Commentary
NFL Fumbles, Tries To Limit Live Blogging Of Games
- by Wendy Davis , Staff Writer @wendyndavis, September 3, 2009
This week, the NFL told the media that any detailed accounts of the games must be time-delayed and that live updates must be limited to scores or other quick facts. "The accredited organization's game coverage cannot be used as a substitute for, or otherwise approximate, authorized play-by-play accounts," the organization mandates, according to the San Francisco Chronicle. In other words, no live-blogging, Facebook updates or Twitter posts that reveal too much information.
This policy is wrongheaded on many levels. First, as a practical matter, the real-time Web isn't going to go away simply because the NFL doesn't like it. Unless the NFL and SEC plan to confiscate everyone's cell phones, audience members -- including the media -- will find a way to tweet their observations of the games.
Presumably, the NFL could de-credential reporters who tweet. But the organization can't realistically prevent reporters from purchasing tickets and live-blogging from the stands.
Besides, shouldn't the NFL encourage more media and fan engagement, not less? Blogging doesn't detract from TV and radio coverage of games. On the contrary, blogs and tweets supplement other coverage. Who does the NFL think is reading all of the live Web reports, other than fans who are also watching the games?
Obviously the NFL, like the SEC, is afraid that play-by-play coverage of games would pose a threat to the media companies that pay for broadcast rights. But the attempt to limit the use of technology to spread news about the games come off less as a sound business strategy than a desperate and reactionary attempt to squelch independent commentary.
Wendy Davis is a Senior Writer at MediaPost. You can reach Wendy at wdavis@mediapost.com
This is reminiscent of the battles that the music industry waged against Napster or more currently the broadcast networks/movie studios against YouTube. In both of these cases we know how things ended. In this case it will most likely be the same with sports leagues embracing blogging/social media/tweets/etc. once the fully understand it and can profit from it.
In theory, a little protection seems lovely. In reality, this seems like another case of people with not enough to do trying to hold onto their jobs and inflated income.
It a different battle than the music/network industry. In those cases, the battle was over a medium that was a capable substitute for the old medium. A tool like Twitter can't replace the user experience of listening on the radio or watching on TV. On one side you could argue that social media enhances the fan experience because if I am not close to a television or radio, I can still follow my favorite teams. On the other side, you can argue that I would be less motivated to tune in to the game on TV and radio if I knew I could get a Twitter feed. Nobody really knows what it's effect will be until you test it.
The real meat of the matter is that the NFL is sending a message that they are more concerned with protecting revenue than the fan experience. Just like the Washington Redskins who recently sued their season ticket owners who lost their jobs and couldn't afford to pay.
If this isn't a validation of the power of social media, I don't know what. Big, bad NFL is afraid of how players twittering directly to fans will threaten their ability to sell media rights at an astronomical premium.
What they forget is that the connection between the players and their fans is the greatest asset they got - and they should cultivate this asset.
Public figures across every vertical are using social media to reach out directly to their fans, followers and stakeholders. There is no putting this genie back in the bottle. I think next year, when the NFL has gotten over the social media shock, they will be smart and find a way to encourage twitter while protecting their media interests.