South African media organisations have protested strongly against attempts to restrict media coverage of prominent international sport events this year.
In a statement on Thursday, the South African National Editors’ Forum (Sanef) and Print Media South Africa (PMSA) expressed strong concern at the attempts being made by the International Rugby Board (IRB) and the Australian Football League (AFL) to restrict media coverage of Rugby World Cup and Australian Football League games this year.
The IRB has imposed severe terms and conditions for media accreditation at this year’s Rugby World Cup in France on the grounds that it has an obligation to protect its commercial revenues.
Sanef and PMSA fully support the World Association of Newspapers (WAN) and a coalition of the world’s leading news agencies in their protests against specific media accreditation and other limitations on media coverage imposed by the IRB, and the refusal by the AFL to provide media accreditation for any of the games in the 2007 season.
Terms and conditions
The IRB is imposing legally binding terms and conditions for accreditation, limiting media coverage.
These include a limit of five still images per half-time, two still images per half of extra time, a ban on photo sales subject to conditions determined by Rugby World Cup Limited (RWCL), images being published for editorial reporting purposes only, and reserving the right to turn down any applicant at its discretion and without providing any reason for doing so.
All decisions of RWCL are final, and the RWCL reserves the right to amend or limit an accreditation.
Other terms include banning superimposed text on photos; only using tournament material in regularly scheduled bona fide news programming or bulletins, which specifically excludes any sports magazine, sports review and analysis, feature and/or discussion programming; and limiting television and internet content duration and timing with differential limits for particular countries.
”Sanef and PMSA state that these restrictions and rules are unacceptable and are a gross interference with press freedom and United Nations-endorsed principles of upholding the widest access to information and its dissemination.”
Public focus
In addition to the principles of press freedom being breached, Sanef and PMSA pointed out that the media’s historical role of providing pre-event material about all aspects of the World Cup and the AFL, the conduct of the games, the teams playing and their prospects of success is the prime creator of the enormous public focus on the events when they take place.
Such material is widely published weeks and months ahead of the games.
It has traditionally been accepted that in view of this service performed by the media — for which it makes no charge on the various sporting codes that benefit — it is important for all interested media to be present at the actual games and to report as widely as possible on them and on the ensuing developments and controversies.
”Sanef and PMSA reject the IRB view that media reportage of the actual sporting events is a ‘third-party exploitation’. Media reportage of the actual events, which includes wide exposure of the advertising around the sporting pitch, does the opposite by increasing the publicity of these advertisers and thus allowing the sporting codes’ commercial exploitation of their events.”
Mike Miller, CEO of the IRB, has even mentioned the possibility of charging newspapers to attend major tournament or events in the future.
Sanef and PMSA rejected the concept of charging entrance fees for newspapers to attend sporting events as unacceptable and damaging to the sporting codes, because of the limitations it could place on reporting sports events.
”Sanef and PMSA believe that apart from the press-freedom principles involved, the restrictions are misconceived and will harm the general public’s interest in their sporting codes, because diminished reporting and media discussion of their events will reduce the high public focus that those codes currently enjoy.” — Sapa