talkmagic.co.uk

Nuff said. On Twitter he asked people to re-tweet this.

http://www.pauldaniels.co.uk/blog/

The tabloid press are rarely interested in the full picture which is why I haven't bought a newspaper for over 20 years. Paul Saniels' advice yonks ago after a previous made up story in one of the daily rags was, for genuine unbiased news, get it from a selection of TV, radio and these days I suppose we could add the Internet news providers to those sources.

I think it's horrible when the papers attack people for taking a fee for a charity gig. Would the printers who did the promotional material do it for free? Would the venue do it for free? No and even the oragnisers themselves most of the time are being paid for it. But it's always the poor old performers who get it in the neck

The agent they're talking to seems like a bit of a sleaze to me. I say we invade the story forums and blast them with some facts

I know I'm a relative newbie on this forum but I'm with you on this Tomo. PD along with David Nixon was the inspiration for me getting into magic as a kid.

Let's hit the news forums/comment pages when the story breaks!

It's dangerous territory isn't it?

At least he's being more honest than some others. I do smile when I see the apoplexy of the popular press when people have the audacity to sell popular charity event tickets for a profit.

nothing on the mirror website yet ...

The annoying thing is that the Mirror knows the situation about how performers work and why.

It's no revelation. Just cheap copy on a slow news day.

A few years ago I was involved in organising a charity evening with a popular local comedian. Although he was giving his services for free, he insisted the tickets be sold at the normal rate for one of his shows otherwise it could cheapen his value in the entertainment market and that would cost him far more than the fee he was 'donating' by not taking it. He also said that he could understand why some names charged and kept a fee just to make sure tickets are sold at a proper cost to prevent undercutting their bread and butter commercial bookings.

How many threads have we seen here on TM from pubs & clubs who've posted a need for a magish, no fee, just a few drinks and experience? Quite rightly we've showered them with appropriate 'comment' and PD's situation is no different, all entertainers should be paid their worth and if they then donate it back or onwards somewhere else, that's their business.

The events company that I work for are bombarded all the time by people wanting to run events for charities. They are often outraged when I quote them a figure for their event. "But it's for charity!" they cry. "Yes," I explain, "but the performers and venue still need paying." Many go off in a huff to find "somewhere else that will do it for free".

If performers did all the charity work they get contacted about for free, they would literally be working for nothing 7 days a week.

... what a bunch of clankers the press are.
edit: (to keep Tomo happy...)
... what a bunch of clankers that MOST of the press are.

I've just completed a load of graphic/web work for a local firm doing a 'charity ball'. They had no hesitation paying me for it, and I had no reservations charging for it.

Why?

From a morals standpoint, I already donate money to charity in my own slices.

From a business point of view, I can't afford to do owt for nowt.

From a personal perspective, if a 'company'—whether it's a charity or a commercial one—commissions me to do work, I treat it as 'work'. If I am walking down the high street in my own time and I see a guy dressed in a suit covered in medals with a poppy tray, I donate my own money.

Needless to say, if the work I'd done graphically and website wise for the aforementioned charity gig HADN'T been done, they'd have not made any money from the ball as they'd have had no posters, no invites, no tickets, no blog, no publicity—ergo, nobody to turn up.

The charity ball tickets cost the attendees £50—which got them a nice meal and a tabled seat. As I'm aware, the charity ball made in excess of £12,000 for the charity from ticket sales, auctions and on-the-night donations.

That's £12,000 AFTER they'd paid the hotel, publicity and me.

(Oh, and the hotel charged full whack as well... why shouldn't they?)

At the end of the day, the news is pretty average at the moment since Swine Flu has dropped a little in the excitement stakes, so dishing the 'dirt' on a high profile celeb is just the way of the vulture-like tabloid journos.

As Paul says, he has his select group of 'no fee' gigs—which he's basically donating his time and skills to make money. The rest (who REQUEST him) get a charge. I see no harm in that whatsoever.

What is purposely more hurtful (except from having to read tiny white text on a black background on Mr D's site ) is the fact that the tabloids will utter the untruths KNOWING that even they themselves probably walk-on-by the charity box, or sit tight on their wallet at charity events.

Hypocritical, also, that they are publishing the article to MAKE MONEY. And, they are MAKING MONEY from publishing an article about how a CHARITY IS BEING HARD DONE BY.

Surely, if their morals are so strong, they should donate the agent's payoff for the story to the said charity to right the wrong?

Yeah, thought not ...

Woah, hey, hang on. Don't go lumping ALL the press in the scum category, or you're no better than a red top editor.

Tomo wrote:Woah, hey, hang on. Don't go lumping ALL the press in the scum category, or you're no better than a red top editor.

No... not ALL the press are scum.

I've got two very close friends who are a man & wife journalists... and they live for their job and for accuracy.

Unfortunately, there's not much money available for the truth these days.

Nice to see you back on TM Seige and I do not that you're not charging us a fee

Seriously though, people often want something for nothing and will then waste the money that they save. You will often find that the charity pays various expenses to some of their workers when arranging events and then rely on free labour from volunteers to provide the hard labour.

Mr Daniels has explained himself and I think that it's a good explanation and that he is justified in doing what he wants to do with his own time, skills and donations.

Tabloid journalists and editors are nothing short than a bunch of... well, you know.

Similar happened with Chris Moyles a few weeks ago, where The Sun published a story saying he was going to be getting the boot by the end of the year. They knew it was untrue, the journalist phoned up Radio 1 who said it was untrue. Yet they still printed it anyway

I get my news from BBC, at least I know they take their time to check their facts and don't knowingly post lies. The scum who write this stuff give journalists a bad name, and shouldn't be called one

kolm wrote:Similar happened with Chris Moyles a few weeks ago, where The Sun published a story saying he was going to be getting the boot by the end of the year. They knew it was untrue, the journalist phoned up Radio 1 who said it was untrue. Yet they still printed it anyway

Probably just wishful thinking.