| Sign in: |
| Members log in here with your user name and password to access the your admin page and other special features. |
|
|
|
|
|| SportsShooter.com: Member Message Board
Rugby vs. THE PRESS!!!
Mark Loundy, Photo Editor
 |
San Jose | CA | USA | Posted: 10:17 PM on 09.04.07 |
->> If the NFL did this it would cause a major uproar and a widespread boycott by many news organizations. The net result would be no change at all in the images actually published because the sidelines would be filled by high-end-equipment-owning independents and amateurs.
--Mark |
|
G.J. McCarthy, Photographer
 |
Dallas | TX | USA | Posted: 11:12 PM on 09.04.07 |
->> "The net result would be no change at all in the images actually published because the sidelines would be filled by high-end-equipment-owning independents and amateurs."
You mean aside from the change in quality, right? I know our readers/news consumers are a fickle bunch, but I still believe they know when they're being offered solid storytelling as opposed to ... uhh ... something else.
I hope so, anyway.
Cheers,
- gerry - |
|
Jim Colburn, Photographer
 |
Omaha | NE | USA | Posted: 11:41 PM on 09.04.07 |
->> 'Anger over the pictures issue prompted Agence France-Presse to warn the French sports minister, Roselyne Bachelot, and the French Rugby Board that it was considering withdrawing from coverage of the tournament. Reuters and AP were other major international agencies considering similar action."
It's France. Lets hope that they have the guts to boycott the matches. |
|
Shaun Ward, Photographer
 |
Perth | Tayside | Scotland UK | Posted: 3:52 AM on 09.05.07 |
->> At a time when the IRB is trying to increase rugby's popularity around the world its certainly going about it in a strange way.
The arrogance -
'In response Greg Thomas, the communications director for the IRB was reported as having said: "Our sponsors are 100 per cent behind us. They care only about the TV audience and that will be 4billion for this tournament. They also want banners on stadiums, they don't care about newspaper coverage. We have drawn a line in the sand. If the media feel they have to stay away, that is their decision."
Also the cheapest tickets range anything from £60 to £250.
No wonder the TV audience is estimated at 4 billion, most people cant afford to go. |
|
John Cowpland, Photographer
 |
Napier | HB | New Zealand | Posted: 3:53 AM on 09.05.07 |
->> This is the biggest worry.......
In response Greg Thomas, the communications director for the IRB was reported as having said: "Our sponsors are 100 per cent behind us. They care only about the TV audience and that will be 4billion for this tournament. They also want banners on stadiums, they don't care about newspaper coverage. We have drawn a line in the sand. If the media feel they have to stay away, that is their decision."
Basically, do it our way or stuff off....TV are happy and we don't need you!!
Not a good look for rugby...and a dangerous precedent for other sports. I always figured we would lose out to TV, they dictate a lot when it comes to rugby here in New Zealand...and this shows it is just going to get worse!!
I had to laugh when I saw the posts on the new red vests you having to wear in the states....here they have gone to black or white, because TV said the still guys stood out to much in the bright orange ones!! Maybe you should try and get the TV guys on your side!!
JC |
|
James Madelin, Photographer
 |
AKL | Auckland | New Zealand | Posted: 12:21 AM on 09.06.07 |
| ->> welcome back jc.... |
|
Steve Mitchell, Photographer
|
Peterborough | Cambridgeshire | England | Posted: 3:25 AM on 09.06.07 |
| ->> The rugby world cup only takes place once every four years, the IRB should remember that throughout the periods in between there are less important, not so well televised, or highly sponsored rugby fixtures that they are very greatful of media coverage of, such as the lower level European Cups.Take away the media coverage of those events and would the sponsors then be interested in backing them? |
|
Derrick den Hollander, Photographer
|
Melbourne | VIC | AUSTRALIA | Posted: 5:26 AM on 09.06.07 |
->> I'm not sure of the timezone differences, but I'm certain games in Australia would possibly be during hours when people can't or won't watch it.
The next best thing is to buy the day's newspaper, read all about it, and look at some action images.
Those images can appear in magazines, billboards etc for many months afterwards.
For me, print journalism will always have it's place for your vast majority of fans. |
|
Darren England, Photographer
 |
Brisbane | QLD | Australia | Posted: 7:44 AM on 09.06.07 |
->> Looks like its getting nasty!!! I wonder who will blink first.
http://news.brisbanetimes.com.au/international-media-boycott-rugby-world-cu...
"Leading international news agencies on Thursday launched a boycott of the 2007 rugby World Cup, plunging the event into controversy on the eve of its opening game.
Agence France-Presse, Reuters, the Associated Press, Getty Pictures and the German agency DPA said no text, photo or video news on the World Cup would be sent for 24 hours in protest at restrictions imposed by the sport's governing body, on the transmission of photos during games.
The International Rugby Board (IRB) restrictions will particularly hit the use of action pictures on the internet." |
|
Paul Hollands, Photographer
|
Chester | UK | United Kingdom | Posted: 9:45 AM on 09.06.07 |
->> I had really hoped that this wouldn't have reached this stage, however it seems to be the only course of action that will resolve this ridiculous situation that the IRB have landed themselves in. I would suppose that with comments from the IRB suggesting that they only care about tv audiences and sponsors, a reasonable discussion to resolve this was something of a pipe dream.
Off at a tangent...........
"At a meeting in Dublin on August 21, the IRB and international media agreed that one photo per second could be transmitted during World Cup games. This would allow 2,400 images per half with a maximum of 6,000 if there was extra time."
How do they police this? Is there a "Wiring Monitor" who will tap you on the shoulder and ask you to wire more slowly? :o) |
|
Vincent Johnson, Photo Editor, Photographer
 |
Chicago | IL | USA | Posted: 5:47 PM on 09.06.07 |
| ->> My questions is where the hell would any of these sports be if it weren't for the press? |
|
Dave Kennedy, Photographer
 |
Danbury | CT | US | Posted: 7:27 PM on 09.06.07 |
| ->> ...on TV... |
|
Jim Owens, Photographer
 |
Cincinnati | OH | usa | Posted: 8:12 PM on 09.06.07 |
| ->> Mr. Colburn, would you care to elaborate ? |
|
Jim Helsel, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Christchurch | NZ | New Zealand | Posted: 8:41 PM on 09.06.07 |
->> I agree with everything being said here.
Just another angle.....
It's no wonder the "sponsors" agree with the IRB. Let alone everything else, I'm sure the sponsors love the idea of the IRB having free access/use of all images without restriction. I wonder how long it will take for an All Blacks Haka image from the RWC to show up in a sponsor's major print advertising campaign.
Talk about the best of both worlds..... |
|
Jim Colburn, Photographer
|
Omaha | NE | USA | Posted: 11:52 PM on 09.06.07 |
->> "Mr. Colburn, would you care to elaborate?"
Sure.
The French take the concept of "solidarity" (as in "Remember that Polish union that Reagan spoke so well of?) seriously.
Earlier this year I was at the plant that produces France's TGV trains for a visit by presidential candidate Segolene Royal. When we (the press) got there some little PR minion announced that it was going to be a "pooled" event with two still photographers and two video crews.
The French press (with me as an add-on) spent all of ten minutes to decide, and announce, that "we all go in or nobody goes in!"
Total coverage or no coverage at all.
After much whining from said PR minion they caved and allowed everyone there to cover the event.
After that? Chaos. Everyone fighting for a better spot and a better sound bite.
It was beautiful.
As to the IRB setting "rules"?
F**k 'em. |
|
Rob Mattson, Photographer
 |
Sarasota | FL | USA | Posted: 12:38 AM on 09.07.07 |
| ->> If papers, mags and wires could find the strength to boycott coverage for a year, this would never happen again. First, people would lash out against media outlets for not covering. When they find out why there is no coverage, they will redirect frustration to the governing body of football (NFL, soccer, rugby, etc...). People will feel lost without visual stimulus, columns, stats, stories, detailed information (i.e. injuries and status of reserve players). Why? Because information is power. TV will only cover game action, so people will only receive a small portion of what they expect. Sure, some stations will do shows, but none will provide the depth offered in the peak action photograph or written word. This will never happen, because media is big money, but it would be nice to see sports media outlet leaders take a stand. |
|
Shaun Ward, Photographer
|
Perth | Tayside | Scotland UK | Posted: 3:02 AM on 09.07.07 |
->> A press boycott worked a treat back in 2002 when Glasgow Celtic tried something similar. The Scottish press acted as a group and ran black boxes where photos of the match against Ajax would have been. They made their point and Celtic backed down.
Seeing is believing.
http://www.epuk.org/News/212/newspapers-united-1-celtic-0 |
|
John Plassenthal, Photographer
 |
Vandalia | OH | USA | Posted: 10:53 AM on 09.07.07 |
->> As I was reading Rob's post this thought hit me: What happened during the last baseball strike when there wasn't baseball, NASCAR picked up a bunch of fans who just wanted a sport to follow. If the media stopped covering Rugby, how many of those fans would start following another sport and how many would stay interested in Rugby? The relationship between the media and sports organizations is symbiotic to a degree, but the sports organizations don't thrive without media attention and coverage to keep their fan base interested. The media can and always have been able to find stories to fill space. If the media started running water polo in the space they would have used for Rugby, imagine the benefits that sport would gain.
There is a scientific paradox that suggests that the mere act of observing something or someone changes its behavior. Does the act of covering a support change the interest in the sport, or do we simply cover the sport because there is interest? |
|
Brad Mangin, Photographer
 |
Pleasanton | CA | USA | Posted: 2:52 PM on 09.07.07 |
->> From Romenesko:
Agence France-Presse, Reuters and Associated Press reached an agreement with the International Rugby Board on Friday afternoon, ending a boycott of the rugby World Cup just 90 minutes before the first match was due to kick-off.
http://poynter.org/forum/view_post.asp?id=12834
One of the nuggets from this memo:
"Both sides agree that still photographs used on websites should not be presented in a way which 'emulates video'." |
|
Dave Kennedy, Photographer
|
Danbury | CT | US | Posted: 2:58 PM on 09.07.07 |
| ->> The first step down a slippery slope.... |
|
Darren England, Photographer
|
Brisbane | QLD | Australia | Posted: 12:31 PM on 09.08.07 |
->> This is all about sporting bodies looking to protect and increase revenue. And to do this they are slowly trying to create monopolies of coverage. And sporting bodies are seeing the internet to be the big fat cash cow of the future, and they do not want to share it with anyone.
My guess is it is only a matter of time before sporting bodies try to ban "non official websites" from using photo's or video of their events.
It is interesting to see the official World Cup website is trying to sell tournament internet video for $50 on:
http://www.rugbyworldcup.com/
So i guess that's why they do not want... "still photographs used on websites should not be presented in a way which 'emulates video" |
|
|| Sponsor Special Deals
Nikon D3 (refurbished demo!)
|
Available from:
Samy's Camera
|
Price: $3799.00 |
Notes:
We have 15 refurbished demo Nikon D3 cameras available. First come, first served! Comes with a 3 month manufacturer warranty, and extended warranties are available. Send an email to samys@sportsshooter.com, or call 866-726-9463 and identify yourself as a person from SportsShooter.
|
|
-- More Info -- |
|
Return to --> Message Board Main Index
|
