First AP reports on a Crackdown on photography on the London Underground, and the creation of a paid for pass for shooting on the underground which is private property. At least this indicates that with the reasonable permission - and a route to get it, you can shoot on the London Underground, at least until some station staff decide the LU permit is 'not valid on this station'.
Secondly we have Sherpherdpics story about former Home Secretary David Blunkett commenting on the sacking of Britain's most senior anti-terrorism officer for displaying a top secret memo on the top of his papers leaving Downing Street. The officer was snapped by a member of the UK press from the designated press pen outside Downing Street.
So for private property like London Underground photographers have at least a route to get passes, though I wonder how many mobile phone camera users would apply? Then for the press in designated press areas outside the official residence of the UK prime minister it's suggested that it should not be allowed to take pictures of people leaving No. 10!
Should the various heads of departments take more care with what they show in public, or should photography be censored / banned to reduce the responsibility of being a top chief and having to carry top secret papers? Photographers often buy bags to make their photography kit less visible or liable to theft, do you think 'well paid' officials should be issued with document carrying bags as standard?
Comments?
-blabpictures-