Club Statement on Media Policy

[SaintBobby]

So i guess it boils down to who do you believe. The Sun newspaper and about 4 people on here, or NC, the guy who normally never says a word about anything?

 

hmmmmm tough decision....guys on here who over-react at the slightest thing....or the dude when the club was falling apart managed to put money where his mouth was and actually do something to help us?

 

Poor old media, we should all write a letter saying we back their right to go to an event, take photos and make their bosses loads of money on the back of those photographs. It's just not on. It isn't like these photographers take photos, put them in their papers then expect us to buy the paper to see that photo is it....oh wait...it is....poor old media.

 

I'm not sure there's any dispute about the facts is there? So, I don't think this needs to come down to who you believe.

 

I believe every word of the statement about the club's media policy on the official website.

 

I just happen to think the policy is extremely stupid.

[hypochondriac]

I'm not sure there's any dispute about the facts is there? So, I don't think this needs to come down to who you believe.

 

I believe every word of the statement about the club's media policy on the official website.

 

I just happen to think the policy is extremely stupid.

 

This.

[Goalie66]

Spot on. My fear is that Cortese will not stop there.Pardew next ?

[PhilippineSaint]

It has now made the world page of the BBC internet site our name is known all over the world:)

[Kingsbridge Saint]

Just popped up on the local paper here in Brisbane. Apparently the Plymouth Herald used a couple of cartoons to illustrate the game. Saints will get nowhere commercially with this approach, at least not without p1ssing off a lot of people and copping some retaliatory flak. Is it really worth the candle?

[CB Fry]

So i guess it boils down to who do you believe. The Sun newspaper and about 4 people on here, or NC, the guy who normally never says a word about anything?

 

hmmmmm tough decision....guys on here who over-react at the slightest thing....or the dude when the club was falling apart managed to put money where his mouth was and actually do something to help us?

 

Poor old media, we should all write a letter saying we back their right to go to an event, take photos and make their bosses loads of money on the back of those photographs. It's just not on. It isn't like these photographers take photos, put them in their papers then expect us to buy the paper to see that photo is it....oh wait...it is....poor old media.

 

You've got to love the beauties on this forum. The sun, or any newspaper on earth for that matter, don't ever and won't ever make 'loads of money' from a couple of poxy photos of saints v anyone. This is not about money on either side. If anyone deserves the mocking ' diddums' routine you employ it's cortese, blubbing like an infant because he's not actually the centre of the universe.

[holepuncture]

Its getting to that stage. Im starting to wonder where a good Saints fans site is.

 

Same

[northam soul]

What influence has this new guy we employed from Fifa or wherever, wasnt he in marketing or something. Maybe this is his new brainwave.

[Thedelldays]

You've got to love the beauties on this forum. The sun, or any newspaper on earth for that matter, don't ever and won't ever make 'loads of money' from a couple of poxy photos of saints v anyone. This is not about money on either side. If anyone deserves the mocking ' diddums' routine you employ it's cortese, blubbing like an infant because he's not actually the centre of the universe.

 

if the papers are not that bothred by little old us in league one..then why the big issue....however, if this is in place and we do go up the leagues then will they still not bother with us..?

hmmmmmm....guess time will tell

 

oh, for those who doubted it...in the printed version of the herald (plymouth rag) they had snaps of the game in their..snaps that simply could ot have been taken from the away end....are we to assume a photographer snuck his way into the home stands..?

[saint_mears]

What influence has this new guy we employed from Fifa or wherever, wasnt he in marketing or something. Maybe this is his new brainwave.

 

I dont think he has joined yet, so hopefully he will tame Cortese.

[Fitzhugh Fella]

I just had this email (cut and pasted below) from someone who is close to things. This person has never given me duff gen. Make of it what you will, I am not going to comment.

 

"The club can claim the Echo isn't banned, but they will only allow certain reporters in. I can't see Ian Murray letting the club say who of his staff can and can't cover games.

 

I think the real reason The Sun went to town yesterday was down to the incident at Staplewood last Thursday when Sky were refused entry to the media day (yes, the media day when only BBC Radio Solent and Meridian were allowed in, no newspapers).

 

No mention made of that in the club statement.

 

As I said, Sky Sports editor took it a long way up the News Corp chain of command. As paymasters of the FL coverage, they don't take kindly to being told to **** off by a two-bob club.

 

It's not a smart move to brass off the broadcaster who is going to provide live coverage of your game 48 hours later. It's why NewsCorp have taken the muzzle off The Sun and they could well decide not to cover any more Saints games this season".

[docker-p]

if the papers are not that bothred by little old us in league one..then why the big issue....however, if this is in place and we do go up the leagues then will they still not bother with us..?

hmmmmmm....guess time will tell

 

oh, for those who doubted it...in the printed version of the herald (plymouth rag) they had snaps of the game in their..snaps that simply could ot have been taken from the away end....are we to assume a photographer snuck his way into the home stands..?

Well the 3 of 4 teams who are big enough to warrant newspapers publishing pictures of them every week haven't gone down the NC "Our pictures or no pictures" route, so i guess that tells you all you want to know.

I think a lot of people are unaware how little these photos change hands for from. It's a few hundred quid a time. And to simply get a slightly bigger slice of that small amount NC has ****ed off the press, who can give you positive coverage of negative coverage depending on how they feel.

But I think there is a bigger issue. For once nearly everyone of this forum is in agreement that this was not a good idea. Most could have predicted the outcome. If NC judgment is this poor on this issue what else has he screwed up, and what else will he screw up?

[Miltonaggro]

The main feeling being expressed over this situation seems to be disappointment with a degree of sadness, and it's a great shame that one game into the 'promotion' season we have our backs to the wall in both the league and in the media. This policy seems utterly counter-productive and the product of looking for things to tinker with. If SFC were an unstoppable juggernaut in the Premier League knocking teams down 4-0 every week with NC and AP riding high there may be a justification in adopting a 'we don't care' ethos. Right now serious further investment in playing staff is needed, not a furore over a few hundred quid on photographs when most national papers don't print photographs of division three sides anyway!

 

Perhaps we should all turn up tonight with our pocket cameras?...

[Thedelldays]

I just had this email (cut and pasted below) from someone who is close to things. This person has never given me duff gen. Make of it what you will, I am not going to comment.

 

"The club can claim the Echo isn't banned, but they will only allow certain reporters in. I can't see Ian Murray letting the club say who of his staff can and can't cover games.

 

I think the real reason The Sun went to town yesterday was down to the incident at Staplewood last Thursday when Sky were refused entry to the media day (yes, the media day when only BBC Radio Solent and Meridian were allowed in, no newspapers).

 

No mention made of that in the club statement.

 

As I said, Sky Sports editor took it a long way up the News Corp chain of command. As paymasters of the FL coverage, they don't take kindly to being told to **** off by a two-bob club.

 

It's not a smart move to brass off the broadcaster who is going to provide live coverage of your game 48 hours later. It's why NewsCorp have taken the muzzle off The Sun and they could well decide not to cover any more Saints games this season".

lol...taken the muzzle off..

 

yeah, I can see this being all out war on the back pages lol

 

to be honest, you are twisted in your views of saints lately..and it only seems those with most to say have the biggest problem at the club..

 

maybe, JUST BLOODY MAYBE people are just tired of everything NON football related about the club....ever thought that when on your crusade of leaving "snippets" or telling us you are "LOATHED" to leave these snippets...

 

MAYBE..(again, MAYBE) many fans..for once in our miserable saints supporting lives want to see out a bit of our era without needed to know and have every explanation on the non footballing side of things...

 

maybe...but then, most saints fans are not those with the most to say..

 

 

3 posts..and im out..will leave you hysterical "need to know all" lot to eat each other...

[Scummer]

This isn't - and cannot be expected to be - remotely acceptable to a sports editor. Any more than the club asking to, say, check written copy for "accuracy" before a journalist files it with their newsdesk. If I was the sports editor of a national newspaper, I would certainly boycott all imagery of Saints' home matches and would explain to my readers why.

 

Yet by all accounts they do accept this practice in other areas. Cricket was given as an example by someone. And other forms of 'entertainment' do the same thing.

[Saint Billy]

Sky news has now had a laugh about the cartoons about an hour ago.

[OldNick]

I suggest that the media will try and quash this as they know if we are successful the really big clubs may do the same and that would cost the media a lot of money.

Players get image rights, why not their owners?

Iam not in favour of this move but i can see why NC may feel the need to test the water.

[dune]

Nick pay your fiver you tight git, i was gonna try and send you a pm.

[dune]

I just had this email (cut and pasted below) from someone who is close to things. This person has never given me duff gen. Make of it what you will, I am not going to comment.

 

"The club can claim the Echo isn't banned, but they will only allow certain reporters in. I can't see Ian Murray letting the club say who of his staff can and can't cover games.

 

I think the real reason The Sun went to town yesterday was down to the incident at Staplewood last Thursday when Sky were refused entry to the media day (yes, the media day when only BBC Radio Solent and Meridian were allowed in, no newspapers).

 

No mention made of that in the club statement.

 

As I said, Sky Sports editor took it a long way up the News Corp chain of command. As paymasters of the FL coverage, they don't take kindly to being told to **** off by a two-bob club.

 

It's not a smart move to brass off the broadcaster who is going to provide live coverage of your game 48 hours later. It's why NewsCorp have taken the muzzle off The Sun and they could well decide not to cover any more Saints games this season".

 

Thanks for posting this up. Interesting stuff.

[Guided Missile]

Forget the photographs of the action on the pitch. Prior to kick off and during the game, there are always a number of shots of the manager and the directors box. I am taking a wild guess that there will not be any photos of our leader and his guests in future.

 

I wonder who our official photographer is. Leni Riefenstahl?

[OldNick]

Nick pay your fiver you tight git, i was gonna try and send you a pm.

I have sent my payment, Im waiting for Granty to re start my membership.It should be anytime soon as i sent it first class.

[dune]

Forget the photographs of the action on the pitch. Prior to kick off and during the game, there are always a number of shots of the manager and the directors box. I am taking a wild guess that there will not be any photos of our leader and his guests in future.

 

You may well be right about that, but then that begs the question is the photographer ban because of the money or to shield Mr liebherr and his guests? I can't see it being to shield ML and guests because he would have known that he'd have his photo taken long before he bought the club. An interesting theory GM, but probably a little far fetched.

[Scummer]

Make sure you pick up a copy of The Sun in the morning.

 

I raced down to the shop this morning in anticipation of a multi-page expose on Saints.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

However we aren't mentioned at all.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Nice boobs on page 3 though.

[Nexstar]

I raced down to the shop this morning in anticipation of a multi-page expose on Saints.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

However we aren't mentioned at all.

 

Exactly, we're only referred to as 'South Coast Club'

 

Both in the league table and Carling Cup fixtures - 'South Coast Club v Bournemouth'

[Dave Benson Phillips]

I raced down to the shop this morning in anticipation of a multi-page expose on Saints.

 

However we aren't mentioned at all.

 

Nice boobs on page 3 though.

 

I believe a certain Martin O'Neill story pushed it out today. It will be coming at some point this week... possibly.

[wild-saint]

Why would Sky turn up to an event that they weren't invited too? Surely we wouldn't havent sent out comunication to Sky about a media event that they weren'r invited too? How did they find out about it an maybe they shoulf of put a call in before they were arrognant enough to turn up to an event prepared for the local media.

[Matthew Le God]

Does the phrase "All publicity is good publicity", not apply in this case?

[miserableoldgit]

Forget the photographs of the action on the pitch. Prior to kick off and during the game, there are always a number of shots of the manager and the directors box. I am taking a wild guess that there will not be any photos of our leader and his guests in future.

 

I wonder who our official photographer is. Leni Riefenstahl?

Oh No!! Not the Facsist connection again! You`ll be in trouble.

[Kingsland Nick]

"It's not a smart move to brass off the broadcaster who is going to provide live coverage of your game 48 hours later. It's why NewsCorp have taken the muzzle off The Sun and they could well decide not to cover any more Saints games this season".

 

How much do Sky pay us when they show a league game from St Mary's? How much do we lose from lower attendances at TV games? Perhaps provoking a TV boycott is part of Cortese's plan to increase profits.

[hypochondriac]

How much do Sky pay us when they show a league game from St Mary's? How much do we lose from lower attendances at TV games? Perhaps provoking a TV boycott is part of Cortese's plan to increase profits.

 

Superb plan. Cortese is a visionary.

[Saint Billy]

Blimey, I am starting to worry about NC.

 

All this bad publicity smacks of old Rupert but it is all happening at a greater pace. I have defended NC up and till a little while ago but it seems like once again we are starting to appear in the media for all the wrong reasons.

 

Makes you wonder if these chairman/Ceo's/whatever's with no footballing background what so ever are a good idea. They seem to forget that football is an entertainment industry as well as a business, where you have to consider all angles when making a decision including the paying public and the media.

[Dibden Purlieu Saint]

Does the phrase "All publicity is good publicity", not apply in this case?

 

I made that point yesterday. Apparently not.

[dune]

Blimey, I am starting to worry about NC.

 

All this bad publicity smacks of old Rupert but it is all happening at a greater pace. I have defended NC up and till a little while ago but it seems like once again we are starting to appear in the media for all the wrong reasons.

 

Makes you wonder if these chairman/Ceo's/whatever's with no footballing background what so ever are a good idea. They seem to forget that football is an entertainment industry as well as a business, where you have to consider all angles when making a decision including the paying public and the media.

 

I think it would be a good idea if Mr Liebherr demoted NC to a more backroom position and employed a wiser head to run the club.

[Dibden Purlieu Saint]

How much do Sky pay us when they show a league game from St Mary's? How much do we lose from lower attendances at TV games? Perhaps provoking a TV boycott is part of Cortese's plan to increase profits.

 

Or maybe, just maybe, he's sick, like me, of watching Saints lose on Sky. How to rid yourself of the Sky curse? Easy, **** off Sky so you don't get shown. Great idea.

 

I feel I may have to start calling him Lord Cortese...

[JonnyLove]

Lets hope that Sky dont' broadcast anymore of our games. Means 1) kick off's will be at the proper time of 3pm on a Saturday (as much as possible) and 2) We won't loose

[JonnyLove]

...

[Jez]

oh, for those who doubted it...in the printed version of the herald (plymouth rag) they had snaps of the game in their..snaps that simply could ot have been taken from the away end....are we to assume a photographer snuck his way into the home stands..?

 

I'm sure I read on here, or some quote or something, yesterday that a Herald photographer was allowed in (negotiated his way in I think!) on the basis that he only used the photos for Plymouth's own use (the club or the paper, I can't remember) but the Herald then published some statement saying that although they had agreed to this at the time, they changed their minds afterwards and then planned to give the photo's to anyone that wanted them, thus sticking two fingers up at Saints and their new policy.

[Dibden Purlieu Saint]

I'm sure I read on here, or some quote or something, yesterday that a Herald photographer was allowed in (negotiated his way in I think!) on the basis that he only used the photos for Plymouth's own use (the club or the paper, I can't remember) but the Herald then published some statement saying that although they had agreed to this at the time, they changed their minds afterwards and then planned to give the photo's to anyone that wanted them, thus sticking two fingers up at Saints and their new policy.

 

To be fair, could they not be sued for that as it's a breach of contract for when they negotiated there way in. Of course, we don't know what was said, but it could turn into an issue for them.

[alpine_saint]

To be fair, could they not be sued for that as it's a breach of contract for when they negotiated there way in. Of course, we don't know what was said, but it could turn into an issue for them.

 

I would have thought so too.

[shirleysfc]

I believe a certain Martin O'Neill story pushed it out today. It will be coming at some point this week... possibly.

 

Ok, I'll bite. What will?

[hoozonside10]

It's ironic that the Sun are the main national making a big fuss of being asked to pay for photos (Which no other club does) when their sister paper, the Times, is charging people to go on their website (Which no other newspaper does)

 

I think one of the reasons this is making news is that the papers are worried that, if Saints start making money out of it, it may catch on and the Premier League teams might start doing the same thing. If they manage to nip it in the bud with li'l ole us then, from their point of view, it will be worth the fuss.

[Minty]

To be fair, could they not be sued for that as it's a breach of contract for when they negotiated there way in. Of course, we don't know what was said, but it could turn into an issue for them.

I would have thought so too.

All depends what additional paperwork was provided by SFC for the official Plymouth photographer to sign.

 

However, under the terms of Football DataCo's accreditation and licencing policies, the Plymouth snapper is accredited to take photos, and the Herald have a licence to print Football League photos, so under the agreement that is in place for all other clubs and grounds, there is no issue. It just depends if they signed something specifically with SFC. If they did, even THAT could go against the Football DataCo agreement, which would be interesting.

[Jimmy_D]

Personally, regardless of the fact it's Saints, I don't like Newscorp, anything that manages to get them this wound up is something I find quite funny.

 

It's ironic that the Sun are the main national making a big fuss of being asked to pay for photos (Which no other club does) when their sister paper, the Times, is charging people to go on their website (Which no other newspaper does)

 

I think one of the reasons this is making news is that the papers are worried that, if Saints start making money out of it, it may catch on and the Premier League teams might start doing the same thing. If they manage to nip it in the bud with li'l ole us then, from their point of view, it will be worth the fuss.

 

Agreed.

 

Which will make this interesting to watch as Cortese has made it clear he won't back down.

Edited 10 August, 2010 by Jimmy_D

[miserableoldgit]

I think it would be a good idea if Mr Liebherr demoted NC to a more backroom position and employed a wiser head to run the club.

Dave Benson Phillips???

[up and away]

The club's official statement is ludicrous.

 

The issue relates entirely to imagery (not to "banning" specific media outlets - although photographers are banned).

 

Mainstream media outlets will not purchase photo imagery from a single source appointed by the club.

 

The rough equivalent would be Tory Party conference only allowing in snappers from "Conservative TV". The broadcasters and newspapers would go bananas.

 

This is a battle that Southampton Football Club can't possibly win.

 

I don't want Cortese to resign, by the way. God no. Absolutely and emphatically not.

 

I just want him to change this mad policy.

 

Btw, if The Sun is playing it this heavy already, I don't rule out SKY Sports weighing in at some point before long. At that point, you really are a laughing stock.

 

You really need to get some balance and fact amongst that sheite. What about the Premier and CC clubs that control their image rights, absolutely no difference. If Cortese is a **** and a laughing stock, why are all the other chairmen not? You can reasonably argue that we are not going to be making much money from this at present, but this is all about putting things in place for the future, something going on all over the club in different areas.

 

What the press do not like about this is that their margins could be squeezed in the lower leagus, not only the big boys. These image rights are something they will pay for when the need arises, you only have to look at Hello magazine to figure that out.

[Andy Durman]

The clubs statement is clear and very forward thinking. Well done SFC.

[dune]

Dave Benson Phillips???

 

You may mock, but it'd be a struggle to find someone worse than Cortese in terms of his PR skills.

[JackFrost]

You may mock, but it'd be a struggle to find someone worse than Cortese in terms of his PR skills.

 

How about Lowe?

[alpine_saint]

How about Lowe?

 

Nah, he gets letters telling him what a great job he was doing.

[saint_mears]

http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/news/Football_clubs_photography_ban_backfires_news_300833.html