Blogger ejected from NCAA baseball game : Big implications for future blogging
It's not a lawyer being thrown out of a court room, but a baseball reporter was ejected for live blogging a baseball game.
As reported by the Associated Press, Brian Bennett, a writer for The Louisville Courier-Journal, was ejected in the bottom of the fifth inning for refusing to stop blogging Sunday's Louisville - Oklahoma State game. Bennet had called his editor who told him to keep on blogging.
The newspaper's position from the AP:
- We're being deprived of our right to report within the First Amendment from a public facility.
- This is part of the evolution of how we present the news to our readers.
- It's what we did during the Orange Bowl. It's what we did during the NCAA basketball tournament. It's what we do.
- Once a player hits a home run, that's a fact. It's on TV. Everybody sees it. (The NCAA) can't copyright that fact.
And from the NCAA:
- Bennett was asked not to blog about game action before Sunday's game.
- Blogs are considered a 'live representation of the game' and blogs containing action photos or game reports are prohibited until the game is over.
- Because the blogger repeatedly violated the policy his credential was revoked.
- Didn't matter that the newspaper had blogged at other NCAA events, like the Orange Bowl and NCAA basketball tournament.
This probably has more than a few entrepreneurs shaking their heads as to their blogging business models. I have always taken the view that blogging from a public place was wide open. But when the NCCA buys the rights to broadcast this may raise a whole nother issue.
Can we blog in text? What about audio podcasts? And does video blogging conflict with TV rights?
Not sure how ESPN gets its video for play after the game for its reporting. Sometimes ESPN is live with an 'audio call in' during games it does not cover. Does it buy the rights? Perhaps blogger Henry Abbott of ESPN's True Hoop could chime in.
Technorati Tags: blog law
Now this is an interesting post. There are few organizations more protective (or perhaps draconian) than the NCAA. But I agree this case could have implications. Do you know if the newspaper is planning legal action?
Rush
Legal counsel for the paper said they were considering action. If thats the case, I expect they'll be counseled by external forces in journalism circles because of the implications of a court decision.
Isn't the NCAA run by the guy who ran Bobby Knight out of IU? Says it all.
It looks like Judges are getting in on the act of threatening independent bloggers -
http://www.flipthislawsuit.com/2007/06/11/summary-judgment-motion-hearing-june-6/
...and he was the president of my alma mater, Oregon, before Indiana and before NCAA. Yeeeaaahhh, he's a piece of work.
The thing I don't get is... does the NCAA REALLY think that a blog somehow cuts into their profits? If I have the choice of 1) attending a sporting event of interest, 2) watching said event on TV, or 3) tracking the event on the internet via a blog or other method, then my preferences will go in precisely that order. If, time and money-wise, I can afford to go, I'm there. If not, then I will watch it on TV. If I have to study or work, and/or it is not available on a channel I receive, then I can at least have the backup insurance of following along on the internet.
Blogging does the NCAA no harm at all, and could even lead to expanding their following... but instead, they will alienate the media and (somewhat) tech-savvy sports fans with their short-sighted proprietary pissing contests.
Jerry