Illinois photogs denied field credentials

[JayFarrar]

Because I'm much too lazy to find the original thread.
Seems like another state was headed to Armageddon on this, but I don't remember which one.
Anyway, anyone at the scene care to comment.

CHAMPAIGN – Photographers from four Illinois newspapers were not allowed to take pictures from the field at the Illinois High School Association's state football championships this weekend.
Anthony Holman, assistant executive director for the IHSA, said photographers from the Bloomington Pantagraph, the Springfield State Register, the Arlington Daily Herald and the Crystal Lake Northwest Herald were not given field passes to cover the football championships, but were allowed into the pressbox or stands at the University of Illinois Memorial Stadium.
The action was prompted by the newspapers participating in a lawsuit against the IHSA filed Nov. 1 by the Illinois Press Association, Holman said. The sports association sent those four newspapers letters telling them to stop selling photographs from IHSA events, but they did not respond, so they were restricted, he said.
"We didn't give them access to the field," Holman said. "Our hand was forced when the IPA sued us. Essentially, all we did was say, 'This is our policy. We are reaffirming our policy.'"

http://www.news-gazette.com/news/local/2007/11/25/photographers_denied_access_to_field

More at the link...

 

[MU_was_not_so_hard]

Illinois' athletics org. needs to get hit hard.
Below the belt.

Until then, the photogs' papers need to buy tickets to the events, shoot the best they can with some telephoto lenses and then continue to sell them as they see fit.

 

[PTOWN]

Illinois' athletics org. needs to get hit hard.
Below the belt.

Until then, the photogs' papers need to buy tickets to the events, shoot the best they can with some telephoto lenses and then continue to sell them as they see fit.

That's what we did. Bought a ticket and shot from the stands. It worked out just fine. The IHSA put a statement up on its Web site procliaming that pro sports have these same rules. But it's not exactly the same situation now is it. How many times do you think Mama Urlacher calls the Tribune trying to purchase a photo of her son?

 

[tjbball54]

IHSA has done this time and time again. I know one of our photogs (again Arlington Daily Herald) was at a softball game I was covering and the umpire stopped the game and denied her access to the place they always shoot from. It was ridiculous. The coaches get to stand out there. I think it really is up to the photog to take the risk. There wasn't a spot for her to shoot other than behind the fences with an obstructed view. Now, this business in Champaign takes it a step futher even.

 

[steveu]

Since no one has said it, I will...

This will not end well. For the IHSA and the IPA at least.

 

[bigpern23]

My biggest problem with this is that unlike pro teams that aren't based in Green Bay, these organizations are not private organizations. They are affiliated with the local school systems and supported by taxpayer dollars. They are, in essence, public entities. Therefore, their games are public events and the media should have a right to cover them as such.

I don't think they should be able to restrict anyone's access.

 

[OnTheRiver]

I think it happened in Louisiana, and we're heading toward it in Indiana, too.

 

[Clerk Typist]

The IHSA opened a big hole in its argument when it allowed the outlets to cover from in the stadium, just not on the field.
If I'm a paper's lawyer, I'm thinking the argument against the IHSA is this: Papers are allowed to sell pictures taken from the stands with a 400m lens, but not from 25 feet closer? That's a distinction without a difference.
The IHSA ought to cut a deal to share revenue, which is what this is all about: Two sides each trying to make money off children without giving them a cut. Sorta like college sports on a smaller scale.

 

[MCbamr]

It was Louisiana. The LHSAA has a contract with a single photographer who loads up on selling photos of players posing at championship sites and then selling them online. The association wanted news photogs to sign statements restricting each paper from selling photos online. All or most of the state papers banded together and decided not to cover the state girls basketball tournament. The LHSAA said OK you win. I think it was two years ago.

 

[Mira]

Wisconsin's dealt with this issue, too.

From the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel ...

WIAA, newspapers spar over photos, video
Agency seeks control of commercial use
By DON WALKER

Posted: Feb. 7, 2007

With state championships in high school wrestling and basketball just weeks away, the state's newspapers and the governing body for high-school athletics are embroiled in a dispute over photographic and video rights to the high-profile events.

Newspaper representatives say their photographers and, in some cases, videographers, have the right to photograph and film the events for use in newspapers and online. In addition, newspapers argue they have the right to sell photographs or videos taken at the championship events, as they always have.

The Wisconsin Interscholastic Athletic Association (WIAA), which has sold exclusive photographic and video rights to the championship events to two companies, disagrees. Newspapers are welcome to cover the events, the association argues, but photos and videos are for editorial, not commercial use.

The two companies - Visual Image Photography Inc., and When We Were Young Productions - have been around for years. But it wasn't until this year that the issue came to the forefront.

Both sides agree that, with the advent of the digital age, newspapers are able to publish - both in the newspaper and on web sites - photos and videos for resale to the public.

"The issue for Wisconsin newspapers is what they perceive to be inappropriate restrictions on the ability of newspapers to provide sports reports to the public," said Peter Fox, the executive director of the Wisconsin Newspaper Association. "Newspapers across the state have been selling photographs for decades. These types of things have been extremely popular with subscribers. Today we can deliver information products to readers and users in a variety of formats."

But WIAA spokesman Todd Clark said newspapers are out of bounds. "Take your photos, that's fine," Clark said. "Create a photo store on the Web site, that is not fine. That is pretty clear."

Clark said the WIAA does not receive a great deal of money from the two contracts, though he declined to specify a dollar amount. "The dollar amounts are modest," he said. But what makes it worthwhile for us is getting those images, not just from the popular sports, but other sports that we can use in our publications."

