| 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
Photographers Protest Rights Grab
PJ Heller, Photographer
 |
Santa Barbara | CA | USA | Posted: 9:43 PM on 02.26.07 |
->> Photographers protest limiting a newspaper's right to sell photos from a girl's high school basketball tournament by walking out of the game.
http://www.kplctv.com/Global/story.asp?S=6145876 |
|
Landon Finch, Photographer
|
Colorado Springs | CO | USA | Posted: 10:51 PM on 02.26.07 |
->> "Pam Mitchell-Wagner, executive director of the Louisiana Press Association says it's a freedom of the press issue. She says they can't allow anyone to dictate how the press covers an event."
From what the article says, it's not a freedom of the press issue nor is the state sanctioning body dictating how the press covers the game. In fact, according the article, the only thing the state is doing is not allowing the newspapers to sell prints outside of those that are acutally printed in the paper.
Seems fair to me; I don't think the newspapers should be selling prints outside of the newspaper anyway. Newspapers are there to tell the story of the game, not as event photographers selling prints online. (I know it's been goin' on for years and that it's another source of revenue for dying papers...that doesn't make it right or ethical.) In fact, papers may not even have the legal right to sell prints, it's just that it seems no one has challenged it in court.
See this thread, particularly what TD Paulius has to say:
http://www.sportsshooter.com/message_display.html?tid=22844
And this one (two parts): http://www.sportsshooter.com/message_display.html?tid=18188
http://www.sportsshooter.com/message_display.html?tid=18229 |
|
Eric Canha, Photographer
|
Brockton | MA | United States | Posted: 11:21 PM on 02.26.07 |
->> Looks like the newspaper is the looser in the end. I'd be curious to know if ALL the newspapers took part in the boycott or just one or two. Their morals didn't stop them from reporting the story though.
This will become a moot issue sooner or later. LPGA NFL FIFA and several other leagues have already tested the waters, and yes I know that they all backed off. Mostly because they didn't have the tools in place to deliver the content themselves. The NFL has answered this with their own network AND they have made few secrets about controlling their assets (content, images, film) in the future.
In my opinion tournaments like the one reported gain little if anything from the "exposure" that the newspapers give them. The POST game story adds nothing to the gate, or the concessions, or any other aspect or the game. If not one newspaper ever covered another high school game, high school sports wouldn't come to a crashing halt. On the other hand there are many papers that would loose huge ad $$'s if all of a sudden the hs sports section vanished. In the end I think that the schools have all the time in the world to hold the line on this one. The more the media pushes this the more the schools and state associations will find alternative vehicles to move their content.
The grab here, to me anyway, seems to be the newspapers wanting to make a few more bucks. Twenty years ago editors weren't telling anyone to shoot 10 more rolls of film at a hs football game. Now they have a new revenue stream, and those papers want to capitalize on that. The association isn't grabbing anything IMHO they are protecting what is their's to begin with. |
|
Jeff Frings, Photographer
|
Milwaukee | WI | USA | Posted: 8:32 AM on 02.27.07 |
->> Sounds familiar.
http://www.nppa.org/news_and_events/news/2007/02/wisconsin.html
The part that worries me is, “The circumstances have Wisconsin editors and publishers seeking modifications to certain clauses in the agreements, the parts pertaining to who owns the rights to images as well as some of the terms the resale of pictures and video.”
If the WIAA or any public school sanctioning body tries to grab ownership of our photos, or video, I have a serious problem with that.
I haven’t been able to find the credential agreement on the WIAA website though, so I can’t speak to the actual language. Definitely something to keep an eye on. |
|
Jason Frizzelle, Photographer
|
Greenville | NC | USA | Posted: 9:20 AM on 02.27.07 |
| ->> Selling photos aside I think the way the sports association went about it was pretty underhanded. I mean the way Im reading this is they were asking photogs to make a big editorial desicion on the spot without consulting editors. I can say personally at my paper I would have been fired for signing the contract. |
|
Jim Colburn, Photographer
|
Omaha | NE | USA | Posted: 10:03 AM on 02.27.07 |
| ->> It's about time! |
|
Chris Stanley, Photographer
|
Lansdale | PA | USA | Posted: 10:23 AM on 02.27.07 |
| ->> What if a newspaper simply took all those extra photos and presented them as a Soundslides show on their web site...then offered the photos for sale. Would this solve the problem? |
|
Landon Finch, Photographer
|
Colorado Springs | CO | USA | Posted: 10:38 AM on 02.27.07 |
->> I think its important to remember that, at least according to the article, the state is only requesting that the images not be sold as prints.
The state is not saying they want rights to the images and the state is not restricting any access or editorial rights.
If the state were grabbing those rights, I'd be completely on the newspapers' side of the issue. |
|
Jeff Stanton, Photographer
|
Tucson | Az | USA | Posted: 12:02 PM on 02.27.07 |
->> An amateur sports organization, especially on the high school level, needs the support of the local media outlets to get the word out about the various sports teams in a state.
High schools themselves, and the body that governs them, do not have an advertising budget to make public these events. I believe hampering the ability of the newspaper to do business with images their photographers have created does little if anything for the relationship between the two. Both need each other, but the high school governing body, IMHO, needs the media more. Their messenger is the local media. |
|
Jack Howard, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Somerville | NJ | USA | Posted: 12:12 PM on 02.27.07 |
| ->> Just out of curiosity, what is the Gannett LA freelancer's contract? WFH like here in with Gannett NJ? |
|
Tim Hynds, Photo Editor, Photographer
|
Sioux City | IA | USA | Posted: 12:19 PM on 02.27.07 |
->> The problem is that the athletic organisation appears (according the the story in the link) to allow only images that appear in the print product to be sold as reprints by the newspapers. The issue probably is the additional photos that may appear in newspapers' web only photo galleries.
