here's another link to the herald's story from yesterday.
sadly, it's all about the money. it has nothing to do with free speech or public interest. it's just about the money.
the athletic association is well within their rights to restrict the sale of photos; that is no different that what the NCAA or Monster Truck Jam or NASCAR or a broadway theatre does. i don't like it (not being able to sell photos), but i can abide by it. and, the newspapers aren't allowed to sell photos from those events, either.
the problem is when the association puts undue restrictions on accessibility. not to allow credentialed media photographers on the field (or the baseline or the floor) is simply an example of the association shooting themselves in the foot, because it is only through the media that the message really gets out.
it's a shame that they haven't been able to work it out; as is, only the lawyers are getting the money...
Originally posted by garrywhite2:
So, no professional courtesey from the news media given to the photographer hired for the event? The news guys just snap a few hundred pictures and the newspaper publishes and sells the prints on their website. |
it's not a professional courtesy issue, it's a contractural one ;-) (and, as far as making money goes, it really comes down to who has the best photos...if the papers send out bad photographers, they won't have much to sell. likewise, if the promoter/association contracts with a company that specializes in sports portraiture, they won't have any action shots worth buying...)
Message edited by author 2008-02-15 06:56:45. |
