I was sent a link to a blog where the headline blared: “Why are Bloggers' the Rodney Dangerfield's of Journalism? It was about a blogger wanting access to a sports team, namely the Tampa Bay Rays.
The person who penned the story claims to have a journalistic background, but is that enough to give him what he wants?
Most respected bloggers have a connection to a mainstream media organization and are guided by the rules set forth by those signing their paychecks. Others have branched off to form their own companies and at the same time bring along their credibility.
Then you have those who have learned to type a semi-coherent string of words into a sentence and post them where someone hosts a WordPress or other blogging software and think they have a worldly, and wordy, degree.
Before blogging became fashionable, I thought a simple website and a passion for a sport would grant me the access I sought and figured members of the Fourth Estate would welcome me with open arms. Yeah, right.
Talent has no relevance when being considered by teams or leagues, and there is a longstanding policy by professional sports leagues that a website must be directly connected with an organization in good standing, like ESPN, CBS Sportsline, etc.
Even though the internet has become the main source for up-to-date information, there is so much of it that goes unregulated, unchecked. Have a cell phone and you are an amateur photojournalist. Own a computer and stories, no matter how outlandish, find an audience.
Getting the foot in the door is always the hardest thing to do and operating as an “independent” will guarantee you nothing. Being hired by a mainstream company does not mean you will be allowed in either or once in, be accepted by those you think are your peers. You are not. Take it from a guy who has been there, done that.
The first time I got a chance to pass through the hallowed doors of a team I was immediately and happily greeted by a well known local writer who then proceeded to throw me under the bus because I did not follow a media protocol. I laid low but still made the mistake. My access lasted all of one day.
I was upset at the time but when I look back it was a valuable lesson. It would take years and the proper associations before the door opened again. I am still treated differently by many of the legitimate press but that comes with the territory. They have their jobs, I have mine and yes, it is a job.
I guess what I am trying to say, is fans drive the blogosphere but that doesn’t make them journalists. To get some idea of the legitimacy of a blog, check out the photos and logos being used. They are copyrighted and/or trademarked by their owner whether it is an Associated Press picture or a team mark. You cannot arbitrarily use them without authorization or permission but they do. In a word, it is called “stealing.”
It was 10 years ago I received a cease and desist letter from a league because I used a team logo. My domain also reflected the team name and was forced to relinquish it as a matter of a cybersquatting law with one stroke of President Clinton’s pen. Another lesson learned.
On the flip side, I recently had a legal tug-of-war with a certain sports personality here in Tampa Bay when he obtained a domain name that used my own trademark in a dot-com. After personally informing him it belonged to me it turned out to be a protracted back and forth before my own cease and desist was eventually honored and he changed his fledgling company’s name.
Being on both sides of this issue gave me a better understanding of how and why things work in the land of journalism and the media. It is also something some bloggers refuse to understand.
Then there is the padding of one’s alleged résumé and anyone can create an online presence even if the entire exercise is a fabrication of epic proportions. It goes relatively unchecked because no one is there to validate claims of background, education or sports bloodlines.
The author of the story I referenced early on stated he could not understand why he wasn’t allowed to sit in the stands with a laptop generating stories on the fly. Can you imagine a sea of fans with computers at Tropicana Field in the middle of their journalistic endeavors? Can't wait for the first drunk fan to spill a beer on the keyboard and see what happens next. Then again, the computer person could have made endless trips to his favorite concession stand for some adult beverages.
So as we wander through his thought process, he quotes ESPN’s Michael Wilbon:
""The notion of blogging scares the hell out of me, and ... this is why. There's no accountability ... stuff isn't edited. It just goes out there as gospel. What it is is opinion, there's way too much rumor."
That is exactly my point. I have never made claims that I am a formally trained journalist but when I write something I make every attempt to draw on what I was taught in Catholic School. My knuckles still hurt after all these years.
The Wilbon quote was then followed with this by the author:
And with this fact comes the question, If I am qualified and able to produce a good article, or even submit a entry to get out another aspect of the team without bias or prejudice, shouldn't I have the opportunity to showcase my talents too? Why do I have to work for a large Fourth Ward employer to even get a taste of a pregame or post-game interview. I may not want to ask a single question, but it would be nice to get a quote, or even a comment from someone and fashion it into a great blog piece for everyone to enjoy.
Even a blind squirrel finds a nut occasionally, so the saying goes, and any blogger is capable of writing a tremendous piece, however, for every great article there are hundreds that would tear it down because we are in this know-it-all age with no checks and balances. Opinions are like rear-ends, everybody has one, so who is going to regulate the good from the mean spirited or simply the unqualified?