At my newspaper - and we are in Iowa and not Louisiana - we publish many more photos on our web site than there is room for in the print product.
I would bet that having web published photos treated the same way as print published photos is the crux of the disagreement. |
|
Paul W Gillespie, Photographer
|
Annapolis | MD | USA | Posted: 12:25 PM on 02.27.07 |
->> Eric, while the schools may not need the media to increase the gate at the events, just try and not cover a certain school for too long and the parents will go nuts. At my paper we receive letters all the time complaining that we do not cover a certain schools sports enough or that we cover another too much.
So while the schools may not need the coverage, which I am not so sure they don't, the parents go nuts when they don't get it. Some actually feel that we owe it to them no matter what the schools record is.
I can see it both ways as far as print sales. If the images run in the paper or online as a special editorial gallery for the event, then they should be allowed to sell prints. If outtakes are just slapped online in a sales site, then I can see where there could be a problem.
And don't get me started on the cheerleading parents.
Paul
www.pwgphoto.com
http://photo-monkeys.blogspot.com/ |
|
Eric Canha, Photographer
|
Brockton | MA | United States | Posted: 12:35 PM on 02.27.07 |
->> Chris,
How would that then make the papers anything more than an event company with a print edition? Newspapers, again IMHO, have had unrestricted access to these events because they were there to report on the event AND not compete against the organizers. By putting up a slide show of 300 images the papers have STOPPED being an outlet for news and taken on the athletic association in a way that may cause them financial harm. Not ONE of these papers would think for a second of trying to put up a slide show of 300 images from a NCAA tournament and selling prints to the general public via the web. They hold the high schools to a different standard AND have a false sense of their own worth. Newspaper coverage is nice and gives the kids a boost in ego, it does little to bump gate sales. It may drive readership up a notch, but at .50/copy the extra copy sales don't add anything to the paper's bottom line. The extra copy sales WILL bump ad rates though. So who needs the content / coverage more? The bottom line here is the BOTTOM LINE. If newspaper coverage is going to cost somebody a few thousands dollars in fees or commissions, trust me the papers will be shooting from the stands with the parents.
BTW I pulled a prospective ad campaign with the largest paper in one of the markets that we service because I was told by a shooter from another paper that they had refused to sign the credential agreement and were going to simply flex their muscle. I can only hope that their print sales exceeded the $1700 that I would have spent for the 3 days prior to the tournaments. If not then I can honestly say that with that kind of business savvy they're not long for the world. |
|
Eric Canha, Photographer
|
Brockton | MA | United States | Posted: 12:57 PM on 02.27.07 |
->> Paul we must have been typing at the same time. Parents will go more nuts when the find that ticket prices are up a buck because a revenue stream is drying up. And while we are on the subject...... How many parents does the basketball team for your hs have? Does the paper really cave to the demands of 150 readers (assuming that they are all subscribers). I just spent a weekend listening to parents complain about paying $6 to get into a state championship tourney. Parents will complain about the food at the venue even if you put Bobby Flay on the grill. Parents complain, that's what they do, (I'm one too), schools and state associations have to balance those complaints against the REALITY of what things really cost. And for that matter if the paper's want to run the story with photos they CAN CAN CAN CAN one more time C--A--N! Simply agree to the credential language.
Three years ago the town that my son went to school in implemented a $500 'user' fee to join a sports team. That was AFTER parents ponied up money at all kinds of fund raisers. We got it down to $250, the following year, trust me that the "other" $250 didn't go away. They simply found other ways to generate the cash.
The issue here ISN'T ***IS NOT*** coverage. It is about not killing one of the few NEW cash streams that these schools and groups have. The papers can cover the events all they want, the issue is to not SELL 100's of prints and pee on the school's parade.
They way I see it, the papers are trying to hold hostage the coverage of an event and leverage the emotions of the players and parents against the organizers for the papers financial gain. |
|
Shane Canfield, Photographer
|
Alexandria | VA | USA | Posted: 1:04 PM on 02.27.07 |
| ->> Sounds like the school league is just trying to honor the deal it has with the photographer. Many schools, booster clubs, and like strike a deal with a photographer that gives rights to sell photos, mostly to parents and athletes. Schools will normally get a small cut of that or some other kind of non-monetary contribution. If a newspaper photog was there using press creds to get access, submitting to the paper, and then also selling prints on the side, this would infringe on the deal with the photographer. I don’t see how this is dictating the newspapers content. I have never heard of a situation where a deal with a photog precluded a newspaper from running press coverage/photos. But the devil is in the details on this and we do not anything close to enough information to do other then speculate. Being someone that is on both sides of this fence all the time (meaning on shooting for a newspaper and for schools and clubs), this is likely something that will be ironed out. It is bad timing tho that the school waited until the last minute to approach with the newspaper photogs with a letter of intent, and this should have gone to the paper, not individual photogs…hurts everyone. However, what if they just found out that in the game previous that someone was actively selling photos on the side…what choice did they have? We don’t have enough details. |
|
William Jurasz, Photographer, Assistant
|
Cedar Park | TX | USA | Posted: 1:45 PM on 02.27.07 |
| ->> I'm in agreement with those who say this contract has nothing to do with how the newspaper can cover the NEWS of the event. Nothing I've seen yet dicates what they can and cannot do in terms of covering the news of the game. It has everything to do with a news media outlet also trying to become an event photography outlet at the same time. I can just see the slope this becomes. "Let's cover this sport and this team more, they're generating us more income in print orders..." |
|
Tom Morris, Photographer
 |
West Monroe | LA | USA | Posted: 2:40 PM on 02.27.07 |
| ->> The event photograher in the past at the Louisiana state high school association playoffs has held the contract for team and individual posed shots. Their sale of action photography is an offshoot of that contract as more and more parents and fans want action pix. They also control the sale of TV replay DVDs. Exclusivity on action photos? I just wouldn't want that responsibility because I don't think anybody can do it right and make a profit. They can hit and miss, but there are too many angles to cover in action photography. |
|
Eric Canha, Photographer
|
Brockton | MA | United States | Posted: 3:03 PM on 02.27.07 |
->> "I just wouldn't want that responsibility because I don't think anybody can do it right and make a profit."
