The NFL's response to SPJ
When
we first learned of a ridiculous new rule affecting journalists who want to cover NFL games from the sidelines, we wasted no time
dashing off a letter to league officials.
In a nutshell, the league wants photojournalists to wear red vests bearing the logos of NFL sponsors Reebok and Canon.
The response we received this week essentially states that the logos are so small they shouldn't bother journalists. Heck, league officials say, you won't even be able to see them on television! These vests aren't meant to advertise anything, the NFL says. The Canon logo is there because Canon is paying for the vests, and Reebok's logo is there because it's the league's official clothier.
What-in-the-world-ever.
Why are NFL officials so convinced this is a workable situation? They ran it by the Associated Press' director of photography and can cite plenty of sporting events where journalists typically clad themselves in corporate logos.
Please, by all means, read the NFL's letter to SPJ for yourself.
Don't know about you, but I'm not ready to throw in the towel on this one. I still don't understand why the league -- if it genuinely wants to manage security and has no sales and marketing wrapped up in any of this -- couldn't just charge news organizations for the manufacture of vests sans corporate logos ...
At the risk of sounding like a preachy school marm, I'm royally ticked that so many journalists have walked around sporting events clad in corporate logos. And if an AP photog editor sees nothing wrong with this? Really, what were any of you thinking?
Some good news: the National Press Photographers
Association, which got the same letter from the NFL, also considers the League's argument ridiculous -- and the NPPA is not backing off on this matter.
SPJ isn't, either.