having a hard time putting together what really happened.Thanks again!
Controversy Surrounds Creating Keepsakes Hall of Fame Book Release
Via Nancy Nally’s Scrapbook Update: Controversy Surrounds Creating Keepsakes Hall of Fame Book Release. Rumors of impropriety have swirled around Creating Keepsakes’ annual Hall of Fame contest almost from its beginning 9 years ago. But with the releas…
Controversy Surrounds Creating Keepsakes Hall of Fame Book Release
Via Nancy Nally’s Scrapbook Update: Controversy Surrounds Creating Keepsakes Hall of Fame Book Release. Rumors of impropriety have swirled around Creating Keepsakes’ annual Hall of Fame contest almost from its beginning 9 years ago. But with the releas…
Controversy Surrounds Creating Keepsakes Hall of Fame Book Release
Via Nancy Nally’s Scrapbook Update: Controversy Surrounds Creating Keepsakes Hall of Fame Book Release. Rumors of impropriety have swirled around Creating Keepsakes’ annual Hall of Fame contest almost from its beginning 9 years ago. But with the releas…
Controversy Surrounds Creating Keepsakes Hall of Fame Book Release
Via Nancy Nally’s Scrapbook Update: Controversy Surrounds Creating Keepsakes Hall of Fame Book Release. Rumors of impropriety have swirled around Creating Keepsakes’ annual Hall of Fame contest almost from its beginning 9 years ago. But with the releas…
Controversy Surrounds Creating Keepsakes Hall of Fame Book Release
Via Nancy Nally’s Scrapbook Update: Controversy Surrounds Creating Keepsakes Hall of Fame Book Release. Rumors of impropriety have swirled around Creating Keepsakes’ annual Hall of Fame contest almost from its beginning 9 years ago. But with the releas…
Thanks for always keeping us up on the latest in the industry! I linked to your article to share with my friends.
-d.
Thank you muchly for the informative article… it’s been the easiest to actually understand and seems to be fact based rather that the subjective and / or emotional comments that I have seen elsewhere. I think CK have done more damage with the perceived “coverup” but don’t you think this whole controversy is all just a bit overdone? (I mean we are talking scrapbooking not JFK here!!!).
Also, I have a purely hypothetical question, genuinely not trying to be a smart alec or stir up further controversy… rather just to make it clear in my mind… “If I were to enter the HoF contest (under these stated rules that Contes has allegedly broken)… and I used a happy snap that my sister-in law took of my family, myself included, would I be breaking the rules?” It’s my camera, I have begged and bribed my children to all sit still and smile, I have promised my husband all manner of “favours” that we won’t mention here LOL… and I have only handed her the camera and asked her to “point and shoot” because I don’t own a tripod… and for the life of me have NEVER been able to take a decent shot with the timer. Does this mean that the image is not my own? I have often wondered about such things in relation to photography in general… wedding photos for example… the photographer owns the “image”… but surely if I am that image… I should own it… it is ME afterall…mmmmmmm… I wonder what other’s think.
Thanks for the very well written summary of the situation (I have been traveling and got all caught up on the latest industry news in minutes thanks to you!).
I worked for many years in the high tech industry, beginning in PR. The number one lesson I learned from that job was this:
“Tell it all and tell it early.”
What I mean by this is that when you, as a company or individual, realize you have made a mistake, done something which violates rules/laws, or does something without integrity, the best plan of action is to explain the situation, to everyone, as quickly as possible…and be honest about it! Yes, PR pros are known to put a “spin” on things so they appear better or less damaging than they are, but they (the real pros) know enough to be the one “driving the public knowledge bus” rather than letting others drive the discussion and dissemination of facts and/or information.
This situation could have so easily been avoided, if:
1. The entrant had followed the rules
2. The contest host had enforced the rules
3. When the breaking of the rules was discovered, either the entrant admitted to the mistake and stepped down from the HOF title, or the contest host made an announcement to the affect that the rules were not followed and followed it by removing the HOF title from the offender. This applies whether or not the entrant “meant to” violate the rules and/or the contest host “knew” about the photography ownership/credit.
Having integrity is doing the right thing even when, or especially when, it’s not likely anyone else will ever know what you did. This industry could sue more integrity.
In the end, is this situation all that important in the big scope of things going on in the world? No, probably not. But, where do we draw the line on dishonesty?
Steph
Binxcat1
If I am not mistaken, it doesn’t matter who the picture is of or who owns the camera. What matters is whose finger pushes down the button to take the picture. They are the ones who “own” the image.
“If I am not mistaken, it doesn’t matter who the picture is of or who owns the camera. What matters is whose finger pushes down the button to take the picture. They are the ones who “own” the image”
you may be
IANAL, but there’s obviously a question of who owns someone’s likeness (for publication purposes) and who owns an image…if i try to take a picture of say eiffel tower and sell it in a gift shop, i’d be looking at a legal battle, because i do not own the image for that specific purpose.
this is to say–it’s up to CK to decide what they determine ownership, while keeping in mind copyright laws with respect to the purpose of the image.
on a personal note–i’m torn on whether or not i think it was well thought out, this rule about you being the photographer. in one sense i really think that scrapbooking is about how you use what you have to creatively tell a story, and *that’s* what the contest is about, not how skillful a photogrpaher you are. on the other hand, if they want to make a rule like that, it’s a decent enough challenge, although it makes obvious how so many of the layouts won’t be heartfelt (meaning to me that the artistic value is cheapened), because it was created solely for the purpose of winning a contest.
i can more sensibly see them having such a rule to make sure legal issues are avoided (i.e. taking a picture of a person on the street then using it then winning then being sued by the subject)
j.