Maybe he had a moment of clarity with the following and maybe he answered his own question in the process:
Here lies the true evil or good of the news source. A blog is a blank website entry until we write our words and post them to the Internet. We can post personal events, activities, or even that trip to your favorite ballpark, but we still are not held liable for a fraction that the media is in real life. No ethics, no A P style book, and a basic empty space to be filled by any array of words. In this way, blogging is not journalism, we are not held to time tested sets of rules dictating how to practice the art.
I do not write this as sanctimonious soap-box rhetoric because I went from a paying fan to working media. I have a lot of respect for the Fourth Estate and other press box personnel. I have my share of detractors as well as supporters and I accept that.
There is no other way to explain this except to say I have been lucky and thankful to be in the position I am in. Not many people get the opportunity to work in a profession they love and I have had a lot of help getting here and even more helping me to stay. But I cannot help but think of the real qualified journalists who won’t be coming out to games because their employers trimmed payroll.
Independent bloggers take note. Those unemployed journalists have more of a right to be there than you do. And to be honest, even though my work is very different from theirs, I would gladly give up my seat if they would just get their jobs back.
Comments
a couple of points...
1. "They are copyrighted and/or trademarked by their owner whether it is an Associated Press picture or a team mark. You cannot arbitrarily use them without authorization or permission but they do. In a word, it is called “stealing.”"
The team logo? Yes. As for images. It is still being debated and I am sure will head to the courts at some point. Many argue that once something is published on the internet it is fair game. Like purposefully dropping a $10 bill on street and leaving it there.
2. "Opinions are like rear-ends, everybody has one, so who is going to regulate the good from the mean spirited or simply the unqualified?"
Simple. The readers do. This is what annoys me about perceptions about bloggers. Everybody is worried that they will write something that is not true or something that is mean-spirited that is not waranted. So what? If it is not true, the readers will eventually know and the blogger loses credibility. And nobody will read them any more. i know more than one blog that has lost a good share of its readership because they posted a rumor that was not true.
3. I am a blogger. I have no experience in the industry and yet I was fully credentialed for the ALCS. Most of the time i have no desire for credentials but the Rays have granted me access any time i have requested it. And they have always been open and helpful to anything I have needed from them.
It is about trust. They know me from writing about the team for several years. And while I have been very tough at times, I have always been fair and I never make stuff up. They know that. So they open their door for me, just as they might not for somebody else they don't know.
a couple of points...
1. "They are copyrighted and/or trademarked by their owner whether it is an Associated Press picture or a team mark. You cannot arbitrarily use them without authorization or permission but they do. In a word, it is called “stealing.”"
The team logo? Yes. As for images. It is still being debated and I am sure will head to the courts at some point. Many argue that once something is published on the internet it is fair game. Like purposefully dropping a $10 bill on street and leaving it there.
2. "Opinions are like rear-ends, everybody has one, so who is going to regulate the good from the mean spirited or simply the unqualified?"
Simple. The readers do. This is what annoys me about perceptions about bloggers. Everybody is worried that they will write something that is not true or something that is mean-spirited that is not waranted. So what? If it is not true, the readers will eventually know and the blogger loses credibility. And nobody will read them any more. i know more than one blog that has lost a good share of its readership because they posted a rumor that was not true.
3. I am a blogger. I have no experience in the industry and yet I was fully credentialed for the ALCS. Most of the time i have no desire for credentials but the Rays have granted me access any time i have requested it. And they have always been open and helpful to anything I have needed from them.
It is about trust. They know me from writing about the team for several years. And while I have been very tough at times, I have always been fair and I never make stuff up. They know that. So they open their door for me, just as they might not for somebody else they don't know.
Let's be very clear about copyright and trademarks. Just because something "shows up" on the Internet does not mean it is in the public domain. The images and logos that appear were taken or created by someone and were purchased for editorial purposes.
It would be like someone taking something you blogged about and copied it verbatim and claimed it is an original piece. You would be screaming plagiarism. Same applies for the photographer who has his/her work sold to Getty, AP and other outfits. If I was to take a picture and it it under AP Copyright and people arbitrarily use it for whatever purpose without paying for its rights, what is the point of the entire exercise? The entire process was explained to me in detail and when you see certain photographs show up in blogs, my first question is, "How much did they pay for the right to use it?"
There are some who think they can circumvent copyright and trademarks simply by giving credit (AP/Joe Blow) and believe me, I had an issue with the Associated Press many moons ago. First hand experience, you know?