You are certainly allowed to not take the contract, but to say that it can't be done right and make a profit? Why not?
"They also control the sale of TV replay DVDs."
Now that is the BIG news of the day! Do you know if the local TV station (cable outlet) sells or has attempted to sell tape of the games. How does the event company get the footage? Do they have a deal to purchase the rights from the video source (TV/cable) and repackage for sale or do they have their own video crew as well. Talk about total content control, I'm intrigued. |
|
Clark Brooks, Photo Editor, Photographer
|
Urbana | IL | USA | Posted: 3:24 PM on 02.27.07 |
->> "Let's cover this sport and this team more, they're generating us more income in print orders..."
Playing devil's advocate....
What is wrong with that? This isn't a socialist state we live in - it is one built on capitalism. It is one of free enterprise. Technology changes, the needs of any given market changes, hell... once in a while society even changes, but mission of a newspaper can't and can not adapt and adopt new technology, business practices or how they choose to publish image content and the quantity? A find that a silly notion.
Again being the horny fellow that I am....
Eric wrote: "By putting up a slide show of 300 images the papers have STOPPED being an outlet for news..."
They stopped becoming a news outlet because they published 300 or more images from event? I find it difficult to digest that a paper now chooses to provide broader image coverage of their documentation from an game, rally, or press conference the automatically loose their 'media' status because the post all the photos they want the public to see from an event. Since when did image content published by a news outlet have a quantity limited imposed? That is very un-American thought that there is such an position. Wouldn't that be like diminishing the freedom of the press to inform the public? A newspaper or media company can not take advantage of a new medium to disseminate its content and coverage?
Mind you these are questions to ponder.
However, I think that if a paper is captioning and keywording every images it publishes to the web with 5Ws/Y, incorporating them into multimedia, or using the photos in various publications, regular or special, they are still disseminating news ~ and any purchase of private viewing rights (after all, the buyer isn't really buying a photo) is still a reprint.
If a publisher is just putting pics online in open access galleries with no information about the individual photo with the intention of only "selling" prints, IMHO should be treated with the same status as that of an event photography company. |
|
Jeff Stanton, Photographer
|
Tucson | Az | USA | Posted: 3:50 PM on 02.27.07 |
| ->> To me, it's obvious a bad choice was made when the school springed this contract on the photographers at the door. It clearly is something newspaper management needed to see and be made aware of before any decisions were made. And those photographers who declined to sign made the correct decision. |
|
Eric Canha, Photographer
|
Brockton | MA | United States | Posted: 4:07 PM on 02.27.07 |
->> Clark,
Not being horny ...... If the slide shows are so 'kosher' then I would imagine that SI should take all 10,000 Super Bowl images tag them with the IPTC data and put up a XX minute slide show AND sell the images from that slide show to the public. Hell they must have a few (2 or 3) photos of the game that the public might like to buy.
I think that the NFL might just make a little phone call though.
I don't know about your horns but I hope you didn't bite you tongue as you stuck it your cheek ;)
"If a publisher is just putting pics online in open access galleries with no information about the individual photo with the intention of only "selling" prints, IMHO should be treated with the same status as that of an event photography company."
99.9% of the public looking at those images wouldn't know a keyword field from Sally Field. Get real the ONLY reason the papers are burning bandwidth is to A. sell prints, B. Drive up numbers so that they can bump their 'impression' rates. I can even learn to live with "B" if it is done in a way that the images are protected so as not to kill the contractor / league.
This money COUNTS to those leagues and schools. What part of that is so hard for people to understand? Would you show up at the ballpark with a hot dog cart and compete against the concession stand, why is this any different? All money counts, but this is one case where a 'new' stream has opened up, and the schools/leagues have a chance to use the money to help keep costs down to the athletes and their families. Now the papers think that because they have the sideline access and credential that they can reap that money too. Bull.
This will continue to be a tug of war. I can see media getting access to the games under the same 'rules' as a rock concert. Anyone credentialed would get to shoot 1 inning or 1 period of the game etc. Then only the contract agency (event company)would have access. It's not like the papers are even buy a ticket to the event. And if and when they do they'll be allowed in the stands like every other ticket holder.
The one thing that these leagues and teams can control is access. |
|
Chuck Liddy, Photographer
|
Durham | NC | USA | Posted: 4:35 PM on 02.27.07 |
| ->> I've been waiting for this to happen. I would have to believe that the majority of newspapers would never agree to the terms of that contract, which I'm sure was made because the event photographer was worried about getting smoked by the newspaper shooter. you folks that see nothing wrong with the decision to try and force the newspaper to follow these rules should also realize there is nothing wrong with the newspaper playing hardball right back with the LHSAA. try and tell us how to use our photos....well we won't cover the event. seems reasonable to me. and as far as a paper running 300 photos from a game (or games for that matter) that is an absurd. even from college games we cover most of the galleries on our website are (on an average) 10-15 images......unless we have two shooters at a big game where there might be 25. in the long run I think the parents will respond to this when junior's photo and story don't get any ink because the LHSAA made a bad decision |
|
Greg Ferguson, Photographer
|
Scottsdale | Az | USA | Posted: 5:28 PM on 02.27.07 |
->> My wife was asking me about this the other day.
