"We believe that the new policy is an arbitrary attempt to limit independent news reporting on SEC...

"We believe that the new policy is an arbitrary attempt to limit independent news reporting on SEC sporting events and ultimately to restrict the coverage that SEC fans have long enjoyed and have every right to expect as supporters of SEC teams and taxpayers financing SEC institutions," said David McCraw, vice president and assistant general counsel for the New York Times Co., owner of the The Tuscaloosa News.

SEC plans to enact new media policy | TuscaloosaNews.com | The Tuscaloosa News | Tuscaloosa, AL.

There is a new Media Policy for the SEC, which was distributed this past week. Among other rules, the SEC is now prohibiting credentialing of anyone other than full-time salaried employees of news outlets. The Tuscaloosa News worries about its effect on freelance journalists or hourly wage employees they hire, but I think this policy is aimed squarely at bloggers.

Lately, many bloggers including our SBNation colleagues cocknfire at Team Speed Kills and Joel at Rocky Top Talk have succeeded in getting credentialed for events like SEC Media Days. Apparently the SEC has changed its mind about its tentative embrace of "the new media" if bloggers, most of whom have day jobs, are not allowed to be credentialed simply because they are not full-time salaried employees of their news outlets.

As an organization made up of more than 90% public, government institutions, I wonder if the SEC is considered a "state actor" for First Amendment purposes. If it is, the SEC would be subject to the limitations imposed by the First Amendment. I would think this would limit the kinds of rules they can place on who can cover their events, and how. As a government actor, I think they could say, "No one gets credentialed," but if they say, "Here are the rules of getting credentialed, and some of you are eligible while others of you aren't," they will have to justify the distinctions WHEN someone sues. Not "if" someone sues. When.

Other rules sound very problematic, such as restrictions on publishing "descriptions" of games. If the SEC really wants to push this issue, I think they will find they've really overreached legally.

6 months ago Richard Pittman 17 comments 0 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Un-enforcable

Sure the SEC can try to do this but it faces many issues out of their control.

1. With the current state of local media, the number of “full-time salaried” employees is down and will continue to plummet in both papers and local tv. If the SEC’s goal is to get rid of all media, except the national behemoths they are partnered with that can afford to have a full time reporter for each team, this would be the way to do it.

2. The value of being credentialed has continued to decline over the last few years. You don’t need 20~ reporters to cover the same press conference and put out the same story with the same quotes. It’s not like reporters are gonna ask tough questions anyway. And if the SEC tries to influence the way a story is covered by threatening a revoke of credentials, then it becomes completely worthless.

3. The NCAA has already tried, and lost, to control descriptions of the game from someone sitting in the stands (a baseball super-regional in Louisville 2 years ago i believe). It certainly isn’t going to stop me and my crew at www.geauxshow.com from talking about the games we go to. And since i don’t own season tickets, what are they gonna do? Hand out a book of photos to every ticket taker at TS and make sure that none of the people who violate this rule get into the game?

In the end, i don’t think it will be that big of a deal though. If the Tuscaloosa news, who has smartly embraced the sports web with tidesports.com, is sounding an alarm, surely other local media that is in the same boat is making their concerns known as well. It all comes down to weather or not the SEC wants local news reporters to cover games or would rather throw out everybody but national media in order to get rid of “those pesky bloggers on the intertubes”. How this policy changes, or doesn’t, over the next few months will tell us what the SEC’s motivation truly is.

by PodKATT on Aug 8, 2009 9:08 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

this all just seems heavy-handed

but I swear I think it is aimed at us. It’s not aimed at me in particular, because I have never sought credentialing and have no immediate intention of doing so. I do think that this is designed to keep highlights off of YouTube and keep bloggers out of the press room. I wonder if it’s an example of “pissing into the wind”, though. YouTube is everywhere, and there is no way to get things off of it quickly or permanently. Are they really going to try to chase the highlights off of YouTube? and try to chase the bloggers away altogether? Do they even have the resources to fight those battles?

Richard Pittman

by Richard Pittman on Aug 8, 2009 9:33 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

btw..

I did not realize you had started your own blog. Keep up the good work.

Richard Pittman

by Richard Pittman on Aug 8, 2009 9:38 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

started?

I need to work on putting our site out there, but we’ve been doing this show since 05. It’s mostly been drunken rambling on the parade ground, but there are some good moments in there.

by PodKATT on Aug 8, 2009 10:17 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

That Same Article

That same article says the restrictions will apply to the fans as well, and will be printed on the tickets starting next year (as this years’ have already been printed). It may not stand up, but they are trying to ban you from sharing your cell phone video and even still photos from games.

by Watchman on Aug 8, 2009 9:19 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

i think they are really trying to control all media access..