The closest thing I can analogize this to is the music industry protecting themselves fro piracy and others opening up their own Internet “radio stations.” It’s called royalties. Photographers as well as logo designers and owners are protected unless expressed permission is granted or purchased. Ever listen to the disclaimer on a Rays or baseball game about usage?
When it comes to sorting out the good from the bad and the ugly, let's not assume people cannot be fooled. Not everyone in this world may be an educational equal to you and the blogosphere can lead some to believe what they read is gospel. Clearly, there is more innuendo and lies on the net now than ever before and it tends to blend so much there are some who cannot separate fact from fiction.
Believe me, I am not putting down bloggers by any means. There are a lot of good ones out there and there is a place for them as well. That said, if someone has an education and an agenda they can word a blog post as being reasonably acceptable/true. It can then take on a life of its own and therein lies a potential problem.
For the first time I am accountable for what I write. To be honest I welcome the challenge and the oversight. There is a certain comfort factor that keeps me between two lines.
As for access, it is up to individual teams if they choose to let someone in but they have every right to exclude an individual based on league guidelines. I am happy you were able to bridge the gap from what you do to covering the team.
Thank you for the insight today in your site entry.
I know you do not know that I worked at the "Alligator" the University of Florida paper for 4 years in college and also used to be a sports correspondent and copy clerk for the sports desk at the Evening Independent before it ceased operations in the mid-80's.
I missed journalism and its place in sports until you started to write a few years ago on your other site. I slowly got interested again and wanted to re-establish myself into the stream. My website is new and known, but unknown and I want to thank you for being honest and look forward to shaking your hand at Fan Fest.
I know I have due within the Rays organization to pay, I should have stated that, but sometimes you think that the relationships you have when you are in their offices all the time would help open a few doors. Darcy Raymond and the guys up in Fan Experience asked me in 2008 if I would like to write some copy for their www.raysmaniacs.com site basically dealing with the Maddon's Maniacs.
They are awaiting MLB approval on a few things before they proceed even an inch forward. Again, with the articles by yourself and Corky Gaines today, irt helped me get some expoure number 1, but it also got me noticed by some people I respect in the Rays press box. I know I will be seeing you at the Fan Wall of Fame introduction at Fan fest.
Cliff Wittig
Cliff, this was not an indictment of your blog and I wish you well on the Rays Maniacs. However, I used some quotes to point out what I went through and how some have this expectation of inclusion because they do "something" that could be construed as journalistic.
Imagine, if you will, every blogger in the New York/New Jersey area asking for and being granted access to the Yankees. The city would save billions in the demolition of the old Stadium as it would take something that large to house all the people.
As I stated in my column, it took a lot of years and getting a chance to work with some of the best organizations in the industry. When I jumped into this it was with both feet, no turning back. There is time and dedication needed to make any sort of inroads in this industry, especially when you consider how many unemployed - and very good - journalists are floating around. It is those people I feel for.
As an addendum to my last two responses, there is the issue of what is termed “fair use.” However, in an article written by Mark A. Fisher on Copyright in the Digital Age, he states the following:
>> American copyright law has long offered the copyright-infringement defense of “fair use.” One problem with fair use is that it is a defense against infringement, not a right.
Additionally, it has been duly noted that outlets such as the Associated Press, Getty and others have copyright ownership for everything that is distributed by them in print and/or photos.
Part of the copyright/fair use doctrine brought forth in The 1961 Report of the Register of Copyrights on the General Revision of the U.S. Copyright Law, Revised in 200, states in part the following:
>> The safest course is always to get permission from the copyright owner before using copyrighted material. The Copyright Office cannot give this permission.
>> When it is impracticable to obtain permission, use of copyrighted material should be avoided unless the doctrine of fair use would clearly apply to the situation. The Copyright Office can neither determine if a certain use may be considered “fair” nor advise on possible copyright violations. If there is any doubt, it is advisable to consult an attorney.
This company, Examiner.com, obtained rights to use Associated Press photographs just like any newspaper, magazine or other similar publication. Similarly, they are prohibited from using same outside the window in which they have contracted for that use.
To insinuate that because a photograph or logo appears on the Internet is eligible for fair use is off target. There is a simple term I learned a long time ago, “Ignorance of the law is no excuse.”
As best as I have been able to research and have been taught, photographs and logos by any of the aforementioned outlets are not in the public domain because they can not fall into any fair use category. Fair use is generally reserved, to the best of my knowledge, for creative endeavors such as writing, music, etc. Those issues are still subject to future scrutiny and any possible revisions to existing law.
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!