I think it puts the paper in a bad spot because their motives could be called into question when they send photographers to an event, publish a photo in the paper, then sell any number of unpublished images from the event.
Playing Devil's advocate, I could say they were using their editorial standing as a free entry pass to shoot and the use of one photo as their proof they were there editorially, even though they might be selling tens or dozens of other unused shots. And, are they being impartial in their coverage of all events or only "newsworthy" events that have more visual impact AKA online sales appeal?
In no way do I believe that all papers selling photos are trying to compete in the event-photography market, but I sure see where it would tempt a lot of less scrupulous publishers or editors into taking unfair advantage of "freedom of the press".
"Reasonable expectation" plays into a lot of legal thinking. I think it's reasonable that the paper's readers would expect a photo in the paper would be available for reprint, and I think it's reasonable for the paper to assume some of their readers might want reprints of printed photos.
I think it is unreasonable for the paper to assume the non-readers would know to go to their site and look for unprinted photos - only their readers would only know because they read it in the paper. The Devil's advocate in me says the way the non-readers would know is for the paper to tell them at the event, "Hey, come to our website because we have pictures available for sale that we didn't use in print." That doesn't fit if they're supposed to be impartial reporters of the news.
Along that same line, I think it is unreasonable that the public would assume they could go there and find photos that were not published. That's what Flickr is for and a paper should want to avoid any inferred association with a site like that.
I'm also not comfortable with using those unpublished photos to "drive traffic to the site" like a carrot. The paper could supply additional legitimate editorial content incorporating the images that weren't deemed worth of print on paper, and people would go to the site to learn more and read the sidebars and take advantage of the hypertext cross linking to similar stories. This would be more inline with the trend toward putting more content on the web and extending and enhancing their "paper" news. |
|
Jeff Stanton, Photographer
|
Tucson | Az | USA | Posted: 6:17 PM on 02.27.07 |
| ->> Hey Greg, speaking of rights grab, doesn't the rodeos do this as well and you have to sign a wfh? That's the main reason I declined to get involved with that. |
|
G.M. Andrews, Photographer
|
Mobile | AL | USA | Posted: 7:30 PM on 02.27.07 |
->> Just a few points I'd like to bring up.
One, advertising pays the bills at newspapers. Not the resale of photos shot by photogs. The return on photo reprints just isn't a major revenue stream for most publishers and editors. Assignments aren't made with a thought to "how much can we make off reprints from this event". Resales at most newspapers probably wouldn't pay the yearly, or possibly the monthly, salary of just one photographer.
Two, few newspapers have the staff to sit and generate photo galleries just to drum up a few bucks from resales. My newspaper doesn't put up a gallery from every assignment or every day. And when we do, it's not more that a dozen of so photos from a game or shoot.
Three, some newspapers have moved reprints from editorial to their marketing departments, completely out of the editorial loop. Pricing, printing and mailing are now out of the newsroom control. Which goes back to my earlier point about assignments not being made with reprints in mind.
Four, papers put up photos for the benefit of their readers, who for the most part would like to see more photos, but can't in print editions because of space and deadline considerations. It also gives a newspaper's online presence a slightly different look instead of just parroting the dead tree edition. |
|
Greg Ferguson, Photographer
|
Scottsdale | Az | USA | Posted: 7:38 PM on 02.27.07 |
->> <sidebar>
The PRCA does the same sort of blanket copyright grab/statement as the NFL and other pro sports to cover their IP as^H^Hbases.
There is no WFH though. I sell photo usage for editorial content to PSN, other magazines, catalogs and commercial use and retain all my copyrights. The PRCA is aware of the ownership of the images - some rodeos aren't but that's a common problem with dealing with any promoter or event.
Now, all that only applies to the PRCA and some open rodeos. Dealing with the PBR is an entirely different animal and I don't recommend trying to shoot their events except purely editorially on assignment.
</sidebar> |
|
Clark Brooks, Photo Editor, Photographer
|
Urbana | IL | USA | Posted: 7:39 PM on 02.27.07 |
->> "Would you show up at the ballpark with a hot dog cart and compete against the concession stand, why is this any different?"
Yes, if I had a better product, better service, or a product desired by the market and permission to be there ;-)
and yes, Eric - I did nip my tongue a bit ;-)
Like Greg Ferguson, I don't see papers chomping at the bit to get into the "event" photo business although they were in it long before the genre had it their own separate designation. In the old days at both papers I worked at you could walk into the photo department and look at contact sheets to order images that were not published or those that were for personal use. Now that there is a class of people trying to earn a living at it and the internet is the vehicle for delivering content it is a new ballgame, eh?
It is kinda funny the impression that content is published only when it is ink on paper.
"99.9% of the public looking at those images wouldn't know a keyword field from Sally Field."
That isn't the issue. The real issue here is whether or not a newspaper or magazine or news agency has the right to publish all of their photos captured at a given event. To say 'no they don't' to me seems like an attempt to restrict the press or media from a constitutional right. To say 'yes they do' is going to, however not likely, kill the event photo business.
"Now the papers think that because they have the sideline access and credential that they can reap that money too. Bull."
Those have horns, too.
Seemingly your concern is not access, it is that potential return on the investment of time, money and energy may perhaps be smaller because there is more competition in the market? If you have a superior product and can meet the needs of your market newspapers or 20 event companies represented on the sidelines won't make a difference.
Honestly, a paper or a competitor can post 300 images to a ecom site but if their images don't meet the needs of your market it will not affect your potential income.
Of course what are you going to do when the newspaper industry gets smart and decide to actually compete forcing your off the sidelines by offering the schools a higher percentage of the revenue for exclusivity and/or giving incentives to the school for helping market their site? |
|
Clark Brooks, Photo Editor, Photographer
|
Urbana | IL | USA | Posted: 7:48 PM on 02.27.07 |
->> One more thing . . .
