Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Southampton ban photographers
- Thread starter crasher
- Start date
Horton's halftime iceberg
Blooming Marvellous
Has Belloti got a job at St Marys, all sounds very familiar...
Easy 10
Brain dead MUG SHEEP
I'm sure the shirt sponsors and pitchside advertisers will be delighted with that decision.
The Large One
Who's Next?
What a load of old bollocks. Censorship by the back door.
We don't want anyone photographing Dean Hammond's anonymity now, do we?.
We don't want anyone photographing Dean Hammond's anonymity now, do we?.
Mendoza
NSC's Most Stalked
I've been to a few away games where I have been told not to use my camera by the stewards. I cant remember which ones, but at a guess I'm sure Southampton, Southend and Walsall have had words before
Tony Meolas Loan Spell
Slut Faced Whores
Its to do with the Paparazzi FOLLOWING you around I reckon.
Tony Meolas Loan Spell
Slut Faced Whores
clapham_gull
Legacy Fan
- Aug 20, 2003
- 25,470
It's a silly little ruling that had a place a few years ago.
With every phone having a camera these days it's completely out of date.
Bit like the rule that you can't re-produce the fixture list or league table.
Complete nonsense.
skipper734
Registered ruffian
So sue me. Skates.
Safeway
M0DERAT0R
Strictly speaking you're not allowed to take photos at any sporting events, gigs or shows etc, for copyright reasons. Vary rarely is it ever enforced though.
Horton's halftime iceberg
Blooming Marvellous
Southampton Football Club is understood to have emailed editors refusing to accredit any press photographers from regional or national papers, saying they should instead buy photos from the one agency it will allow, Digital South.
The move has been criticised by Bob Satchwell, executive director of the Society of Editors, who has written to the League One club raising concerns about press freedom being affected.
Looks like the local Hearld paper is refusing to purchase the club photographers pictures.
Also states they banned another local paper all together last year.
The move has been criticised by Bob Satchwell, executive director of the Society of Editors, who has written to the League One club raising concerns about press freedom being affected.
Looks like the local Hearld paper is refusing to purchase the club photographers pictures.
Also states they banned another local paper all together last year.
The Large One
Who's Next?
The original post says 'No press photographers...'
What they mean is 'no freelancers' - so someone like Roz, should she wish to, would automatically be denied a press pass. The difference is that press photographers will probably have their work syndicated and get money for it. Bit different to a pic taken on a camera-phone.
What they mean is 'no freelancers' - so someone like Roz, should she wish to, would automatically be denied a press pass. The difference is that press photographers will probably have their work syndicated and get money for it. Bit different to a pic taken on a camera-phone.
The Large One
Who's Next?
As you said, Bellottiism at work here.
Horton's halftime iceberg
Blooming Marvellous
Stench of premership and how to squeeze every penny out of your fans and the public at large. I hope it blows up in their faces.
Some clubs get well above themselves.
Some clubs get well above themselves.
KNC
Well-known member
Damn!!!!
Was looking forward to seeing photo's of Pardew with his head in his hands.
Was looking forward to seeing photo's of Pardew with his head in his hands.
bhaexpress
New member
Is that something they can legally enforce ?
Tooting Gull
Well-known member
- Jul 5, 2003
- 11,033
It's presumably not just 'no freelancers', it also includes staff photographers, both for the big sports agencies and the papers/magazines themselves.
I'd be amazed if there wasn't some retaliatory action over this. Maybe they can just let one local press guy in as well, and send his words to every paper. 'The brilliant but unlucky Southampton under genius manager Alan Pardew slumped to another 5-0 defeat and into the bottom three last night'.
I'd be amazed if there wasn't some retaliatory action over this. Maybe they can just let one local press guy in as well, and send his words to every paper. 'The brilliant but unlucky Southampton under genius manager Alan Pardew slumped to another 5-0 defeat and into the bottom three last night'.
Horton's halftime iceberg
Blooming Marvellous
You will only see the offical head in hands photos, taken this week by the club photogrpher.
"Sorry mate I only do interviews with the approved club interviewer, who asks tough questions like, why are we so much better than anyone else and will you be watching South Today's footage praising us every night of the week".
"Sorry mate I only do interviews with the approved club interviewer, who asks tough questions like, why are we so much better than anyone else and will you be watching South Today's footage praising us every night of the week".
Attachments
Horton's halftime iceberg
Blooming Marvellous
The Plymouth press should get fans to send in images from phones and publish them in the paper.
Southampton FC bans press photographers | Media | guardian.co.uk
Southampton FC bans press photographers | Media | guardian.co.uk
Tooting Gull
Well-known member
- Jul 5, 2003
- 11,033
I predict this decision will be reversed very soon. There are all sorts of things a paper can do to put pressure on, a lot of them involving the featuring (or removing) of references to important club sponsors.
Another possible scenario is that Pardew, who loves publicity, finds tabloids won't interview him while the ban is in place. Even if he was involved in the decision initially, he'll hate that.
It is important to have more photographers there, otherwise, as is hinted in that Guardian piece, you could have a picture of Pardew punching someone and under pressure from the club (their client) over possible ramifications, the sole accredited agency would pull it.
Another possible scenario is that Pardew, who loves publicity, finds tabloids won't interview him while the ban is in place. Even if he was involved in the decision initially, he'll hate that.
It is important to have more photographers there, otherwise, as is hinted in that Guardian piece, you could have a picture of Pardew punching someone and under pressure from the club (their client) over possible ramifications, the sole accredited agency would pull it.