Info Censorship

**Macy** · 31/07/2001, 1:19 PM

This the way all football is going. You can be sure that UEFA and FIFA are looking

From the IMUSA mailing list....

Blackout threat in rights war
The newspaper industry and England's league clubs are on course for a battle over media rights and match reporting that could result in journalists being refused entry to stadiums and a print media 'blackout' of the game's leading sponsors.

From 11 August, there is the very real prospect of journalists being barred from press boxes unless they sign away their basic rights to report on the game without interference from football's governing bodies.
Journalists say that the conditions demanded by some clubs, in the guise of a new company trying to raise millions of pounds through media rights sales, would effectively reduce newspaper coverage to the anodyne level of matchday programmes.

A draft proposal for conditions of accreditation included such draconian measures as journalists not being allowed to wear any clothing or use equipment carrying a non-authorised logo, and having to agree to articles 'not being presented in such a way that it would damage the integrity or reputation of the Football League, the FA Premier League, clubs, their
players or officials'.

Months of talks between newspaper representatives and Football DataCo, a joint venture set up by the Football League and the FA Premier League, have reached stalemate. It could lead to editors threatening to reduce their coverage drastically and enforcing a 'blackout' of sponsors' names and logos.
Trouble has been simmering for more than a year.

Inspired by the dotcom frenzy of the 1990s, clubs saw a way to add the print media to television and radio as a way of generating revenue. This would entail taking control of the statistical information that is increasingly popular with fans and, more importantly from their point of view, essential to the business of
football betting.

If Football DataCo controlled the flow of informa tion, it argued, it could cut lucrative deals with bookmakers and new media providers. As an indicator, BSkyB's latest figures show that betting revenues last year totalled �78 million - 84 per cent of its interactive business. The service was only introduced last summer, and Sky sees interactive betting as a
great source of revenue over the next few years. It is not backing Football DataCo's plans.

There is also the tricky problem of ownership of information. If David Beckham bends a ball around a defensive wall and into the net away to Arsenal, the intellectual property rights do not belong to Beckham,
Manchester United, High bury Stadium or the Premier League - but to those who report it.

The only way to make real money out of bookmakers and service providers is by guaranteeing exclusivity - which can only be delivered if no one else is putting out the same information.

Football DataCo is trying to impose a system whereby journalists are banned from sending out statistical data during a game or having their copy appear on any 'unauthorised' websites or messaging services.

Newspapers see this as censorship and an infringement of freedom of the press. And they have some surprising allies, not least Manchester United, Leeds and Arsenal, who have all expressed grave concerns about the scheme.

United, for example, whose shirt sponsors are Vodafone, who would be horrified by the prospect
of Football DataCo striking a deal for mobile phone provision with one of its major rivals.

Under the conditions put forward, official club websites would be unable to put out any data until after the final whistle, while their unofficial
rivals would be able to supply live score updates and team line-ups simply by listening to the radio or even using a feed by the Press Association, which is the official information provider.

For months Football Data Co failed to consult or inform the vast majority of football club press officers about the changes, and only last week
called a handful of club press officers together to brief them on the scheme they are expected to impose and police in a few days' time.

Reporters at the first matches of the season are likely to be asked to sign up to a licence agreement or be refused admission - which is when the trouble could start.

Conflict could be averted if Richard Scudamore and David Burns, chief executives of the Premier and Football League respectively and also board
members of Football DataCo, can be persuaded to quietly drop their scheme.

BskyB, effectively the Premier League's paymaster, is angry about the new proposals, not only because its own data provision company, Opta, faces being squeezed out of the new arrangements, but also because it was
recently invoiced by Football DataCo for publishing fixtures for the Premier League - whose latest deal with Sky is worth almost �2 billion.

Other major sponsors are watching the situation with concern, not least Barclaycard, who launch a �15million deal with the Premiership this week. How would they react to their expensive launch party this week being ignored and their name being omitted from all subsequent newspaper coverage?

Leonard · 31/07/2001, 2:59 PM

So papers will be forced to write mundane crap that gives the impression that they weren't even watching the game and spent 90 minutes in the club bar claiming off company expenses before writing sterile rubbish that goes out of it's way not to offend anyone?
And that differs to the level of eL reporting in the national press at the moment in what way?

**Macy** · 31/07/2001, 3:18 PM

Thats not the point, is it? It's bad enough that the media is controlled by so few, and now they are trying to do the same to the net. No to censorship of peoples right to free speech.

I dread to think what the government (both UK and here) will come up with in the wake of Brasseye.