G.M. Andrew brings up for valid points on why event shooters really don't have to worry about newspapers sticking their fingers in the event pie. |
|
Alan Look, Photographer
|
Bloomington | IL | United States | Posted: 7:49 PM on 02.27.07 |
->> G.M. - I'd like to add one (ok, two)to your list.
Five - many local papers support the schools and especially the athletic programs by means of manners and advertising in the schools gyms, fields, and program/rosters. Not to mention scholarship donations and awards for athletic and acedemic achievement.
Six - many local papers started displaying and selling more images/prints because calls from parents, friends, and relatives were requesting them. |
|
Shane Canfield, Photographer
|
Alexandria | VA | USA | Posted: 7:59 PM on 02.27.07 |
| ->> If the school has a deal to give photo rights to a certain photographer, that is their deal. If the newspaper has that deal too, then fine. Otherwise a newspaper has no right to go in under the pretense of shooting editorial and turn around sell photos as if IT were the holder of that contract. Many event photogs, many of whom are SS members, have such contracts with schools. No way would we sit back and let some other photog with no such contact violate our exclusive deal with the school--whoever that party is...be it another photog or a newspaper. Who would, that's clearly grounds for a PR mess, and a civil suit. Should the paper want that deal, then the paper should to the AD and outbid the independant photog. This is not theory, it is playing on the up-and-up, and it is called contract law. |
|
G.M. Andrews, Photographer
|
Mobile | AL | USA | Posted: 8:08 PM on 02.27.07 |
->> "This will continue to be a tug of war. I can see media getting access to the games under the same 'rules' as a rock concert. Anyone credentialed would get to shoot 1 inning or 1 period of the game etc. Then only the contract agency (event company)would have access."
Then why is it, that when I got to cover high school events for my paper, coaches and athletic directors sometimes come and thank me for coming? And ask me if I need anything?
The same happens at non-athletic events. Why?
Maybe because these folks are happy that the newspaper is there and that their team/group/event will get widespread coverage?
Maybe people in this internet-driven age still get a kick out of seeing their child or their child's name in the paper.
Restrict the paper to one inning or period, and pretty soon, the sports editor will find something else to fill that space, and that high school game suddenly becomes a brief on the preps page, and the front page is covered with art from a sport or story that places no such restrictions on the local media.
Pretty soon moms and dads will call to complain. Heck, most sports departments will tell you that this happens already in places where media access is unfettered. "Why don't you cover my son's school?" "My kid's JV tug-of-war team is undefeated". Etc.
Contrary to popular belief, there is no great conspiracy to run event shooters out of business.
Newspapers fear the internet (loss of readers) and declining ad revenues (loss of money) more than the local T&I guy. |
|
G.M. Andrews, Photographer
|
Mobile | AL | USA | Posted: 8:10 PM on 02.27.07 |
->> Clark -
My mom and dad paid good money for that "s" in "Andrews" ;) |
|
Jack Howard, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Somerville | NJ | USA | Posted: 8:11 PM on 02.27.07 |
->> G.M.: The reprints, you're right, aren't much of a profit engine.
What matters more than a buck or two per print is the page views for touting hit rates to, who do you think--Advertisers! |
|
Shane Canfield, Photographer
|
Alexandria | VA | USA | Posted: 8:21 PM on 02.27.07 |
->> "At my newspaper - and we are in Iowa and not Louisiana - we publish many more photos on our web site than there is room for in the print product.
I would bet that having web published photos treated the same way as print published photos is the crux of the disagreement."
Tim, same here and I bet you on to something. |
|
Joe Cavaretta, Photographer
|
Ft Lauderdale | FL | USA | Posted: 8:37 PM on 02.27.07 |
| ->> Are these not seperate animals? I shoot editorially at HS events and I'm trying to get the story telling important action play or feature from the event. Methinks if I wuz an event fotog I would be trying to get pix of as many Johnnys and Jennys as possible, ball, no ball, whatever. I think the newspapers are on firm ground here. I would venture to say that whatever sales the newspapers are making are pretty slight compared to what an event person makes if he or she is doing thier job right. High school sports is a BIG deal in papers all over. I'm willing to bet that this action has caught the attention of the school boards etc. involved, who are mostly local elected officials who are very familiar with the old adage, "never pick a fight with someone who buys ink by the 55 gallon drum." |
|
Eric Canha, Photographer
|
Brockton | MA | United States | Posted: 8:54 PM on 02.27.07 |
->> >>> Five - many local papers support the schools and especially the athletic programs by means of manners and advertising in the schools gyms, fields, and program/rosters. Not to mention scholarship donations and awards for athletic and academic achievement.
Alan if that is true where you are then my hat is off to those papers. Around here there is not ONE gym that has a paper's banner that I have seen. Nor is there one on the school's athletic site. Our 'local' paper has TWO staffers, a handful of stringers that are on WFH, and an editor who also takes time in the field. I have nothing to worry about in terms of the locals.
Clarke says >>> It is kinda funny the impression that content is published only when it is ink on paper.
I have no such illusions, that's why I think that it will some day come to limiting things to an inning or a period. If at all.
G.M. says >>> One, advertising pays the bills at newspapers. Not the resale of photos shot by photogs. The return on photo reprints just isn't a major revenue stream for most publishers and editors. Assignments aren't made with a thought to "how much can we make off reprints from this event". Resales at most newspapers probably wouldn't pay the yearly, or possibly the monthly, salary of just one photographer.
Agreed!! That's why I can't understand why a paper would sacrifice the things it needs to keep the ad $$'s, content and integrity. The issue isn't whether or not a paper can cover an event, it's what they MAY do to harm the promoter. I still would like to know why it's ok for a Div I NCAA school to tell you that you can shoot a game provided that the photos are only used in the paper that is sending you AND no private resales/print sales / etc. and you live with it. A high school league does it and the world is skewed.
