Press photographers banned from pride because of last year’s Get The L Out protest

Major own goal now they've done a u-turn

This journo didn't mince her words:

"it is a serious attack on press freedom that undermines the ability of journalists to carry out their work"

How to get journalists interested in a story - tell them they're not allowed to cover it. Own goal Pride.

My first question would also be "what are they trying to hide."

Now that they have decided to let press photographers in after all, I hope some of them will be looking for this. Will it be like the one planned for Brighton in a couple of weeks, with a 'Fetish March'?

twitter.com/BrightonResist1/status/1147213188506820608?s=19

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3630406-Brighton-Pride-omg

Apologies just seen they have backtracked, what a fiasco.

I’m glad they’ve done this. Pride and the people in charge are out of control and by banning the MS media they will attract far more attention that they ordinarily would have. Let’s hope this ridiculous decision raises a lot of questions.

They never said owt about trans.

Yeah aspley exactly

Interesting line in that article:
"The changes came after anti-trans protesters forced their way to the front of last year’s parade and handed out leaflets "

"Anti trans protesters" FFS they were lesbians - trying to point out how lesbians are being redefined and erased by the trans lobby. This is happening. We are being told that lesbians can have penises and objecting makes us "anti-trans" f**k off with this shit.

Come on journalists - earn your money.
Expose Pride for being the anti-lesbian, porn soaked nonsense that it is.

Where there are protests there are counter-protests. They don’t want photos of burly baseball bat wielding transwomen ‘defending’ themselves against 60 year-olds armed only with dictionaries.

I rather think that Stonewall's slogan: "Acceptance without exception" may need to be changed some time soon, after Amanda Speilman's speech at the Stonewall conference today and the Pride London event this Saturday.

It's all beginning to unravel as more and more light is thrown on what Stonewall and its associates that comprise the Trans lobby are doing.

The question needs to be, why is taxpayers' money being given to the Trans Lobby via these so-called "LGBTQ etc" groups when none of them are representing anyone but the "TQ etc" and some, like Stonewall are even ostracising Lesbians?

For anyone not familiar with the pups reference: www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3619623-pup-play-fans-dance-for-children-at-pride

zebras you really scared me. What the hell are people thinking of, leaving their children with these men?

Really sinister to limit press freedom. My first question would also be "what are they trying to hide." Of course, one answer would be "leather pups with erections around children".

Don’t massive marches and stuff like this have to have permission from the local Authority (Westminster council) and London Mayor?
And Pride London is sponsored by Tesco and loads of other sponsors? Wouldn’t something like this need to involve everyone’s explicit agreements to limit press freedom- not just the Pride London charity that organises this day-so?

What are the organisers afraid of? What do the sponsors thinking that they are supporting?

prideinlondon.org/support-us/partners/

So journalists and photographers are able to report from war zones in countries ruled by dictators but banned from a peaceful festival in their own capital city?

They might be a bit worried, as well, about photos of furries and kinks making it into the media. At the moment doggies on leashes and drag kids are showing only on twitter. On the front page of the DM or Telegraph they might raise a few eyebrows.

Ok so vast majority of population has a phone with a camera on it, many people myself included have digital slr cameras. How are they going to stop random people sending photos to the press? Do they know by sight every press photographer?

This says to me there is something to hide and press will hopefully go incognito and then report on it.

Amazing how scary a small group of lesbians saying they're not sexually attracted to people with penises is.

Wonder if Janice Turner or James Kirkup will pick up on this?

Goosefoot said:
^"I have heard about places where Pride has actually closed off streets and not let people through without paying.

Do most Pride festivals make money? It seems like they must. It's odd, most other festivals I can think of that are similar have nowhere near the same level of sponsorship or money flowing through. A lot of them struggle to make ends meet."^

Brighton Pride charge for entry to the main festival at Preston Park (which is pretty much a Pride-themed music festival with big-name pop acts) and into the 'street party' on St James' Street (which is the main road in Kemp Town, the gay village in Brighton). The parade is free but very, very heavily corporate. When I attended last year the parade went on for AGES and there were relatively few grass roots groups in the parade compared to big, sponsored floats for companies like Barclays, British Airways etc

Any journalist worthy of the name should be asking “what are they trying to hide?”

This.

Also, how are pride intending to stop a professional photographer from attending the event and taking their own photos by other means, other than being officially accredited?

A bit of planning and forethought and you can manage to get around a cordon issue...

My guess is that one of the papers has been making mutterings about exposing the whole thing as the farce it is and they are running scared as there is nothing they can do.

Puppy fetish is evidently more acceptable than female homosexuality in Pride 2019. Come on papers - report this stuff. Help the #getthelout girls.

The anti-terf mob threatening lesbians are uncontrollable and the less said about the fetish stuff the better (fetish has nothing to do with LGBT - straight people are involved with fetish too).

Any journalist worthy of the name should be asking “what are they trying to hide?”

I wonder if they can't afford to lose the advertising that is keeping the newspapers etc. alive?

As so many here have commented - this has the familiar odour of charities and virtue-signalling organisations being able to control a narrative right up until a collapse (eg, Kids Company and Camila Batmanghelidjh).

I have heard about places where Pride has actually closed off streets and not let people through without paying.

Do most Pride festivals make money? It seems like they must. It's odd, most other festivals I can think of that are similar have nowhere near the same level of sponsorship or money flowing through. A lot of them struggle to make ends meet.

Any journalist worthy of the name should be asking “what are they trying to hide?” and acting accordingly by doing their fucking job regardless and refusing to bow to this edict.