Gambit Posted April 8, 2008 Share Posted April 8, 2008 Websites banned from covering IPL Harish Kotian The deadlock between the media and the Indian Premier League ended, at least in part, following a meeting between IPL organizers and editors from leading newspapers in Mumbai on Monday. While the print media got relief on the use of images and the number of reporters and photographers allowed, top cricket websites like Rediff.com and Cricinfo have been banned from covering the IPL. Adding insult to injury, the IPL has decreed that websites can cover pre-match and post-match press conferences, but their reporters and photographers will not be allowed into the press box when the actual matches are on. Further, websites are not allowed to upload any pictures of the tournament, and news agencies have been banned from selling pictures to websites. Climbing down from its earlier stand that newspapers would not be allowed to put up pictures on their websites, the IPL has conceded that newspaper websites can upload six different pictures on their portals, in addition to the pictures have been published in their print edition. They have also been allowed a maximum of two reporters and photographers for each game. IPL chairman Lalit Modi said the new media guidelines will be shortly be posted on the tournament website, and that the deadline for media accreditation has been extended to April 10. Also, as per the new guidelines, newspaper photographers are now not required to upload all their pictures on the IPL website. The organisers agreed that they will not have any rights over any photographs taken at the venues and will instead have their own photographers at each venue who will click around 10,000 pictures per day. They would also request the editors of all newspapers to send the best images of the day to be uploaded on the IPL website so it could be made available to fans worldwide. To encourage such a move, they would also give a daily prize to the best photograph of the day. The Editors' Guild of India and Sports Journalists Federation had criticised the original media guidelines and had asked the BCCI to withdraw all restrictions on the coverage of the tournament. There were also reports that all the top newspapers were considering boycott of the tournament if the restrictions were not lifted, following which the BCCI acted swiftly and met the representatives from all the leading newspapers to resolve the issue. The Indian Newspaper Society (INS) had also said that it would advise its member publications not to cover the IPL matches if the restrictive terms for accreditation were not withdrawn. Accordingly, the IPL has revised the 13-page terms and conditions to two pages. However, the News Media Coalition which includes top global news agencies like Agence France-Presse (AFP), Associated Press (AP), Reuters and Getty Images have not still taken a decision on the coverage of the event. Their main concern is not being allowed to sell photographs to websites and also the fear that this could set up a bad precedent for the future. FIFA tried imposing similar restrictions on photo coverage of the 2006 World Cup; however, it had to back down after it faced a threat of a worldwide boycott. In September last year organisers of the Rugby World Cup tried a similar stunt but had to bow down. Interestingly, then the photographers turned up for a commercial photo shoot and just took pictures of the grass as a protest. In November last year, the global news agencies boycotted the coverage of the first Test between Sri Lanka and Australia, thereby leading to virtually no coverage of the match in Brisbane after similar restrictions were imposed by Cricket Australia. The Australian Cricket Board finally had to bow down, thereby ensuring that the second Test match was covered. http://www.rediff.com/cricket/2008/apr/08web.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gambit Posted April 8, 2008 Author Share Posted April 8, 2008 What sort of Nazigiri is this? Look at the bolded portions. This is essentially an own goal. Do they want this to succeed or not? Blacking out the media is never the smartest move. Seems like CI won't be able to provide comms for this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DomainK Posted April 8, 2008 Share Posted April 8, 2008 This is being reconsidered by IPL right now. They did this because they have no knowledge of laws. The websites can sue their backside bigtime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirty_South Posted April 8, 2008 Share Posted April 8, 2008 What a Bunch of Mothafcukers ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sachinism Posted April 8, 2008 Share Posted April 8, 2008 wtf thats BS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silv3rado Posted April 8, 2008 Share Posted April 8, 2008 seems like BCCI want to have a monopoly on everything. another aspect is that the individual teams have opened up their own websites and they dont want to lose to someone like cricinfo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurker Posted April 8, 2008 Share Posted April 8, 2008 In the end it would be all about money..and for everyone. BCCI, players, teams, promoters yada yada. Whats the point in complaining really? Who didnt see this coming? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gambit Posted April 8, 2008 Author Share Posted April 8, 2008 In the end it would be all about money..and for everyone. BCCI' date=' players, teams, promoters yada yada. Whats the point in complaining really? Who didnt see this coming?[/quote'] In this day and age of electronic media, such draconian bans are unheard of. I definitely didn't see this coming. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurker Posted April 8, 2008 Share Posted April 8, 2008 In this day and age of electronic media' date=' such draconian bans are unheard of. I definitely didn't see this coming.[/quote'] I did. It is no different from BCCI demanding big bucks from the channels covering series that involves India. Basically the ideology is simple - You make money off Indian players, then we want a piece of it. Media, like Cricinfo, generates a lot of traffic by viewers and makes money by putting tons of ads. BCCI is not a fool and so obviously want them to pay more. In the process the game, and the fans, get effed but hey it was never about the two anyway! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gambit Posted April 8, 2008 Author Share Posted April 8, 2008 I did. It is no different from BCCI demanding big bucks from the channels covering series that involves India. Basically the ideology is simple - You make money off Indian players, then we want a piece of it. Media, like Cricinfo, generates a lot of traffic by viewers and makes money by putting tons of ads. BCCI is not a fool and so obviously want them to pay more. In the process the game, and the fans, get effed but hey it was never about the two anyway! This never happens during Tennis Grandslams or the Olympics or the Football World Cup. Anyone is free to cover the event, write about it, publish pictures etc. This as I said is an own goal and might lead to a boycott by certain sections of the media which will only hurt IPL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurker Posted April 8, 2008 Share Posted April 8, 2008 This never happens during Tennis Grandslams or the Olympics or the Football World Cup. Anyone is free to cover the event' date= write about it, publish pictures etc. This as I said is an own goal and might lead to a boycott by certain sections of the media which will only hurt IPL. And no-one gets paid by the billions to play Olympics. No-nation spends billions to own a team in Football World Cup. The only kind of "renumeration" is if the guarantee money that a player makes in Grand Slams and of course more if he wins it. IPL on the other hand is for the money. The moment teams were "sold" out for billions in BCCI coffers, the moment players made more money than many would in an entire life, it was a foregone conclusion that this was money at work and not cricket. Simple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gambit Posted April 8, 2008 Author Share Posted April 8, 2008 And no-one gets paid by the billions to play Olympics. No-nation spends billions to own a team in Football World Cup. The only kind of "renumeration" is if the guarantee money that a player makes in Grand Slams and of course more if he wins it. IPL on the other hand is for the money. The moment teams were "sold" out for billions in BCCI coffers, the moment players made more money than many would in an entire life, it was a foregone conclusion that this was money at work and not cricket. Simple. Alright then. What about the EPL/the Spanish Football Leagues/MLB/NBA etc? Players are bought and sold in EPL as well. I don't see a ban like that there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurker Posted April 8, 2008 Share Posted April 8, 2008 Alright then. What about the EPL/the Spanish Football Leagues/MLB/NBA etc? Players are bought and sold in EPL as well. I don't see a ban like that there. Channels that cover these games pay huge sum of money. You wont find NBA, for example, be covered on ten channels at the same time. It is covered by 1 channel during regular season and other channel in Post season. You will see NBA franchise making sure that main traffic is directed towards NBA.com and not tens of sports websites. Most sport websites, say Sports Illustrated, will have 1-2 pictures from each game(if that). Cricinfo has a dozen picture even from BD-Kenya match. IPL should not even be considered in the same league as NBA(which is the stellar championship for basketball) or MLB etc. However what goes without saying is the driving force of IPL is money. I am yet to hear a Sachin tendulkar or a Dravid say - This is going to be best for cricket. All they keep saying is - This is going to be great for cricketers. See the difference? xxx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kumble_rocks Posted April 8, 2008 Share Posted April 8, 2008 Channels that cover these games pay huge sum of money. You wont find NBA' date=' for example, be covered on ten channels at the same time. It is covered by 1 channel during regular season and other channel in Post season.