I think there is an element of trying to protect their contractual partners and give them everything, but I think the real target here is the ubiquitously available internet chatter. I wonder if this would impact Tigerdroppings, as they are a much bigger operation than this humble site. Would they be barred from having Game Threads? Would I?

Richard Pittman

by Richard Pittman on Aug 8, 2009 9:35 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Honestly

I don’t think this is that big of a deal.

I think we are nearing the day when a team decides to bad the media entirely from press conferences and just has employees from the PR department ask questions of the coach and players. Then post the video and the transcript to the team’s own website. They can control the flow of information much easier in that way.

Seriously, the value of a press credential is fairly low these days since teams place so much content on their own sites and so much is avaliable online already. If I watch the game on TV, do I need to read a game account with five quotes from three sources to tell me what happened? I saw it myself. Every game is available for my consumption without the media, as I can just go to LSUsportsnet and watch/listen to their broadcast.

Since they already cannot control accounts of the event (the Louisville regional showed that), I don’t mind if the SEC creates a video library that they control. Hell, it might be good for us.

Now, after I’ve ranted about credentialing, I’m sort of tempted to apply for a credential for the LSU-Vandy game, which I will be attending. Call it a blogger experiement.

by Poseur on Aug 8, 2009 11:01 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Do it!

Richard Pittman

by Richard Pittman on Aug 8, 2009 11:18 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Thanks for the heads-up on this.

It’s my initial knee-jerk reaction and prone to error, but I don’t think this is going to end well.

by Hooper on Aug 8, 2009 10:33 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Do you have a copy of the pdf?

The Tuscaloosa news link doesn’t work. If you have a copy, could you email it to me?

Much appreciated.

by Hooper on Aug 8, 2009 12:53 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

I don't have a copy. I'm going by what tuscaloosa news says.

Richard Pittman

by Richard Pittman on Aug 8, 2009 1:24 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

ah

thanks.

by Hooper on Aug 8, 2009 3:30 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

A Copy of the Media Policy

From the Tuscaloosa News:

http://www.tidesports.com/assets/pdf/TL1766887.PDF

Richard Pittman

by Richard Pittman on Aug 8, 2009 8:27 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Not to get too "inside baseball"

But the Supreme Court has already decided (wrongfully, imho) that the NCAA is not a state action. Tarkanian v. NCAA, 488 US 179. But see Brentwood Academy v. Tennessee Secondary School Athletic Ass’n, 531 US 288 (2001), holding that a high school athletic conference in TN is a state actor.

by 4.0 Point Stance on Aug 9, 2009 1:33 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

I think that deserves revisiting, at least in this context.

The SEC is simply made up of member institutions, 11 of which are publicly funded government organizations. I don’t think a government actor can insulate unconstitutional behavior by filtering it through a private organization of member government institutions. If the universities are just using the SEC rules as an excuse to do what they want to do, then I think the courts could look past it.

I also think there’s a difference between the NCAA and the SEC. The SEC really is just a collection of schools acting collectively. I don’t think the SEC can do anything without the support of its institutions, but I may be wrong about that.

Richard Pittman

by Richard Pittman on Aug 9, 2009 7:18 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Too many lawyers...

… but I think Tarkanain was correctly decided. The NCAA, try as it might, is not a state actor. It does have public schools as members, but is also has a large number of private schools which are obviously not state actors. Brentwood is distinguishable, IIRC, because it is made up of primarily public schools (unlike the NCAA). The SEC seems closer to TSSAA than the NCAA.

But it’s also built on the fraud that the NCAA is a nonprofit. But that’s a different case and part of my blind hatred of the NCAA. The NCAA is a corporate entity built for profit, which would change the tenor of the case.

by Poseur on Aug 9, 2009 3:39 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

If it looks like a state actor, smells like a state actor, and quacks like a state actor...

Although I see your point. The NCAA contains a whole lot of private schools, especially at the Division II and Division III levels. What’s more troubling to me is that Tarkanian is just teh most notable of a long line of cases where the courts bend over backwards not to interfere with the NCAA based on little more than the premise that “people like college sports so let’s not mess with it.” And of course it would be difficult to have found a less sympathetic plaintiff than Tarkanian, who certainly deserved everything that was coming to him.

by 4.0 Point Stance on Aug 10, 2009 11:55 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs