Is gender the key to writing sport interviews of athletes and coaches? There are still some professional athlete with an prehistoric mind set that women are not allowed in the holly grail of post game interviews, the locker-room.
As a whole, female reporters have been given a difficult time when entering not just the locker-room, but also the practice field. The more attractive the women the less attention they receive as the sport reporter. Females are asked to meet for exclusive or boldly requesting that the female reporter join them for an evening out on the town. Since when is the job description of any reporter, dating!
Women and the Jets!
In recent years no franchise has been on the defense more than the New York Jets, of course the owner of the team put out a press conference apologizing for the misconduct of their soon to be hall of fame player, Brett Favre. Favre allegedly sent cell-phone pictures of his private parts masturbating, to a female reporter that he met during the Jets 2008 preseason.
If that was not enough, in September 2010 reporter Ines Sainz of the TV Azteca in Mexico was in town to interview quarterback Mark Sanchez. During the interview there were reports of sexual harassment from other players and coaches from the Jets organization.
Males flirting with females are nothing new, in fact most of us would consider it normal, however when professionals are at work there is a certain manner we are expected to conduct ourselves. Take for example the Rampage Jackson interview listed below.
In todays corporate human resource departments have several sentivity courses for managers on sexual harrasment, race and gay conduct. I think it’s time for american sport franchises incorporate these policy for female reporters in the locker-room. After all gender have no barring on the words listed on the page of a newspaper.
http://theothermccain.com/2010/08/08/female-reporter-claims-brett-favre-sent-her-photos-of-himself-masturbating/
http://articles.nydailynews.com/2010-09-13/sports/27075155_1_jets-fans-rex-ryan-jets-organization
Sunday, March 25, 2012
Sunday, March 18, 2012
NBA new union agreement
2011 National Basketball Association Labor Dispute
At the end of the NBA 2010-2011 season was the labor dispute between the NBA team owners represented by David Stern and the National Basketball Players Union, lead by Billy Hunter and Derrick Fisher. The two side were not in agreement with several issues listed in the collective bargaining agreement and the owners wanted to take this opportunity and revise the union-management agreement that was in place.
Until a new agreement was reached, the NBA owners locked the players out of the corporate location and pervented players from working. A complete stoppage until a new agreement could be reached. At issue was the revenue share of the NBA revenue from TV, cable rights and merchandise. This was a complete interruption of employer's service and employee revenue.
Due to unfavorable negotiations on both sides, the players filed antitrust action against owners and were at the brink of disbanding the union. As both sides continue to negotiate to no avail, there was the potential of the 2011-2012 season being cancelled. Players agents negotiated contracts to play in other countries giving the players the options to return to the NBA once a tentative deal was reached and the new CBA was ratified.
Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA)
The CBA is a agreement between employers and employees regulating work conditions. In the NBA’s collective bargaining agreement includes, but is not limited to basketball related income shared percentage, length of time or expiration date between the current and new agreement, minimum team salary and free agents and restricted free agency. There are winners and lossers in each of the cases, none the less the NBA as a league is the clear winner. Both sides are allowed to share in the fruits and labor of the long and gruley process of improving the terms of the CBA so that it will benefit all parties.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/14/nba-lockout-players-reject-offer-disband-union-antitrust_n_1092994.html
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/sam_amick/10/29/nba-labor-proposals/index.html
At the end of the NBA 2010-2011 season was the labor dispute between the NBA team owners represented by David Stern and the National Basketball Players Union, lead by Billy Hunter and Derrick Fisher. The two side were not in agreement with several issues listed in the collective bargaining agreement and the owners wanted to take this opportunity and revise the union-management agreement that was in place.
Until a new agreement was reached, the NBA owners locked the players out of the corporate location and pervented players from working. A complete stoppage until a new agreement could be reached. At issue was the revenue share of the NBA revenue from TV, cable rights and merchandise. This was a complete interruption of employer's service and employee revenue.
Due to unfavorable negotiations on both sides, the players filed antitrust action against owners and were at the brink of disbanding the union. As both sides continue to negotiate to no avail, there was the potential of the 2011-2012 season being cancelled. Players agents negotiated contracts to play in other countries giving the players the options to return to the NBA once a tentative deal was reached and the new CBA was ratified.
Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA)
The CBA is a agreement between employers and employees regulating work conditions. In the NBA’s collective bargaining agreement includes, but is not limited to basketball related income shared percentage, length of time or expiration date between the current and new agreement, minimum team salary and free agents and restricted free agency. There are winners and lossers in each of the cases, none the less the NBA as a league is the clear winner. Both sides are allowed to share in the fruits and labor of the long and gruley process of improving the terms of the CBA so that it will benefit all parties.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/14/nba-lockout-players-reject-offer-disband-union-antitrust_n_1092994.html
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/sam_amick/10/29/nba-labor-proposals/index.html
Sunday, March 4, 2012
The NCAA Licensing Lawsuits
The NCAA is being suied by former student athletes, lead by Ed O’Bannon for not requesting permission to use the former student-athletes images and likenesses. According to Ed’s attorneys, the NCAA is profiting about $4 billion a year of sales of DVD, video games, books and poster of past performances. The federal district court is reviewing the case to determine if it qualify for class action against the NCAA. What’s at stake is the profit sharing with former student-athletes whom images have been violated and the NCAA paying them compensation.
NCAA Licensing Agreement
Currently, the NCAA is requiring Universities to include with their scholorships, licensing agreement giving the university and the NCAA the right to use the player’s “name or likeness in merchandise or advertising for fee or royalty”. Are parents selling their kids future royalties?
http://www.amazon.com/1995-NCAA-Division-Basketball-Championship/dp/B000NPP9IU/ref=sr_1_7?ie=UTF8&s=dvd&qid=1250702774&sr=8-7
Oscar Roberson
http://thesportdigest.com/2011/01/oscar-roberson-and-ncaa-the-big-o-says-no/
NBA Hall of famer and NCAA All-American, Oscar Robertson announced joining the class action suit as a plaintiff. The Big “O” blame the NCAA for intellectual property and anti-trust violations, by using his signature, image and name in cards and video games without compensating him.
Michael Jordan Sues Qiaodan Sports
http://www.ipbrief.net/2012/02/28/michael-jordan-sues-qiaodan-sports-to-reclaim-his-name/
Michael Jordan Sues Republic of China company for trademark infringement of his name and image without permission from him or Nike, Inc., which owns the name and identity. For years Qiaodan Sports have been using Michael Jordan’s trademarks, photo’s, “Jumpman” logo and other commercial products for profits.
Conclusion
A issue that comes to mind is should the NCAA be allowed to own the rights and profit from all former student-athletes images, names, television broadcasts, DVD’s and video games without compensating the athletes.
In my opinion, the NCAA is illegally profiting from former student-athletes, in the same maner that Qiaodan sports are infringing on Michael Jordan’s trademarks. Monies are being earned by the NCAA from older student-athletes performances without paying the former athletes. Past games are licensed by the NCAA and being sold on Amazon and other outlets. No additional scholarships are offered as compensation. Fans are purchasing DVD’s and video’s games with the former players identical likeness, uniform and number, not because it say property of the NCAA. If Ed O’Bannon’s attorneys are correct and the NCAA merchandising profit is $4 billion a year, the NCAA can offer licensing agreements for all former student athletes whose images are used.
NCAA Licensing Agreement
Currently, the NCAA is requiring Universities to include with their scholorships, licensing agreement giving the university and the NCAA the right to use the player’s “name or likeness in merchandise or advertising for fee or royalty”. Are parents selling their kids future royalties?
http://www.amazon.com/1995-NCAA-Division-Basketball-Championship/dp/B000NPP9IU/ref=sr_1_7?ie=UTF8&s=dvd&qid=1250702774&sr=8-7
Oscar Roberson
http://thesportdigest.com/2011/01/oscar-roberson-and-ncaa-the-big-o-says-no/
NBA Hall of famer and NCAA All-American, Oscar Robertson announced joining the class action suit as a plaintiff. The Big “O” blame the NCAA for intellectual property and anti-trust violations, by using his signature, image and name in cards and video games without compensating him.
Michael Jordan Sues Qiaodan Sports
http://www.ipbrief.net/2012/02/28/michael-jordan-sues-qiaodan-sports-to-reclaim-his-name/
Michael Jordan Sues Republic of China company for trademark infringement of his name and image without permission from him or Nike, Inc., which owns the name and identity. For years Qiaodan Sports have been using Michael Jordan’s trademarks, photo’s, “Jumpman” logo and other commercial products for profits.
Conclusion
A issue that comes to mind is should the NCAA be allowed to own the rights and profit from all former student-athletes images, names, television broadcasts, DVD’s and video games without compensating the athletes.
In my opinion, the NCAA is illegally profiting from former student-athletes, in the same maner that Qiaodan sports are infringing on Michael Jordan’s trademarks. Monies are being earned by the NCAA from older student-athletes performances without paying the former athletes. Past games are licensed by the NCAA and being sold on Amazon and other outlets. No additional scholarships are offered as compensation. Fans are purchasing DVD’s and video’s games with the former players identical likeness, uniform and number, not because it say property of the NCAA. If Ed O’Bannon’s attorneys are correct and the NCAA merchandising profit is $4 billion a year, the NCAA can offer licensing agreements for all former student athletes whose images are used.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)