[b'] You will see NBA franchise making sure that main traffic is directed towards NBA.com and not tens of sports websites. Most sport websites, say Sports Illustrated, will have 1-2 pictures from each game(if that). Cricinfo has a dozen picture even from BD-Kenya match. IPL should not even be considered in the same league as NBA(which is the stellar championship for basketball) or MLB etc. However what goes without saying is the driving force of IPL is money. I am yet to hear a Sachin tendulkar or a Dravid say - This is going to be best for cricket. All they keep saying is - This is going to be great for cricketers. See the difference? xxx I believe that's not true, lurker. In fact the play by play broadcast for any NBA game can be obtained from yahoo sports which doesn't necessarily have an agreement with NBA league. In fact , I would think yahoo sports for NBA generate more traffic than nba.com. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurker Posted April 8, 2008 Share Posted April 8, 2008 I believe that's not true' date=' lurker. In fact the play by play broadcast for any NBA game can be obtained from yahoo sports which doesn't necessarily have an agreement with NBA league. [b']In fact , I would think yahoo sports for NBA generate more traffic than nba.com. I wish there was a way to figure that out KR. Unfortunately there isn't. What is definitive though is that NBA.com is the league's official website. Take for example a kid wanting to write to Shaq or Iverson, can he do so at Yahoo Sports? I am not too sure. He can do it at NBA.com by going to the team and then further after that. Of course this doesnt mean that Shaq will sit and respond. Maybe he will, maybe he wont. But atleast the kid has that option there. Not too sure of the whole Yahoo-NBA relationship but I would be surprised if Yahoo covers NBA any better(not in terms of content but merchandise, interviews, pictures, videos, history etc) than NBA.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gambit Posted April 8, 2008 Author Share Posted April 8, 2008 Channels that cover these games pay huge sum of money. You wont find NBA' date=' for example, be covered on ten channels at the same time. It is covered by 1 channel during regular season and other channel in Post season. You will see NBA franchise making sure that main traffic is directed towards NBA.com and not tens of sports websites. Most sport websites, say Sports Illustrated, will have 1-2 pictures from each game(if that). Cricinfo has a dozen picture even from BD-Kenya match.[/quote'] I am not talking about channels. Everyone knows that telecast rights lie with the broadcaster. But when it comes to print media coverage, it's pretty much without restriction. As long as you are from a reputed media agency, you get access to the ground, the match, click pictures, write session based or inning based articles and post on your website. BCCI is disallowing press men to be even present in the media box during the game. They are disallowing them from providing updates on their websites. This sort of media ban is unheard of and very very silly. This doesn't happen in EPL or the NBA. The EPL and Champions League 'live' text coverage of games is provided by atleast 2 websites that I know of. They pretty much upload match pics quite regularly. Sure, it's the BCCI's baby and pretty much upto them to decide who gets access and who doesn't but it is simply not common and quite frankly very regressive in this day and age. If INS do boycott IPL, BCCI would have shot itself in the foot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bumper Posted April 8, 2008 Share Posted April 8, 2008 BCCI babus are megalomaniacs. I can understand their motives, but to ban media coverage before even IPL has taken off as a league, is plain delusional. If IPL is as poorly covered as ICL, people will lose interest in it. Regardless of the star value of the players, it'll take atleast a couple of years for IPL to take off. It'll need all the help from the media in this time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurker Posted April 8, 2008 Share Posted April 8, 2008 But when it comes to print media coverage, it's pretty much without restriction. Thats because no sports in the world, not football, or hockey, or baeball, can compare to the popularity of cricket in India. Okay maybe football in South America but even those countries dont have as much passion raging in. In other words the authority that controls Indian cricket sits in a pretty unique position when it comes to making demands. That all being said, which fan gets his sports news from print media these days? It is all about television and internet media, atleast in cricket. With