Reporter tossed for blogging NCAA baseball tourney game in Louisville

General Media10

LOUISVILLE, Ky. — A reporter was ejected from an NCAA baseball tournament game for submitting live Internet updates during play.

About StateFans

'StateFansNation' is the shared profile used by any/all of the dozen or so authors that contribute to the blog. You may not always agree with us, but you will have little doubt about where we stand on most issues. Please follow us on Twitter and FaceBook

General Media

10 Responses to Reporter tossed for blogging NCAA baseball tourney game in Louisville

  1. Buck 06/11/2007 at 9:15 PM #

    A journalist reporting news in close-to-real-time is a journalist like any other. The NCAA is obviously trying to stop the stampede of TV viewers who would rather get posted written updates than watch it on TV(!?!?)….HA!…that’s totally absurd. Not only is it ridiculous on their part, but the NCAA is not going to win this fight.

  2. VaWolf82 06/11/2007 at 9:41 PM #

    Once again, the NCAA is shown to be one of the stupidest organizations on the face of the earth. Instead of paying to attend the game, the reporter could just have easily sat at home and blogged away.

    Guess we better warn BJD95 to drop the live blogging during BB games. We wouldn’t want the NCAA Gestapo to break down his front door and scare his wife/kids.

  3. Lunatic Fringe 06/11/2007 at 10:18 PM #

    Honestly…what is next text messages? I have sent text messages to my buddies who were out of viewing/listening range of updates during the football games.

    NCAA is only pissed it has not found a way to profit from live blogging, but I am sure they will find a way.

  4. BJD95 06/11/2007 at 10:59 PM #

    Crazy shit, this is. Deadspin has been all over it. Does sound like something that would pique AV’s interest, doesn’t it? Can’t you just see her darting frantically up the aisles of C-F or the V Center, looking for thumbs working on blackberry keys?

    The establishment fears blogs b/c they can’t be controlled. We don’t yearn for “access” to the locker room, or coaches’ quotes. We aren’t looking to move up to a network gig. We just serve the fans, and our own individual interests.

    Great for the consumer (fans), satisfying for the blogger, but “the man” has no control, and even worse – can’t make a buck off of it.

    This news should trigger a virtual tsunami of liveblogging, blogging folk being insurrectionists by nature.

  5. packbackr04 06/12/2007 at 8:22 AM #

    not to jack the thread but the 83 championship got #7 on USA todays top 25 sports moments of the last 25 yrs. sorry, you may delete at your discretion.

  6. noah 06/12/2007 at 8:56 AM #

    I don’t think it has anything to do with the first amendment or the NCAA being out of touch. I think it has to do with the wording of the contracts the NCAA has with various media outlets.

    I’m speculating (I’ve never seen a TV contract in my life), but I would bet that the contract the NCAA has with TV or radio outlets (and possibly with the AP on photos) has language in it that is forcing this issue.

  7. joe 06/12/2007 at 1:28 PM #

    Do baseball games still have announcers read that statement about how you cannot provide rebroadcasts or descriptions of the event without express written consent? That’s the contract issue they are running into.

  8. statered 06/12/2007 at 2:37 PM #

    Wouldn’t that apply to all blogs and messages boards then? This very site posts written descriptions albeit after the fact. Its funny watching all these big companies trying to get the technology genie back in the bottle with threats (RIAA being a prime example). They are doomed to failure.

  9. joe 06/12/2007 at 3:22 PM #

    It’s OK to post stuff after the game is over, it’s only live descriptions that are probably not allowed under TV / radio contracts.

    I remember hearing guys on radio shows watching a game on TV and describing the game based on what they saw – that was probably not allowed based on contracts either.

  10. noah 06/12/2007 at 4:20 PM #

    “Its funny watching all these big companies trying to get the technology genie back in the bottle with threats (RIAA being a prime example).”

    I don’t think that’s what is going on. I would imagine that the contract defines in excruciating detail exactly what it is that ESPN is paying for. Something like, “The definition of broadcast will hereby be used to describe ….” and then they list 95 different ways that you could possibly interpret “broadcast.”

    Probably because of what Joe talks about in the post above, some lawyer pointed out that if the NCAA didn’t pull the credentials of the blogger, they’d be in breach of contract and ESPN could always come back later and demand compensation.

    I’m completely guessing on this, obviously. But that’s what it certainly sounds like. And the paper’s lawyer is completely wrong when he turns this into a first-amendment issue. The first amendment protects you from legal prosecution….it doesn’t mean that the NCAA can’t pull your credentials.

    Technology always moves faster than the economic models. And once we move into a new age, everyone has to sort of scramble around to figure out how they’re going to make money.

    When cars first came out, there were a hundred American car companies that had a product. A very small handful of them figured out how to make money doing it.

    When film came out, look at the stories that got turned into movies. They had no idea what audiences wanted or didn’t want or what they could even pull off. So we ended up with movies made from Lord Jim and Great Expectations and Pilgrim’s Progress and The Pickwick Papers. What were they THINKING?? Those are HORRIBLE stories to try and tell on film. So…we end up with a situation where studios hardly ever make movies that they don’t think are a sure thing (test audiences, script doctors, dailies, etc). And since they’re supposed to be a sure thing, they are supposed to make money. And since they are supposed to make money, everyone wants a huge salary. So even dramas with no special effects end up costing $60 million.

    The internet was supposed to the be the thing that big companies could use to sell product. But it turns out that people still like going to stores and buying certain things. The big wave stuff is always going to be brick-and-mortar. The internet is great for selling things that basically have no market. Out of print books, records that only 500 people want, size 15 shoes (hello!), Weird Al Yankovic pajamas, and NBA season tickets…

    Blogs aren’t new…but people have to figure out the economic models to determine how they will impact their ability to make money. Until then, Comic Book Guy has to leave the room.

Leave a Reply