Not tooo long ago there was a real question about displaying NCAA photos here on SS. Had the NCAA ruled hard and fast would you have stopped shooting their games because they were dictating use? Don't they dictate use/sales now?
Clark says >> Of course what are you going to do when the newspaper industry gets smart and decide to actually compete forcing your off the sidelines by offering the schools a higher percentage of the revenue for exclusivity and/or giving incentives to the school for helping market their site?
I'm going to sit back and chuckle the first time a league person tells the event/paper shooter that you can't shoot that it won't look good for us. Remember you're here as our EVENT company. Or better yet when a schedule changes due to weather and you have to pay a shooter OT to cover 4 basketball playoffs tomorrow instead of today. Or the league wants you to e-mail a photo 'free' to a yearbook company no strings attached or you are called a few days ahead of a banquet and asked to provide a slide show / posters / a shooter for the night..... Hell yes Clark I would love to see a paper jump right in and take a stab at it. Wait until the paper starts 'servicing' a client like that and see where the lines between the newsroom and the marketing department blur
Shooting the games is nothing.....wait until those 'editorial' photographers are dealing with very real non-editorial clients.
The only company that has any real toe hold on schools is LifeTouch, they already provide more to the schools in terms of cash and prizes than any two papers ever would, and they want no part of it. So papers with all the stress that they are under..... yep bring it on. |
|
Joe Cavaretta, Photographer
|
Ft Lauderdale | FL | USA | Posted: 9:22 PM on 02.27.07 |
->> Eric says:
Not tooo long ago there was a real question about displaying NCAA photos here on SS. Had the NCAA ruled hard and fast would you have stopped shooting their games because they were dictating use? Don't they dictate use/sales now?
The NCAA / NFL / NHL / ad nauseum, also have rules that do not allow parents/fans or anyone else to bring "pro" gear into a venue. High schools are gonna have to start doing that too to "protect," the event photo companies, I suppose.
Ya, I think that's gonna go over real good with the poor schlub who pays 10K a year in property tax to the local school board and got hisself an EOS Rebel so he can make lasting memories of little Johnny.
The event folks have every right to make as much $$$$ as they can from thier contracts, hey, more power to 'em. I just don't think they need to pressure HS spoarts federations into becoming the NCAA to do so. |
|
John Harrington, Photographer
|
Washington | DC | USA | Posted: 9:46 PM on 02.27.07 |
->> I am sure this perspective isn’t going to be one that’s met with much agreement, but I shall present it anyway.
Newspapers (hereinafter, just Media) enjoy a first amendment right to publish images of news events. Media are granted access to private events, whether professional or HS sports, with certain limitations in place. It’s within the right of a school to preclude media access to it’s campus and other locations it has jurisdiction and responsibility over. In fact, “all visitors must report to the main office first” is posted at entrances to the school for that reason. Yes, it’s a government institution, but your access as a citizen, or media, is limited to being there with permission.
Ms. Mitchell-Wagner is attempting to lump in “how the press covers an event”, with how the press monetizes it’s assets. There is no attempt to dictate “how” the coverage takes place. This is an attempt to preclude the newspaper from engaging in commercial sales of images, generating revenue for the paper, and corporate goodwill of community members towards the paper. This commercial aspect of the paper’s operations is not a part of the first amendment protections they enjoy.
Further, papers are not just selling images “as they appeared”, they are selling access and prints from all images. This makes matters worse for the paper, not better, as it further illustrates the monetization of those assets in a commercial manner. Yet, from a first amendment standpoint, the paper, for a fee, is giving the public access to its unpublished work. The next time that that paper is hauled before a judge who is insisting that the police have access to their unpublished photographs of riots or looting or other civil unrest, they will have little ground to stand on, as they grant selective access to images that are potentially profitable, yet no access to images that might make them look like an extension of law enforcement and thus become a target of violence, but help solve crimes.
In addition, the school may (or if they’ve not yet, may well consider) want to enter into an exclusive contract with a photography service that provides them with a percentage of print sales in exchange for access to operate a commercial business in the gym or on the field. Allowing the paper to do what they are doing is likely a breach of any exclusive contract that is in place for this. The school may have earmarked their percentage of revenue towards new team uniforms, or such. In fact, the very notion that the school would allow (in the past) the paper to commercially profit from the print sales of all images would give other commercial photographers the grounds and standing they need to turn up, make photos, hand out business cards with a URL, and sell prints, and the school would be limited in their ability to preclude this commercial access.
To GM’s point earlier that photo sales aren’t a major revenue stream for newspapers, I would respond “yet.” The same was said about seven years ago about the web-versions of newspapers. Your point further about reprints for some papers being moved to marketing from editorial – yes, that’s where they should be. Reprints are a commercial piece, re-paginated usually to make the content look it’s best for the purchasing party.
John |
|
Phillip Davies, Photographer
|
Garden City | NY | US | Posted: 9:51 PM on 02.27.07 |
->> I think the concept of what is editorial and what is not is being reevaluated by everyone.
Newsday on Long Island sends a video journalist to shoot high school games for their Web site. At the same game there may also be an event photographer shooting video for parents. If they are both putting it online to essentially the same audience and both offer the content to parents for sale, which is editorial and which is not?
If I post 150 images from a basketball game on my Web site and include a paragraph about the game, I think I'm supplying better editorial coverage than the the local paper that runs a stat box with no photos from the game. They make their money from advertising. I also run ads, but I also sell prints from the game. If they had photos from the game, they would also be for sale. Which is more editorial?
The problem here is the concept of what is editorial use. As usual, technology is blurring the line faster than event organizers and media handlers can get a grasp on what "editorial use" means.
