I was in London a few weeks ago, and when travelling I’m never without my camera and a load of heavy accessories. I was out in the morning taking pictures in Hyde Park – people, birds, views, anything.
I’m not a professional photographer, but I’ve been taking pictures for many years, have got some good equipment and, I think, I know how to use it. During my hour in and around Hyde Park I was recognised (mistakenly) as a professional photographer twice and invited into a press launch once.

I declined that invitation because the press officer for the organisation whose launch it was saw my 100-400mm lens and assumed I was a pro from one of the Dailies. She would have expected me to carry a press card and I don’t. It was a private event and that would have been her right.
However, in all other respects those who carry press cards have no more rights when it comes to photography than those of us who do not. But the fact the Metropolitan Police guidelines on photography state: “Genuine members of the media carry identification, for instance the UK Press Card, which they will present on request”, even though the guidelines also say, “Members of the public and the media do not need a permit to film or photograph in public places and police have no power to stop them filming or photographing” says, yes, anyone is allowed to take pictures, but if they don’t have a press card then they are up to no good.
If members of the public do not need a permit to photograph in public places, and if the police have no power to stop them photographing, why should the presence or absence of a press card make any difference?
And if professionals have the protection of press cards (which is how the Met Police clearly see them) as well as protection from their employers and unions, what protection do us non-professional, non press card carrying photographers have?