NPPA reports NFL requiring all photographers wear Canon and Reebok Branded Red Vests

Discussion in 'News' started by jamespjones, Jul 21, 2007.

  1. news_and_events/news/2007/07/nfl01.html
    According to an article posted on the National Press Photographers Association website by Donald R. Winslow of News Photographer magazine, this coming season the NFL will require all photographers to wear red vests with brand logos. This has raised some concern among media outlets and photographers.
  2. Just wait until NASCAR sees this idea
  3. Almost as fashionable as the red or gold real estate jackets...

    All kidding aside, this is just wrong to impose advertising on the media.
  4. What else would you expect from professional "sports"?
  5. That's very clever of the NFL marketing guys: got to generate more revenue from somewhere to pay for Michael Vick's legal woes.
  6. What a crock. It's a good thing it wasn't released on April 1st or I would have thought it was an April Fools joke.
  7. Professional sports are all about money -- why should this raise any concern?
  8. All photographers we be required to use Canon cameras and wear Reebok shoes. A non-
    Canon camera can be used if the logo is taped over with the Canon logo. The same applies
    to non Reebok shoes, just tape over adidas and Nike. Also if by chance the photographer is
    using film only Fuji is allowed. Camera bags will be checked.
  9. I would extend the mandatory logo'ed red vest to all photographers.
    A Constitutional Amendment might be in order.

    How are we to know who a photographer is is he's not in red?

    I was thinking . . . green vests for videographers, blue for sketch
    artists and a polka-dot arrangement for media people. All with Canon logos of course.

    Didn't Europe go through phases like this during the Middle Ages,
    and more recently during the 1940's. I don't reckon that it improved
    things all that much though it is true that eveyone knew his place.

    And now with the aid of these vests, photographers will too.
  10. Why should you have to wear a vest with a logo or two when almost every shot you take in a stadium is going to have a few logos in it...?
  11. I think I'd wear mine inside out and backside to....
  12. Here's some feedback from others.
  13. Since ethical photojournalists will refuse to wear these clown suits, might this be an attempt by the NFL to replace the working press with staff shooters and thus own all rights to all images shot professionally at the games?
  14. I thought we had antitrust laws that prevented restraint of trade in the United States? As far as I know the NFL doe snot have an exemption. What gives? Besides money of course. Joe Smith
  15. Actually, many sports organizations DO have an exemption from anti-trust laws. I'm not sure about the NFL but the MLB does.
  16. Edward, I think it's ONLY MLB that has the exemption.
  17. Only major=league baseball has an antitrust exemption. It's the one and only business that's exempt. But what that has to do with red vests, I have no clue. They run the stadium and can clearly tell you what to wear if you want in.
  18. Tell them that your religion forbids wearing red vests unless the back of the vest depicts a raised fist with an extended middle finger.

Share This Page