Eventually it will all shake out, but I think what we are going to see over the coming years are more licensing agreements and exclusivity contracts with not just pro teams, but also colleges, high schools and other sporting event organizers. The reason for this is that there is money to be made and everyone wants a piece of the action. |
|
Tom Morris, Photographer
|
West Monroe | LA | USA | Posted: 9:56 PM on 02.27.07 |
->> On the DVDs . . . the company takes the "event" video and farms out the burning of the DVDs to another company in the state who returns them to the event photo/video company they're mailed to the consumers.
I suspect the Gannetts are pushing this, due mainly to boost their web page hits, something that is becoming more important to them and their ad depts. than their audited circulation. |
|
Jeff Stanton, Photographer
|
Tucson | Az | USA | Posted: 10:09 PM on 02.27.07 |
->> John makes some valid and interesting points. I don't know if anyone has considered this, but in some states, Indiana being one of them, school districts are not-for-profit. What money they get, they spend - all of it. The reason? Because the state distributes moneys to all schools based on enrollment figures and things such as the valuation of properties in the school district.
It's easier to understand when you compare one school district that has the latest technology, the newest facilities (the rich kids school) compared to an inner city district where property values are rated much lower. The tax revenues are less. The state still provides certain moneys per pupil in all districts.
Where the trick comes in is each school district's superintendent prepares a budget that is always higher than what he/she knows the state will allocate to them. The state comes in, examines the budget and makes cuts where it sees appropriate.
At that point, the school district is about where or near where the superindent wanted to be in the first place. However, if there is money leftover at the end of the fiscal year, the state is aware of that and may indeed cut the school's budget the following year based on the prior year's expenditures. So it's a game played by the school officials to secure as much funding as possible and the state's job to cut fat from the budget.
And remember, the school is run by the taxpayers money. Everyone, including the newspapers, TV, etc., are taxpayers. The difference between the school and the media is the media is not supported by the taxpayers and thus enjoy the rights a private entity has. |
|
Landon Finch, Photographer
|
Colorado Springs | CO | USA | Posted: 10:46 PM on 02.27.07 |
->> If reprints are NOT a revenue source, then why do these LA papers have a problem with NOT being able to sell prints? (I am not saying the prints are a big revenue source, but if the revenue isn't a big deal, then it shouldn't matter that the papers can't sell prints.)
It seems as though many here that support the papers' side of the issue are forgetting the fact that the sanctioning body is only restricting the commerical resale of images in the form of prints, NOTHING ELSE.
Papers can still report on the game. They still get free access with no strings attached. They can still post 1 or 1000 images online. They just cannot sell prints. That's it.
Phillip Davies wrote "Newsday on Long Island sends a video journalist to shoot high school games for their Web site. At the same game there may also be an event photographer shooting video for parents. If they are both putting it online to essentially the same audience and both offer the content to parents for sale, which is editorial and which is not?"
Clearly the event videographer is NOT editorial. S/he is there to sell video directly to the parents and is not disguising him/herself as a news outlet and most likely has a contract with the sanctioning body/school. Newsday is there as an editorial entity; they have a press pass around their neck. They get access for free and have no obligation to the sanctioning body/school. Their purpose is to report the unfolding of the game to public, presumably providing more content than just the video of the game (backgrounds of the teams/players, implications of the games for the teams, league standings, etc.).
The only times the lines are blurred is when the editorial outlet goes beyond the role of reporting the news and begins a commercial venture selling prints/video. (I know that papers are a commercial venture, but there are two different purposes here: one person is there to report the news and the other is there with a contract with the sanctioning body to provide a product to the fans/parents/interested parties.) |
|
Eric Canha, Photographer
|
Brockton | MA | United States | Posted: 11:04 PM on 02.27.07 |
->> John,
Very well said and some excellent points that had been missed. One point that we seem to have moved away from, this wasn't a case of A school or A district. This was the LHSAA, which means that even shooters who may have a contract with a particular school or school district don't automatically have access to the LHSAA events. |
|
Chris Stanley, Photographer
|
Lansdale | PA | USA | Posted: 11:34 PM on 02.27.07 |
->> Wow...how this thread has grown since I left it this morning. Great discussion on a topic that will probably affect us all in one way or another soon.
The only thing I would add my belief that newspaper print sales are probably small potatoes compared with what a good event outfit can generate. Newspapers generally don't have the time or resources to shoot every athlete, several poses, marketed well the day of the event, the way a dedicated event photographer can. If I ever see a local newspaper (I'm talking about HS or youth coverage here) set up a multi-terminal order and print station, then I might rethink this opinion.
I still believe that people do value newspaper coverage of local events, including sports, and I hope that never changes. That would be a sad day for our communities and this country. |
|
G.M. Andrews, Photographer
|
Mobile | AL | USA | Posted: 11:40 PM on 02.27.07 |
->> "If reprints are NOT a revenue source, then why do these LA papers have a problem with NOT being able to sell prints?"
It's really not an issue of being able to or being not able to sell prints. It's the issue of an entity trying to tell news media outlets what they can do with material gathered in the course of covering an event.
"Papers can still report on the game. They still get free access with no strings attached. They can still post 1 or 1000 images online. They just cannot sell prints. That's it."
There are strings attached. The media has a responsiblity to cover accurately and objectively this event, and all events. Publish inaccurate, biased stories or photos and see how fast "free access" gets pulled.
And since when does a newspaper's website not count as being published? When did the rule come down from Olympus stating because it's not on newsprint, it doesn't count?
If that's not being published, why are newspapers putting more emphasis on the Internet?
And for giggles, here's some more questions to ponder...
Just how many honoraria would a event shooter have to make to a school to even come close to the "free" publicity given to the same schol by a newspaper that gets seen by hundreds of thousands of sets of eyes everyday? Can you even put a price tag on that?
