What do you think of this move by the NCAA? Do they have any other choice?
In December 2007, the NCAA introduced a new “Blogging Policy” aimed at controlling the frequency of reporters’ blog entries from live NCAA championship events. The new rules do not amount to a “no blogging” policy; it’s more of a “blogging in moderation” policy. For example, as a condition to their receipt of media credentials, bloggers of football, lacrosse and water polo events can post up to three times per quarter and once at halftime, while bloggers of baseball and softball events can post up to once per inning. Blogging of riflery? That’s limited to 10 entries per day. Just as we were getting used to those bullet-by-bullet updates on our computers …
Why such concerns about blogging? The NCAA mainly seems to be protecting the interests of its television broadcast partners, who may be sold exclusive rights to present “live representations” of the events. Arguably, live blogs threaten this exclusivity and thus diminish the commercial value of such rights. And because the Blogging Policy applies only to media entities seeking to gain physical access to the events (and not, for example, to bloggers watching and posting from their living rooms), the NCAA may well be within its legal rights to impose conditions that it deems appropriate. See Post Newsweek Stations-Connecticut, Inc. v. Travelers Ins. Co., 510 F. Supp. 81 (D. Conn. 1981). The wisdom of the NCAA policy is another matter; there is an ongoing debate as to whether blogs actually threaten live or television audiences, and some would take the position that blogging has the ability to enhance overall interest in the events.
Another goal of the NCAA appears to be staking out its own place in the blogosphere. To this end, the Blogging Policy requires that blogs from NCAA championship events must submit the appropriate link to ncaasports.com Blog Central, and in return the blogs must post the ncaasports.com logo/link on their site.
Several weeks after issuing its Blogging Policy, the NCAA struck another blow against new media, but in this case for entirely different reasons. At the 2008 NCAA Convention, the Division I membership voted overwhelmingly to preserve a ban on text messaging as a means of communicating with high school recruits. Before the ban took effect last year, text messaging had become the communication of choice between many tech-savvy athletic departments and teenage recruits, but concerns arose that the practice was intrusive, unprofessional and even costly. For more details of the NCAA’s policies regarding electronic communications and recruiting, see Bylaw 13.4.1.2 of the voluminous NCAA Manual.
I haven’t had time to fully digest this NCAA policy, but it doesn’t feel good at first blush. Seems like NCAA may be missing bigger opportunity to expand its media reach by cooperating with bloggers rather than squelching them.
This reminds me a little bit of Napster. Of course teh copyright owners sued when Napster created a way for people to share songs freely. But what happened in the end? People invented new ways of sharing, and until iTunes came along, nobody was really trying to build a hybrid model that makes it more convenient for consumers to pay a little bit rather than ripping off the songs.
I agree with the NCAA on its banning coaches from text messaging recruits. The last thing high school athletes need is more distractions and I think they should be able to make a college choice without having to sift through countless text messages or feel the need to respond to them. That’s just what I think, but maybe I don’t have all the facts.
I can sort of see both sides of the issue with the NCAA’s blogging policy. On one hand, if I was a broadcast partner with exclusive rights to live coverage of events, I could see how this could potentially devalue my rights in some sports. But for a sport like riflery? I would think the NCAA and sponsors should be happy with any and all coverage small sports like this one gets, and shouldn’t try to limit it. But can you have different rules for different sports…
I could see in the future the NCAA selling live blogging rights separately or specifically including them as part of a deal with a broadcast partner. I think these rights would be valuable, as the live blogs would increase traffic to a partner’s website, and this could be monetized through advertising. I’m not sure many people will ever pay to gain access to a live blog of a game, but I could be wrong. Thoughts?
This is interesting. Instead of embracing the new technologies they are throwing barriers up. I wonder what will happen when the atheletes and students of today become managers and executives at the NCAA and the corporations.
So in between the controlled blog pauses, what would prevent me from “twittering”, and then use my cell and then text message…?
As a semi-journalist, I think the policy smacks too much of censorship. It really is restricting the freedom of the press.
Censorship means that the government — or organizations that receive government funding — are not allowed to abridge the messages of the media, including citizen journalists. In this case though, this is the real media.
Games are played in public buildings, owned and operated by organizations that receive government funding. By limiting what the press can do, they are in effect censoring the media by determining how often they can report on the events.
But more importantly, I have to wonder if the NCAA execs even understand blogging. It’s not like someone is NOT going to watch a game, just because they can read about it instead. They need to join the 21st century, or even the latter half of the 20th century, and try to understand the new media, rather than issue knee-jerk limitations that are mired in a lack of understanding of the technology.
Besides, does anyone even watch water polo?
That’s really interesting. I suppose the big TV sponsors are concerned about people “logging on” instead of tuning in. At least they didn’t bad the blogging–That would have been insane! I wonder how they are gonna regulate this. Are they gonna pay sombody to monitor all of the blogs?
Keep on posting. I have enjoyed your blog.
I guess this action must have been influenced by the TV sponsors, as Jason wrote, who are concerned about losing their audience to bloggers. But they have already put a big task before them self on how to regulate (enforce) this.