Post by Macmoish on Aug 6, 2011 7:07:37 GMT
INDEPENDENT
Stalemate over access sees press facing football stadium lock-out
By Tom Peck
Saturday, 6 August 2011
Journalists and photographers from national newspapers and news and picture agencies are expected to be locked out of football matches today, on the opening day of the Football League season, in the latest and most dramatic development in a lengthy dispute over press accreditation.
The row involves complex details on precisely what, and more importantly when, journalists may report on matches. At the heart of it is live-blogging by reporters and interaction with fans during the games on newspapers' websites.
Talks between the Premier League and the Football League and a media coalition of nine national newspapers and other news agencies broke down on Wednesday. Hull City, who hosted Blackpool FC in the season's opening match yesterday, turned down requests from media organisations to attend the game. Last night The Independent, The Times, The Guardian and The Daily Telegraph cancelled all coverage of the match.
Previous rules stated that no more than 15 photographs of a match may be posted during live play, and they could only be posted in specific two- minute windows during the game.
Reporters are expected to cover today's games by watching them on television. In retaliation sponsors' names will be dropped from coverage. The football authorities had offered a temporary extension of the current agreement, but the national newspapers' representatives believe the terms are overly restrictive.
Picture agency Getty Images was told by several club officials that they had been instructed to ban access to grounds unless photographers signed the temporary agreement.
The media lockout will not apply to tomorrow's Community Shield showpiece at Wembley between Manchester United and Manchester City as the match is organised by the Football Association, which is run independently of England's football leagues.
The two league bodies rejected claims they were inflexible.
"It has been made clear from the start that we are willing to improve areas of the agreement," the Premier League and Football League said in a joint statement. "Whilst we are keen to conclude negotiations, it became clear just 48 hours before the start of the new football season that a new agreement would not be in place."
They said disruption over the weekend "serves nobody's interests".
"The leagues proposed that the existing agreement, which has been in place for the past six years, be extended on an interim basis," they said.
"Unfortunately, as yet, the NPA [Newspapers Publishers Association] and international agencies have not taken up that offer."
This is not the first example of controversy over media access to football matches. Last season Southampton FC banned all but one picture agency from its football matches.
www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/news-and-comment/stalemate-over-access-sees-press-facing-football-stadium-lockout-
2332674.html
INDEPENDENT
Sam Wallace: Without newspapers fans would have to rely on clubs' media for 'inside' information
The Last Word
Saturday, 6 August 2011
A free press helps to hold both players and clubs to account
You may have noticed an anomaly in today's football pages: no Independent reporter covered last night's Hull v Blackpool game.
It was not that we did not think the game was important, it was just that, as part of a news media coalition that includes all the national newspapers, we are in dispute with the Football League and the Premier League.
The coalition – including news agencies – has been negotiating on our behalf with the leagues over what we are allowed to report and when we are allowed to report it. These are detailed and complex agreements based on how quickly photographs can be published and whether newspaper websites can run live, minute-by-minute reports.
Related articles
* Stalemate over access sees press facing football stadium lock-out
* Coverage of Hull City v Blackpool
* Search the news archive for more stories
Talks broke down this week and, in an act of solidarity that is relatively rare in the competitive world of newspapers, a significant number of national titles have so far agreed they will not cover games on this weekend, the first of the new Football League season. Tomorrow's Community Shield, a Football Association game, is exempt. As with all disputes of its nature, it is fast-moving and by this morning an agreement could be on its way.
What is at stake? Details that may seem relatively insignificant to traditional newspaper readers such as a block on reporters interacting online with readers during the "live" reporting of matches. The leagues are advancing spurious intellectual property agreements on where agencies can sell photographs taken at clubs. For the newspapers there is also a wider point: if we lose this battle, then where do we go?
No one could doubt that newspapers face challenging times but in reporting football, as in the reporting of politics or foreign news, the time comes when you have no option but to stand up for yourselves or face restrictions that make proper reporting an impossible job. The key asset the leagues hold is press access to stadiums, and that is significant.
Do I detect a lack of sympathy? Yes, reporting on English football is a wonderful, privileged job. Our top four divisions are vibrant and exciting, even if the finances and some of the owners can cause anxiety. The national team may lack success but they are never dull. And there is a large audience out there – on paper and online – with a deep knowledge of football and a daunting appetite for debate.
As press, we all like a moan about the lack of access to players and managers but to generalise would be unfair. Some clubs are, yes, bloody awful. Others go out of their way to help. Yet, even in the relatively short time I have been a newspaper reporter – 12 years – the changes have been noticeable. What concerns me is what happens if, one day, newspapers are edged out of the press boxes and the training grounds altogether?
I know, I know. This newspaper is biased against Manchester United/Liverpool/Manchester City/Chelsea/Arsenal. We have it in for Cesc Fabregas/John Terry/Rafael Benitez/David Beckham. We give a far too easy ride to Arsène Wenger/Harry Redknapp/Sir Alex Ferguson/David Beckham. James Lawton is a genius. James Lawton should be sacked (for the record, it's definitely the former in my opinion). I have heard it all before. But without us, and the other members of our dysfunctional press family, who is left?
The answer is, the clubs' own media. I have nothing against the website and TV personnel of our clubs, many of whom started life on our side of the fence and are very capable journalists. But are we sure the clubs are going to strive to give us the real, inside, uncomfortable story on their organisations?
As it stands, the greatest scoop ever landed by a football club's media was MUTV's jaw-dropping interview with Roy Keane in which he lambasted his team-mates and convinced Ferguson to chuck him out. It was a property that any journalist would be delighted with. To my knowledge, almost six years on, MUTV has still to broadcast it.
When people tell me that they do not read a newspaper because they "get their news" from their club's website, the only reply I can give them is this. I have always voted Labour but if I want to know what is going on in my party I do not check the Labour website for a happy "Everything's fine!" bulletin. I read Steve Richards and Andrew Grice in The Independent.
We do not always get it right, although we always try our best to do so. The basic aim is: deliver well-sourced stories. Some fans will never be happy and some think that there is an agenda against their club or one individual but I am yet to meet the reporter who would put his or her club loyalty ahead of a cracking news story.
I receive many emails from bright, aspiring football journalists and I fear that my industry is getting elbowed out of the way by certain wealthy clubs who dislike not being in total control. I fear that some of these young men and women may end up in a ghastly PR-version of journalism where their questions are restricted.
When I spoke to "the football authorities" about this dispute yesterday I was given a stern warning by someone whose opinion I respect. He said that English football's view on English newspapers is "you need us more than we need you". They may well think that, but I do not believe any football fan thinks that the clubs' curtailing of press freedom is something to be celebrated.
www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/news-and-comment/sam-wallace-without-newspapers-fans-would-have-to-rely-on-clubs-media-for-inside-information-2332557.html
Stalemate over access sees press facing football stadium lock-out
By Tom Peck
Saturday, 6 August 2011
Journalists and photographers from national newspapers and news and picture agencies are expected to be locked out of football matches today, on the opening day of the Football League season, in the latest and most dramatic development in a lengthy dispute over press accreditation.
The row involves complex details on precisely what, and more importantly when, journalists may report on matches. At the heart of it is live-blogging by reporters and interaction with fans during the games on newspapers' websites.
Talks between the Premier League and the Football League and a media coalition of nine national newspapers and other news agencies broke down on Wednesday. Hull City, who hosted Blackpool FC in the season's opening match yesterday, turned down requests from media organisations to attend the game. Last night The Independent, The Times, The Guardian and The Daily Telegraph cancelled all coverage of the match.
Previous rules stated that no more than 15 photographs of a match may be posted during live play, and they could only be posted in specific two- minute windows during the game.
Reporters are expected to cover today's games by watching them on television. In retaliation sponsors' names will be dropped from coverage. The football authorities had offered a temporary extension of the current agreement, but the national newspapers' representatives believe the terms are overly restrictive.
Picture agency Getty Images was told by several club officials that they had been instructed to ban access to grounds unless photographers signed the temporary agreement.
The media lockout will not apply to tomorrow's Community Shield showpiece at Wembley between Manchester United and Manchester City as the match is organised by the Football Association, which is run independently of England's football leagues.
The two league bodies rejected claims they were inflexible.
"It has been made clear from the start that we are willing to improve areas of the agreement," the Premier League and Football League said in a joint statement. "Whilst we are keen to conclude negotiations, it became clear just 48 hours before the start of the new football season that a new agreement would not be in place."
They said disruption over the weekend "serves nobody's interests".
"The leagues proposed that the existing agreement, which has been in place for the past six years, be extended on an interim basis," they said.
"Unfortunately, as yet, the NPA [Newspapers Publishers Association] and international agencies have not taken up that offer."
This is not the first example of controversy over media access to football matches. Last season Southampton FC banned all but one picture agency from its football matches.
www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/news-and-comment/stalemate-over-access-sees-press-facing-football-stadium-lockout-
2332674.html
INDEPENDENT
Sam Wallace: Without newspapers fans would have to rely on clubs' media for 'inside' information
The Last Word
Saturday, 6 August 2011
A free press helps to hold both players and clubs to account
You may have noticed an anomaly in today's football pages: no Independent reporter covered last night's Hull v Blackpool game.
It was not that we did not think the game was important, it was just that, as part of a news media coalition that includes all the national newspapers, we are in dispute with the Football League and the Premier League.
The coalition – including news agencies – has been negotiating on our behalf with the leagues over what we are allowed to report and when we are allowed to report it. These are detailed and complex agreements based on how quickly photographs can be published and whether newspaper websites can run live, minute-by-minute reports.
Related articles
* Stalemate over access sees press facing football stadium lock-out
* Coverage of Hull City v Blackpool
* Search the news archive for more stories
Talks broke down this week and, in an act of solidarity that is relatively rare in the competitive world of newspapers, a significant number of national titles have so far agreed they will not cover games on this weekend, the first of the new Football League season. Tomorrow's Community Shield, a Football Association game, is exempt. As with all disputes of its nature, it is fast-moving and by this morning an agreement could be on its way.
What is at stake? Details that may seem relatively insignificant to traditional newspaper readers such as a block on reporters interacting online with readers during the "live" reporting of matches. The leagues are advancing spurious intellectual property agreements on where agencies can sell photographs taken at clubs. For the newspapers there is also a wider point: if we lose this battle, then where do we go?
No one could doubt that newspapers face challenging times but in reporting football, as in the reporting of politics or foreign news, the time comes when you have no option but to stand up for yourselves or face restrictions that make proper reporting an impossible job. The key asset the leagues hold is press access to stadiums, and that is significant.
Do I detect a lack of sympathy? Yes, reporting on English football is a wonderful, privileged job. Our top four divisions are vibrant and exciting, even if the finances and some of the owners can cause anxiety. The national team may lack success but they are never dull. And there is a large audience out there – on paper and online – with a deep knowledge of football and a daunting appetite for debate.
As press, we all like a moan about the lack of access to players and managers but to generalise would be unfair. Some clubs are, yes, bloody awful. Others go out of their way to help. Yet, even in the relatively short time I have been a newspaper reporter – 12 years – the changes have been noticeable. What concerns me is what happens if, one day, newspapers are edged out of the press boxes and the training grounds altogether?
I know, I know. This newspaper is biased against Manchester United/Liverpool/Manchester City/Chelsea/Arsenal. We have it in for Cesc Fabregas/John Terry/Rafael Benitez/David Beckham. We give a far too easy ride to Arsène Wenger/Harry Redknapp/Sir Alex Ferguson/David Beckham. James Lawton is a genius. James Lawton should be sacked (for the record, it's definitely the former in my opinion). I have heard it all before. But without us, and the other members of our dysfunctional press family, who is left?
The answer is, the clubs' own media. I have nothing against the website and TV personnel of our clubs, many of whom started life on our side of the fence and are very capable journalists. But are we sure the clubs are going to strive to give us the real, inside, uncomfortable story on their organisations?
As it stands, the greatest scoop ever landed by a football club's media was MUTV's jaw-dropping interview with Roy Keane in which he lambasted his team-mates and convinced Ferguson to chuck him out. It was a property that any journalist would be delighted with. To my knowledge, almost six years on, MUTV has still to broadcast it.
When people tell me that they do not read a newspaper because they "get their news" from their club's website, the only reply I can give them is this. I have always voted Labour but if I want to know what is going on in my party I do not check the Labour website for a happy "Everything's fine!" bulletin. I read Steve Richards and Andrew Grice in The Independent.
We do not always get it right, although we always try our best to do so. The basic aim is: deliver well-sourced stories. Some fans will never be happy and some think that there is an agenda against their club or one individual but I am yet to meet the reporter who would put his or her club loyalty ahead of a cracking news story.
I receive many emails from bright, aspiring football journalists and I fear that my industry is getting elbowed out of the way by certain wealthy clubs who dislike not being in total control. I fear that some of these young men and women may end up in a ghastly PR-version of journalism where their questions are restricted.
When I spoke to "the football authorities" about this dispute yesterday I was given a stern warning by someone whose opinion I respect. He said that English football's view on English newspapers is "you need us more than we need you". They may well think that, but I do not believe any football fan thinks that the clubs' curtailing of press freedom is something to be celebrated.
www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/news-and-comment/sam-wallace-without-newspapers-fans-would-have-to-rely-on-clubs-media-for-inside-information-2332557.html