Sure, schools are public institutions (for the most part, excluding private schools) and funded by taxpayer monies, but are the state associations considered a public (not for profit) entity belonging to and answering to the state's government, or are they private (for profit) bodies operating outside state purview?
Ask a coach if he would rather have an event shooter at his gym or game, or the newspaper's photographer? Ask the same of a player and/or parent?
Why don't event/T&I shooters advertise with newspapers? I see banners at games, but that might be seen by a couple thousand people. Why not buy space for your business on the newspaper's Saturday sports page near the prep pages, or try to buy ad space on the paper's sports web page?
Why is there so much animosity from the event shooters? Do you really believe that newspapers have you dead in their sights? Or is your business model that unsure? |
|
Eric Canha, Photographer
|
Brockton | MA | United States | Posted: 12:32 AM on 02.28.07 |
->> Just how many honoraria would a event shooter have to make to a school to even come close to the "free" publicity given to the same schol by a newspaper that gets seen by hundreds of thousands of sets of eyes everyday? Can you even put a price tag on that?
Me no but...... doesn't your ad department have an idea of what all those eyes are worth??? I'm sure that someone at your paper can tell you inch for inch what it's worth.
Ask a coach if he would rather have an event shooter at his gym or game, or the newspaper's photographer? Ask the same of a player and/or parent?
Hmm let's see.... a couple of slide shows, mounted photo plaques , soup to nuts coverage of all THREE (freshman, JV, Varsity) teams all at no cost to the teams or school. Oh ya let us not forget the science teacher who walks into the gym and begs for photos of the science Olympics during halftime. I said it before BRING IT ON. I'm in our HS from 2:30 to 8pm at least 3 time a week, and then bounce all over the place to cover playoffs and championships. Just tell me the last time you saw a paper shoot the freshman team. When I started shooting the freshman 2 years ago the parents almost lost it. NO ONE covers freshman. And then to put the photos up on a site that some kid's brother overseas can nav to without having to signup for some kind of account. Please. Don't go there. All that and the only revenue is from our sales to the fans and parents. I don't have to ask. They come to me to say hello and to thank us for being there.
Sure, schools are public institutions (for the most part, excluding private schools) and funded by taxpayer monies, but are the state associations considered a public (not for profit) entity belonging to and answering to the state's government, or are they private (for profit) bodies operating outside state purview?
Which state? Of the ones that I looked up they are PRIVATE non profits. Isn't the NCAA one too?? Yes I know that the IRS ask them to justify the NPO but until it's taken away the status sticks.
Read my post. $1700 A WEEK for my ad campaign. Why should I give one dime to a company (paper) that openly has stated that they will try to compete with me for sales??? Now truthfully I wouldn't be spending that 52 weeks a years but even twice a quarter to cover playoff/championships..... You tell me who lost $ money on that deal. Twasn't me. I still have the paperwork here but damn if it isn't sitting on a shelf 12 inches from the shredder.
Why is there so much animosity from the event shooters? Do you really believe that newspapers have you dead in their sights? Or is your business model that unsure?
Could it be that some of us haven't quite mastered the whole walking on water thing. Could it be that the whole argument about non existent rights is getting lame. Maybe it's the fact that an institution as valuable as newspapers, holding coverage hostage for a ransom is so sickening to me. Print the story, tell the story, publish your work, AND when the schools flat out tell you that you are doing something that will HURT them then S-T-O-P. Continuing past the point of reporting the story, to sell prints when you have been told that it violates a contract that the school has and could jeopardize a financial stream has nothing to do with journalism. NOTHING. It paints the papers for what they are or have become. Oh and BTW with the advent of the internet, drums of ink are nothing but a hazmat.
Thankfully, for me anyway, only 1 of the local papers have even tried to do any of the things that we have spoken here. The others are stretched so thin that the shooters are lucky to be able to stay put for 30 minutes. Not once have ANY of the local papers even toyed with the the idea of strobing a gym. So truth be told I am living a charmed life in that I don't have to deal with this kind of crap from too many angles. But I am ready, push come to shove somebody is going to be giving lotsa tribute to out bid me. |
|
Landon Finch, Photographer
|
Colorado Springs | CO | USA | Posted: 8:48 AM on 02.28.07 |
| ->> Does anyone have the text of the form LHSAA was trying to get the papers to sign? This latest article posted by Tom doesn't say anything about print sales specifically, something the first article keyed in on. |
|
Landon Finch, Photographer
|
Colorado Springs | CO | USA | Posted: 8:56 AM on 02.28.07 |
->> GM wrote "There are strings attached. The media has a responsiblity to cover accurately and objectively this event, and all events. Publish inaccurate, biased stories or photos and see how fast "free access" gets pulled."
That's like saying a NBA player has the responsibility to play the game of basketball and even practice...it's part of the job.
If a paper is publishing inaccurate and biased stories, I sure hope that paper's access would be pulled. I wouldn't want that paper there either if it's not going to do its job properly. However, I could also see the paper claiming they have a right to be there, its a 'freedom of the press' issue. |
|
Eric Canha, Photographer
|
Brockton | MA | United States | Posted: 9:18 AM on 02.28.07 |
| ->> Like I said before they may cave this time, but wars are made of many smaller battles. I'm sure that this isn't over. I would expect that the subject will be brought up at national meetings where these state boards will discuss a unified response. Again no different than the NCAA or any of the majors. Give it time...... I'm sure that the gloating in the article will go along way to mending the relationships. Give it time...... There are no free lunches ..... ever. |
|
This thread has reached the maximum number of posts
If you would like to continue it, please create a new thread.
[ Create new thread? ]
Return to --> Message Board Main Index
|