NFL may ban even more web video
Cory Bergman March 25th, 2007
The NFL is considering expanding its ban on video on newspaper and TV websites. Last year, it banned local TV photographers from the sidelines and prohibited game-day video on unofficial websites — even sound bites with coaches and players. And now it may ban any midweek practice video or press conferences, as well. “[The issue] is what, if any, amount of the interview footage should be allowed on websites since it is NFL content,” said NFL spokesman Greg Aiello. The NFL owners’ meetings are this week in Phoenix, so we’ll see what happens. Rant away below…
Adds Paul in comments: “That’s pretty narrow-minded on their part. I realize they have to protect their product, but their product is irrevocably out in the public sphere. You can’t completely control who reports on it. Expect the media to challenge this.”
12 Comments Add your own
1. Allen | March 25th, 2007 at 10:24 pm
I hate the NFL. And you don’t want to know what I think of Greg Aiello and his lies.
2. Safran | March 26th, 2007 at 4:31 am
Shocked. Shocked I am.
3. invitedmedia | March 26th, 2007 at 5:42 am
check out b&c…
seems i saw that word “VIEWSERS” before.
4. Paul | March 26th, 2007 at 6:37 am
That’s pretty narrow-minded on their part. I realize they have to protect their product, but their product is irrevocably out in the public sphere. You can’t completely control who reports on it. Expect the media to challenge this.
5. Bryan Murley | March 26th, 2007 at 9:30 am
I’m with Paul, and I would add how much of their product has been built on the backs of taxpayers who funded their multi-million dollar stadiums.
6. saundra | March 26th, 2007 at 9:52 am
These days, how do the teams decide who gets a press pass to “cover” the team anyway…. isn’t any Joe who generates some traffic to a blog about the team entitled to a pass if the local MSM is?
7. The Tony | March 26th, 2007 at 12:59 pm
I hope this means the end of sports reports in local news shows.
MAN, those things are useless and painful to sit through.
Maybe we can cut out a few other bits and hack local news down to 15-minute broadcasts? That’d be much better, no filler stories.
Oh, right…we’re talking about the web thing.
It’s their content, their players…and their call.
Why shouldn’t the NFL, like it or not, have a say in where its own games or players or anything goes? They’re only damaging themselves by restricting the amount of info and coverage out there…
…so, whatever.
Everyone in the world is a greedy bastard. The more you have, the worse it gets.
Expect a war between the Haves and the Haves. Yeehaw…
8. Allen | March 26th, 2007 at 1:53 pm
Sorry, Tony…sports reports will continue. We aren’t going away. I know some of you think sports is a waste of time, but believe it or not, there is an interest in it when done right.
I love how the news folks poo-poo sports until a Super Bowl or big tourney comes to their town then it becomes the lead with the anchors and news reporters all gung-ho about sports.
I’ve been a sports photog for 20 years. Having said that, I’m so disgusted with the NFL that I hope they ban us completely. I’m tired of their crap.
9. The Tony | March 26th, 2007 at 2:13 pm
No one’s allowed to say “Super Bowl,” sadly.
I don’t work in, but rather with, a newsroom. (Thankfully.)
But, seriously…we need the NFL. If they’re taken out of the TV sports equation, we’ll be forced to watch more sports anchors pretending NASCAR is a valid way to fill their portion of the newscast.
Congrats on 2 decades as a sports photog, though. I couldn’t do it.
10. Gunner | March 26th, 2007 at 8:12 pm
Expect the media to challenge? What a joke. Maybe if this were the media of 40 or 50 years ago, but not today. Nope, no sir, they’ll just take their licks and say, “Thank you sir, may I have another” until all they are left with is a press release and a handout photo.
11. Safran | March 26th, 2007 at 8:53 pm
Allen: Nobody poo-poos sports. Anyone who has followed this space knows what a sports nut I am. At LR we argue for MORE local sports coverage, just less time devoted to covering professional sports teams the same way everyone else does.
You said it yourself - you are a professional who is tired of being dictated to by the subject you are covering. In no other aspect of your newsroom would that be allowed. But for some reason, sports journalism still finds it acceptable for the subject to dictate control of the story.
We can do so much more. We can find great stories about sports in our community. We can’t compete with ESPN or even the sports teams and their own networks anymore - so why try? Let’s put that mastery of yours to work on stories where you get to use your eye for something besides looking out for NFL officials who don’t want you there.
No more useless locker room bites. No more highlights 8 hours after the game is over. No more following teams around while ignoring our own communities. Let’s cover local sports instead. The pro teams have made it perfectly clear: THEY DON’T WANT US THERE.
Why do we keep begging?
12. Allen | March 27th, 2007 at 6:24 am
Steve,
No all pro teams are doing this. Our MLB and NBA teams in town have been pretty good to us, especially compared to the NFL. We do cover the local sports and put most of our emphasis on doing so. I think we’ve done a great job letting ESPN do the national highlights.
This new potential NFL web interview ban has got me riled up because we use our site a lot for interviews. Just the other day I put up 14 minutes of NBA postgame bites. Overkill? Maybe, but for the hardcore NBA fan it beats the :14 second bite we give them on the sportscast. If I’m going to shoot all of those interviews I’d like them used somewhere.
Leave a Comment
(Please keep URLs out of the comment body or the spam filter will block you.)Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed