Breaking the news

BY STEVE KILGALLON

WHEN the Black Caps played Australia at the Gabba in Brisbane in 2008, the reporter whose match report would appear in more Kiwi newspapers than anyone else's wasn't even at the ground.

Mark Geenty, the Australian sports correspondent for the New Zealand Press Association, was in his hotel room a couple of kilometres away, unable even to watch TV coverage, instead relying on website updates. He was collateral damage in an increasingly fierce war between sports' governing bodies and the media, which shows no sign of a ceasefire.

It's a scenario being repeated under the radar during the current cricket series between New Zealand and Australia, with some international agencies (notably Reuters) boycotting the series because of a dispute with New Zealand Cricket over use of pictures.

And the Indian Premier League, which starts this week, will also be boycotted by international agencies because of limitations to traditional rights, broadly summed up as "freedom of the press".

It's a boardroom battle the average sports fan knows little about, and cares even less. But it has an impact every day on the coverage you watch, and read, of your favourite sports.

After media boycotts of major Australian Rules and cricket games across the Tasman, the Australian government has intervened, with a senate committee last year ordering news organisations and governing bodies to hold mediation talks to broker a deal. Those talks reconvened on Friday.

The next big stoush could come over accreditation agreements for the 2011 Rugby World Cup, with media and the International Rugby Board in negotiations.

The bullish nature of the debate is illustrated by the IRB's chief executive, Mike Miller, wondering aloud why the IRB doesn't just charge newspapers for the right to report. On the other side, one senior Kiwi media executive has declared newspapers and websites are ready to walk away from sport entirely if they keep facing such roadblocks. If that sounds ridiculous, it's worth noting that, in an age of media cost cuts, the Washington Times newspaper closed its sports section entirely last month.

The battle lines have been drawn because of a shift in the media landscape as newspaper circulations worldwide decline and websites and cellphones increasingly become the new way to transmit news stories.

Sports bodies, who have identified new media as a commercial opportunity, don't like the old media, which is desperate for new revenue streams, taking this new income away from them. Sport's response has been to draft ever more cumbersome and tighter accreditation agreements, which journalists who want to cover major sporting events must sign, or be denied access to stadiums.

Football writers travelling to South Africa later this year to cover the World Cup will be presented with a document from world governing body Fifa which includes a clause stating that "media cannot engage in activities which could compromise public safety and/or harm the reputation of the Fifa World Cup, as assessed at the sole discretion" of Fifa.

Mark Hollands, chief executive of the Pacific Area Newspaper Publishers' Association (Panpa) says: "So anything that happens in that ground that the sports organisations don't agree with, they can withdraw your accreditation... it's designed to punish free and fair comment."

It's a complex debate, which can get as detailed as deciding how many pictures of a football match published on a news website constitutes "news", but the central issues are relatively clear.

The "most bloody and nasty battles", as Hollands puts it, have come over online and mobile phone coverage of sport. Sports organisations, who have always sold exclusive live radio and television rights to major events, feel they should also be able to flog online and mobile phone coverage too. As the IRB's Miller says, newspaper companies have "become broadcasters [and] the way sport is funded is that broadcasters help pay for the development of sport".

But media organisations see websites as an extension of their newspapers, and increasingly treat mobile phones the same way – irking organisations such as Cricket Australia, which has sold exclusive phone rights to the mobile phone network, 3. The Australian senate appears to have weighed in heavily in the journalists' favour on this one, noting that access should be granted "regardless of technological platform".

THE MEDIA'S view is that the world has changed. In its submission to the senate inquiry, one agency, the Australian Associated Press, noted: "The audience is sophisticated and their demands much higher. In an age where the public can see or hear events unfold anywhere via a live broadcast on numerous media platforms, it is a reasonable demand that they will be able to collect the news associated with those events, with the same degree of flexibility and freedom."

Hollands puts it more simply: "You can't have a free press in print and not on the mobile phone: it's either free or it's not."

On the other side of the fence, that's met with derision. Andrew Croker, chairman of the Perform Group, which sells media rights in the UK, said last year: "You can't hide behind the freedom of the press when it's a commercial relationship."

The sports, for their part, have tried to exercise copyright over events themselves, and therefore reserve the right to dictate exclusivity. But Andrew Moger, the London-based executive director of the News Media Coalition, an industry body created to fight these battles, says many have forgotten they are usually playing in taxpayer-funded stadiums, often with taxpayer-funded teams, in an event which arouses huge public interest. It's hard, then, to argue it's a private affair.

The Australian senators also seemed to dismiss the copyright argument, suggesting the aggressive media policies of the AFL and Cricket Australia had a "a significant adverse effect on the breadth and quality of news coverage of these sports", particularly in rural and regional newspapers which relied on agency coverage. Sixteen papers simply ran no photos at all of the 2007 AFL season because the biggest agency, Getty Images, wasn't shooting the event.

If these broader beliefs have been tested, sports bodies have, however, had some success in the minutiae of operations. They have sought to stop news media from obvious naked commercial exploitation, such as selling content to sponsors' websites, selling photos, posters and fixture lists. But policing this has sometimes been heavy-handed. Hollands cites one bizarre example. To illustrate a story about this very debate in the industry newsletter, The Bulletin, he wanted to publish a cricket picture, but was told it breached accreditation agreements. He had to instead use a 1977 photo of Dennis Lillee. In England, the Leeds United Football Club has been unashamed in its pursuit of new revenue, banning agency photographers and directing newspapers to buy from the club's "official" agency, generating not just sales revenue, but ensuring that all pictures show clearly the shirt-front sponsor's logo.

And in this part of the world, it has translated to sports' bodies demanding news agencies reveal their client lists before they are accredited. That led to the coverage-impairing 2007 boycott of cricket and Aussie Rules by Agence France Presse, Getty Images and Reuters.

Reuters again ignored the New Zealand-Bangladesh series and all cricket in Australia this year, having declared Cricket Australia's media policy "impinges" on a free press. "It's a form of censorship," claims Hollands. "Not what we can say, but where we can say it."

If the newspapers seem greedy by wanting it all and not paying for it, their apparent rapacity can be explained by a worldwide backdrop of falling advertising sales and readerships, both of which are migrating online, leaving many traditional newspapers unprofitable.

And, for the sports, it is also a matter of financial survival. The communications director of rugby league's NRL, John Brady, says: "We have to recognise that sport won't be there if it isn't able to protect intellectual property rights."

And the final, unspoken, issue is that some of the more aggressive sporting organisations would, surreptitiously, like some control over the message itself and are willing to shut out those who say things they don't like.

The worst offenders? British football clubs. Premier League club Portsmouth recently told the Southern Echo's football writer he couldn't even pay for a seat in the stands. While that's fairly blatant, the Fifa example shows how the cannier operators seek to exert a more benign influence.

And the explosive growth of the media has made it harder for even the most open sporting bodies to guarantee access. The All Blacks, for example, offer up every member of the squad just once a week when they are in camp.

The NRL, which has a good reputation among league writers, has rules around guaranteed post-match press access and open training sessions. But the long-serving Brady, a former journalist himself, says: "The media have the best seat in the house, and go where no one else can, but there's only so many people who can do that. While the media has grown exponentially, while there's now 500 people who want a player instead of six, there's still only 17 players, and one ground and the press box hasn't got any bigger. We have to balance those needs."

TREVOR McKEWEN, general manager of sport of the Sunday Star-Times' publisher, Fairfax New Zealand, says an increasing chunk of his workload is negotiating accreditation agreements with sports authorities, but he says most disputes in New Zealand have been resolved.

That's even despite the bullishness of the IRB's Miller, who says: "Newspapers, yes they give us publicity, but they're the only people in the stadium who haven't paid to be there. I'm not saying we should necessarily start charging newspapers to be in the stadium, but there will be tensions and there will continue to be tensions, but at the end of the day you get together and you talk about it and try to reach a situation that everyone can live with." On the issue of paying for access, McKewen says simply: "There would be a mass boycott if that happens."

However, despite the mutual posturing, industry experts say even the RWC deal is likely to be concluded amicably.

BUT NEW Zealand media cannot relax. Moger says it's clear that sports authorities are swapping notes, and when one manages to introduce a new clause into an agreement without debate, others in different codes will copy it.

Hollands says while Kiwi and Aussie readers might not worry if AFP and Reuters don't cover a test – because papers such as the Star-Times will still have reporters there – it does impact on coverage overseas.

"Here we are, trying to tell Pakistan to be a democracy, throwing millions of dollars at them, but we can't even deliver a free press at the cricket ground," he says of a coverage blackout of Pakistan's recent series with Australia.

It appears the media, worldwide, has taken a united and fairly front-footed approach.

Moger says the issue hasn't grown in size, but believes the flashpoints have become more furiously debated and painful for both sides.

New media, he believes, was seen by some sports bodies as "an issue-free opportunity to become publishers in their own right" and while many sports recognise the need to accommodate the change in media, some "regrettably want to play fast and loose with the bedrocks of independent journalism".

Some sports' bodies have managed to maintain harmonious relations with the media, such as the NRL, which is widely recognised for an open, honest approach.

"We like to think we go about it very practically. It doesn't mean we do everything right, but we always try to find the balance," says Brady. "It's always a bit of a tectonic relationship, but I think we get through the bumps and scrapes OK."

And, despite the present stand-off, Moger says even more aggressive operators such as the IPL "come to realise their best friends are the media".

Post-senate mediation hearings in Australia reconvene this month with all sides making placatory noises, and while Reuters' renewal of its cricket boycott suggests a chasm remains, there is enough goodwill around to justify the senate's hope that it won't be forced to enact a formal code of access.

And NZPA is covering cricket again. Geenty, who took a resourceful approach to covering those Australian tests two years ago, will be pleased.

It was the morning of the Brisbane game when NZPA editor Nick Brown rang him to say he wasn't allowed into the 'Gabba. He covered the final four days from Sydney, and watched the Adelaide test a week later as a punter.

But, on day one, with Australian TV coverage not beginning until the final session and radio coverage also starting late, Geenty followed the first session on website cricinfo and was later emailed press conference quotes by a colleague. "It was a beautiful day, so I went for a walk, listening to the game on my headphones, thinking `What the hell am I doing?'," he says. "It was a bit surreal, really. A good story to tell though."

 

Getting the message

Sports' organisations and even athletes themselves are increasingly cutting across, and cutting out, traditional media to take their message directly to their fans.

In some cases, the sports' organisations are becoming their own media companies: the most obvious example is the Manchester United football club, which runs its own television station, radio station, mobile phone service and website. You want news on ManU? You deal with ManU, which controls both the message and the medium.

It was a model adopted by the Wallabies rugby team a few years ago. When they were based in Coffs Harbour, away from the mainstream media in Sydney, they produced their own video bulletins, which were distributed free-of-charge to TV networks, who were happy to run the interviews. The Wallabies got wide coverage, without having to answer hard questions. At the other end of the scale, Kiwi cricketer Iain O'Brien's popular blog has become his way of communicating directly with his fans, who can interact with O'Brien via online comments, and follow him on Twitter.

Other New Zealand athletes such as All Blacks utility Cory Jane, who lets you know what he's doing every couple of hours, cyclist Alison Shanks and rower Nathan Twaddle, provide regular updates on their lives. Shanks was even ahead of mainstream media when she commented on the recent massive forest fire in Dunedin while out riding her bike.  - Sports editor Michael Donaldson

- © Fairfax NZ News