all due respect to KN Prabhu, Raju Bharathan, N Ram etc. print media(in cricket) is dead and no Indian fan follows his cricket from daily staple at Hindu. Sure, it's the BCCI's baby and pretty much upto them to decide who gets access and who doesn't but it is simply not common and quite frankly very regressive in this day and age. If INS do boycott IPL, BCCI would have shot itself in the foot. Not at all. Cricket is the opium of Indian fans, BCCI knows it. Every 2 years we have a DD blockout, or certain cable wallahs refusing to show Ind-Aus series(due to increased charges). SO what happens? People stop watching cricket? No. They keep doing it. The fault lies with the people and not BCCI, end of the story. When BCCI can claim that Indian team is actually Team BCCI and NOT Team India and gets away with that, you beleive that ban by Times of India, Indian Express will put a dent in BCCI coffers? Nah. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gambit Posted April 8, 2008 Author Share Posted April 8, 2008 Thats because no sports in the world' date=' not football, or hockey, or baeball, can compare to the popularity of cricket in India. Okay maybe football in South America but even those countries dont have as much passion raging in. In other words the authority that controls Indian cricket sits in a pretty unique position when it comes to making demands.[/quote'] That's hardly an excuse for doing this. That all being said, which fan gets his sports news from print media these days? It is all about television and internet media, atleast in cricket. With all due respect to KN Prabhu, Raju Bharathan, N Ram etc. print media(in cricket) is dead and no Indian fan follows his cricket from daily staple at Hindu. By print media, I meant electronic as well. Not at all. Cricket is the opium of Indian fans, BCCI knows it. Every 2 years we have a DD blockout, or certain cable wallahs refusing to show Ind-Aus series(due to increased charges). SO what happens? People stop watching cricket? No. They keep doing it. The fault lies with the people and not BCCI, end of the story. When BCCI can claim that Indian team is actually Team BCCI and NOT Team India and gets away with that, you beleive that ban by Times of India, Indian Express will put a dent in BCCI coffers? Nah. BCCI are messing with a very powerful entity which is the media. If the big houses like TOI,HT,India Today etc decide to boycott this event because of what happened, it will hit BCCI hard not in terms of money necessarily but in terms of coverage. People who use the net follow CI commentary, read reports there, on Rediff etc. If they boycott this tourney, BCCI are impacted. Aam janta in India doesn't have access to the internet. They follow their cricket through TV and newspapers. If the newspapers don't cover it, BCCI is impacted. Some of the media agencies own sports channels as well. I'm pretty certain some of the media moghuls have stake in the franchises as well. If things get really bad, the impact might even be seen there. BCCI will have to back down which they have. BCCI has realised how badly this could have turned out for them which is why they've revised their policy. In the wake of strident opposition from the media, the Indian Premier League on Tuesday revised the media accreditation guidelines toning down its controversial proposals. The revised guidelines would now enable a newspaper or a news agency to carry stand-alone still pictures of the Twenty20 matches in the print media and their websites without changing or morphing and for editorial reporting purposes only. The guidelines clarified that the IPRs of any publication shall not be restricted in terms of the clause which says that the accredited party should not use material which could challenge and damage the IPR of IPL. They said the images should not be used in direct association with any marks, names or logos of any third party and no part or whole of the image should be super imposed upon. The guidelines said no online use or publication or syndication of any such still photographic image is allowed except for the website of the publication. The media gallery of a website can have upto any six pictures per match which would include pictures carried in a publication's various editions. http://www.hindustantimes.com/StoryPage/FullcoverageStoryPage.aspx?id=c3fbef06-e813-4996-91f3-4a1ae5a49902IPL_Special&&IsCricket=true&Headline=IPL+revises+media+accreditation+terms Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoda Posted April 8, 2008 Share Posted April 8, 2008 This never happens during Tennis Grandslams or the Olympics or the Football World Cup. Anyone is free to cover the event' date=' write about it, publish pictures etc. This as I said is an own goal and might lead to a boycott by certain sections of the media which will only hurt IPL.[/quote'] FIFA did similar dadadagiri during the 2006 world cup. http://www.sportsbooks.com/news/sports_betting/164412.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts