At the NCAA, "Blog" Is a Four-Letter Word

Chalk one up for the NCAA.  They're the latest stodgy old organization that just doesn't get it when it comes to blogging.  Want evidence?  Check out this article by Eric Crawford of the Louisville Courier-Journal.

They won't let reporters do any live blogging at an NCAA event?!  Are you kidding me?!

I agree with Crawford that this all comes down to the almighty dollar, or at least the NCAA's misguided assumption that live blogging will somehow cost the NCAA something.  Come on.  Be serious.  Are you telling me Myles Brand is afraid someone is going to either (a) not attend an event in person or (b) turn off the TV/radio broadcast of it in favor of following a live blogger's posts?!  Truly remarkable.

I also love the fact that I could sit at home, watch an NCAA event on TV, and blog about it from my living room, but the guy with media credentials at the game can't.  Absolutely hilarious.

Hey, I'm starting to understand why all those IU fans wanted Myles to leave Bloomington several years ago.  I wonder how painful it is for them to see that he's even more influential in matters like this in his current role.  Myles, you really need to re-think your position on this.  It's embarrassing.

P.S. -- As a Purdue alum and fan, I also got a chuckle out of Crawford's comment regarding IU's basketball coach ("That's enough to make Kelvin Sampson's illegal phone calls look like a parking ticket.")  Priceless, and clearly an infraction that continues to get great mileage.  It will never match Bob Knight's "chair incident", of course, but it's a great new start.

Comments

[Jim Minatel]

I knew Myles Bland was evil incarnate 7 years ago. Hoosier Nation has paid for his ego every day since (until the hiring of Kelvin). Now the rest of the college sports world can feel our pain and suffer with us.

You better watch out, you better not cry, you better not blog I'm telling you why,
Miles Bland is coming to get you that's why! Run!

[Michael A. Banks]

The operative assumption in prohibiting or controlling broadcasts (and now blogs) has always been that enabling people to access a description or visual representation of a game in progress discourages fans from buying tickets, hence reducing the financial gain of the organization in question.

Anyone who might go to a college game will go to a college game. I just can't see many college sports enthusiasts staying from from a game, saying, "Hell, I'll just catch the blog and save my ten bucks! It'll be just as good!" Point: the people reading such a blog are those who aren't going to the game, anyway.

A secondary assumption is that if the sports organization is going to lose money, it should be compensated for that loss (profit heavily from, more like) by the entity that is alledgedly discouraging people from attending the game. (i.e., a broadcaster or blogger.)

Guess what? Unlike broadcasters, bloggers--who aren't discouraging anyone from attending a game--aren't making millions of dollars. And there is no loss to be compensated. Fools!

The net result of a blogging ban is to prevent something that isn't happening (keeping paying customers away from games in droves) and antagonizing lots of people.
--Mike
http://www.michaelabanks.com