AZ Republic partners with state high school association ... thoughts?

Hey guys, I'm curious what you think about this. The Arizona Republic just signed an "exclusive" deal to give their Web site more prep content directly from the AIA, which sanctions high schools in Arizona. Smart for them, I suppose, because all those hits will now go to them, but here's my question: Do you think this will make it harder for them to be objective now that they are technically a "partner" of the state's governing body?

I know, I know, it's only high schools, but still, I'm curious to get some thoughts on this.

(By the way, as added context, this comes in the midst of a big hoopla where the AIA put on its credential request form that newspapers have to agree not to sell pictures from state tournaments and championships, because, the AIA is claiming, they own them. The Republic was among those standing against that, but who knows what it will do now.)

 

A decade ago, the Republic did a fairly decent job of covering the entire state when it came to high schools. Then again, it was the only newspaper circulating in print statewide. Want a Tucson paper or the East Valley Tribune in Yuma? You'd have better luck finding the San Diego Union-Tribune.

 

It doesn't seem fair to the rest of the media in the state.

Does this mean the AIA won't provide info to other papers?

This seems like it is saying that no one else is allowed to have all the scores or something.

 

If other media outlets go to the site for scores and other information, are they getting PR information from the state association or taking information from a competitor's site?

 

the star-ledger in New Jersey has been doing this for a decade. They are the title sponsor for all state championship high school athletic events in New Jersey.

It's an obvious conflict of interest. A few years ago, when the executive director of the state athletic association - NJSIAA - was run out of office for a variety of non-criminal but untoward things, the investigation was done (extremely well) by the bergen record, and the star-ledger never mentioned it.

How a newspaper can have such a cozy relationship with an organization it's supposed to be covering is beyond me.

 

Good question.

Do they have to attribute azcentral.com?

 

Being a sponsor is one thing; I'd guess the vast majority of pro stadiums have signage for the local major daily, and newspaper promotions departments routinely work out sponsorship deals with the teams we cover. The industry as a whole seems to think sponsorship is OK. An agreement where the paper has an exclusive content information arrangement as part of its news coverage crosses what was already kind of a blurry line. The AZ Republic is going to have to do an interesting editorial tap dance when controversy breaks out involving the AIA. One would like to think they'd be uninhibited, but I can't imagine they will.

 

I believe there is a similar agreement in Alabama with al.com, the three Newhouse papers and the state association.

Would anyone ignore an agreement like this if it involved the Arizona Republic and the local public utility company? Doubtful. Why these agreements are ignored between the agencies and people covering them also is beyond me.

 

Ethics only seems to matter when a newspapers points out ethical lapses at another paper.

If the East Valley Tribune made the deal, the Republic's editors would cry foul in a heartbeat.