"If we take a photo of a local basketball player shooting the shot that wins the state tournament," said George Stanley, managing editor of the Journal Sentinel, "and his or her parents ask us for a print of the photo, we're going to sell them the print like we always have, and I'm sure every daily and weekly paper in the state feels the same way.

"The parents have every right to take their own photos and post them on our Web site, too, as far as we're concerned. Maybe the WIAA, as a non-profit association, should stick to regulating varsity athletics."

Tom Hayes, the president and CEO of Visual Image Photography, said the issue had not been a concern until recently.

"If anybody is at a game and can post pictures and sell them, that would hurt our sales and therefore hurt our revenue source," said Hayes.

Clark said the WIAA and the two companies have offered a compromise. For $100, newspapers can shoot an unlimited amount of photographs and videos at regional and sectional athletic events. But once the events reach the state tournament level, the newspapers are restricted to using images only for editorial purposes.

That does not mollify the newspapers.

WNA members - including the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel - as well as the Associated Press Editors Association, both plan to discuss the issue this week at meetings in Wisconsin Dells.

 

[jmm1412]

I have no problem with the state athletic organizations controlling the commercial aspects of the events they run. When newspapers decide to sell photos they shoot from games, we cross the line from a journalistic enterprise afforded the free press protection of the first amendment to a commercial enterprise not entitled to such protection.

 

[novelist_wannabe]

I have no problem with the state athletic organizations controlling the commercial aspects of the events they run. When newspapers decide to sell photos they shoot from games, we cross the line from a journalistic enterprise afforded the free press protection of the first amendment to a commercial enterprise not entitled to such protection.

Oh, really? So, just so I have this straight ...

The IHSA should be allowed to determine the method in which we can disseminate the information we gather? Because that's what you're saying. When the paper sells its photographs, that is no different from you putting .50 in the paper box and pulling a copy out. We have information -- in this case visual information -- that someone wants, so they pay us for it. It's what we do. We gather information and we sell it.

 

[Stitch]

How many papers have sold photos before the digital age when all a consumer had to do was point and click? I don't know the answer.

Back to the topic at hand. It's an interesting battle between athletic bodies and sports leagues against the media on who controls the dissemination of information.

 

[MCbamr]

I have no problem with the state athletic organizations controlling the commercial aspects of the events they run. When newspapers decide to sell photos they shoot from games, we cross the line from a journalistic enterprise afforded the free press protection of the first amendment to a commercial enterprise not entitled to such protection.

For the most part, these are state associations that take our tax money through dues and other fees. They also take your money by staging tournaments featuring (again, for the most part) state schools playing sports against each other. In some (probably many) cases, the associations are "non-profit" groups bringing in tons of money and paying large salaries to executives, along with car allowances, etc.

They are not, as most (if not all) claim, in this for THE CHILDREN. If they are, they should have no problem with what newspapers do with photographs.

 

[alleyallen]

How many papers have sold photos before the digital age when all a consumer had to do was point and click? I don't know the answer.

Back to the topic at hand. It's an interesting battle between athletic bodies and sports leagues against the media on who controls the dissemination of information.

The first paper I worked at post-Navy was pre-digital and they made a rather brisk sale of photos, especially for athletics.

 

[Italian_Stallion]

What ever happened to free enterprise? This is ridiculous. Just because the pros have stupid rules doesn't mean that everyone must adopt them. I'd propose the IPA launch a statewide ban on prep sports coverage for a few weeks. That ought to stir the **** enough to force the IHSA's hand on this.

To be fair, though, there sure seem to be a lot of cameras on the sidelines these days. It's one thing for a photog to shoot a game and then sell photos. But a lot of guys I run into almost exclusively shoot to sell the photos. I wonder how this affects some of the photogs I've met who shoot stuff for yearbooks. Technically, they're selling the photos. Are they also in jeopardy?

 

[Just_An_SID]

I agree with the high school associations on this one.

Newspapers have the right to staff a game and report on it but they do not have a right to make a profit off of selling photographs. The association sets forth the conditions for which they will give you a credential and if you don't want to follow those conditions, then turn it down.

Based on some of your comments, what would stop Freelance Photographer from staffing the games by himself (without working for a newspaper) and selling the photos? It doesn't matter what the reason is for taking the photos, it is the selling of the photos that the associations object to.

 

[Rhody31]

The RIAA is pretty much the same way over state finals, especially when photogs/TV guys want shots post game.
Last year at baseball, photogrpahers weren't allowed on field level and had to shoot from the stands. No one said anything, which blew me away,

 

[Italian_Stallion]

Based on some of your comments, what would stop Freelance Photographer from staffing the games by himself (without working for a newspaper) and selling the photos? It doesn't matter what the reason is for taking the photos, it is the selling of the photos that the associations object to.

Where I live, freelancers need to prove that they're working for someone before they're given credentials. I would think that's standard procedure. But then, you're Just An SID. ;-)

 

[Just_An_SID]

Based on some of your comments, what would stop Freelance Photographer from staffing the games by himself (without working for a newspaper) and selling the photos? It doesn't matter what the reason is for taking the photos, it is the selling of the photos that the associations object to.

Where I live, freelancers need to prove that they're working for someone before they're given credentials. I would think that's standard procedure. But then, you're Just An SID. ;-)

So how would you like it if all of those freelance people were taking the good photo spots because they intended to sell the photos online? Why should they be denied the opportunity to make a profit off the state tournament if, as many of you have stated, you feel you have the right to sell photos? Shouldn't they also have that right?