NFL to require photojournalists to wear logoed vests
Don Day July 18th, 2007
Hoooo boy. The National Press Photographer’s Association says the NFL just passed another one of its famous rules: independent press photogs will be required to wear vests adorned with Reebok and Canon logos. Oh… and the vests will be red. “I think it’s extremely unfortunate that the NFL, after limiting the number of local video photojournalists on the sidelines, is now attempting to turn them into roving billboards,” attorney and former photojournalist Mickey Osterreicher told the NPPA’s News Photographer Magazine.
The presence of corporate logos on game vests could be construed by some editors to be a violation of journalistic independence. As an example, many newspapers do not allow their employees to have political bumper stickers on their cars supporting candidates or political parties, or to donate to charities, or to participate in events that could be misunderstood or bring into question the organization’s neutral or independent stance.
18 Comments Add your own
1. Jonathan | July 19th, 2007 at 4:10 am
Okay, this vest rule is ridiculous, but:
“…or to participate in events that could be misunderstood…”
What? We’ve gone from “conflict of interest” to “the appearance of conflict of interest” to…”could be misunderstood?” Where will it end?
2. Brink | July 19th, 2007 at 6:26 am
Screw ‘em. Stop covering NFL. Leave it to the network guys or NFL Network. Cover sports that your viewers can’t see done better someplace else.
3. Mike Escutia | July 19th, 2007 at 7:06 am
I have to agree with Brink on this one. Vote with your feet, newspeople!
4. Jeff Bailey | July 19th, 2007 at 7:12 am
Duck® Tape comes in a variety of colors, including Red, Atomic Yellow Neon, Island Lime and Pink Flamingo Neon, suitable for masking any number of embroidered logos.
5. Steve | July 19th, 2007 at 7:14 am
Do the rules prevent you from wearing a hat that says “NFL pigdogs made me wear this vest”
6. Allen | July 19th, 2007 at 7:20 am
I’ve heard of cases where still photogs had to tape over brand names on their hats.
7. Steve Safran | July 19th, 2007 at 7:27 am
I was going to write my usual response.
Then I saw that Brink beat me to it.
Good on’ ya.
Enough with begging for scraps from these people. Let’s cover local news instead.
8. ha ha | July 19th, 2007 at 7:28 am
It’s nice to say “screw em” to the NFL, but then your audience will say “screw you” and change the channel.
TV news plays by the rules of others in covering almost every story they do. The NFL has the power. Get used to it.
9. tdc | July 19th, 2007 at 8:09 am
guess it would depend on the sponsor…
hOOters, and i’m in!
10. Scott | July 19th, 2007 at 8:25 am
If it’s all about product placement, have sports departments charge the NFL and MLB for airtime during the sportscast. After all, they’re the ones helping get the word out about the sport, which in turn, makes teams and leagues money. Why shouldn’t the stations get a cut?
11. Anon | July 19th, 2007 at 8:41 am
Agreed, local stations should get a cut if they are wearing the vests. They wont.
12. JoeMo | July 19th, 2007 at 9:45 am
It’s time the NFL is pushed out of taxpayer funded stadiums and they build their own. Then they can make these idiotic rules…
13. Larry Crittenden | July 19th, 2007 at 2:25 pm
JoeMo has a point. There was a bill in the Michigan legislature last year that would have protected local media access to events in publicly funded stadiums. The bill had good support, but ran out of time. We (local broadcasters) are working to get a new version introduced this session. We contend that any gathering of 60,000 people is newsworthy and that unreasonable restrictions on news coverage are inconsistent with public “ownership” of stadiums and arenas.
14. Larry Crittenden | July 19th, 2007 at 2:25 pm
JoeMo has a point. There was a bill in the Michigan legislature last year that would have protected local media access to events in publicly funded stadiums. The bill had good support, but ran out of time. We (local broadcasters) are working to get a new version introduced this session. We contend that any gathering of 60,000 people is newsworthy and that unreasonable restrictions on news coverage are inconsistent with public “ownership” of stadiums and arenas.
15. tdc | July 19th, 2007 at 3:33 pm
cool, larry.
that means we can stream the thanksgiving day parade, fourth of july fireworks, hydroplane races, etc. without compensating anyone?
16. News Consumer | July 19th, 2007 at 5:42 pm
Maybe we should have professional sports declared a highly dangerous and adictive activity - a bit like gambling or drugs. Then we could send all the sports fiends to therapy and pull the plug on NFL Network, ESPN 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and maybe my cable bill will go down. I’m all for that.
17. Rob | July 19th, 2007 at 5:47 pm
Sounds like the NFL has a monopoly on professional football.
Maybe we need to bring back the AFL and make it consumer, media and web friendly?
18. discreet_chaos | July 21st, 2007 at 6:00 am
tdc - Both NBC and CBS broadcast the Macy’s Thanksgiving Day Parade. NBC is right in front of the store and they get good angles of what’s being judged, while CBS comes from the roadside, but both networks broadcast the parade. It’s a public event.
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