NCAA now has limits on frequency while live blogging

For the reporters out there who think they can endlessly update their live blogs on NCAA bowling, watch out. Your days of giving up-to-the-minute, detailed reports on strikes and spares are over. The NCAA has set a limit on the number of updates that can be given in a live blog on an NCAA event. If the reporter exceeds the limit, they'll lose their press credentials.

Deadspin has the complete .pdf and a list of just how many updates you can give per sport:
Fall Sports
Soccer: Five times per half; one at halftime
Field Hockey: Five times per half; one at halftime
Volleyball: Three per Competition; one in between Competitions
Football: Three per quarter; one at halftime
Cross Country: Ten per day/session
Men's Water Polo: Three per quarter; one at the halftime

Winter Sports
Ice Hockey: Three per period - one in between (includes overtime)
Basketball: Five times per half; one at halftime; two times per overtime period
Wrestling: Ten per session
Indoor Track and Field: Ten per day/session
Swimming and Diving: Ten per day/session
Bowling: Ten per day/session
Gymnastics: Ten per session
The best response I've seen to this comes from a commenter on Deadspin:
Help Wanted: NCAA Blog Wrangler

Must have prior experience looking over other people's shoulders. Abacus provided for counting, but applicant must procure own horse-and-buggy ride to/from athletic facility.
The reason behind the regulation: the NCAA is worried fans will go to a live blog instead of getting their updates from media who paid for the writes to broadcast the game. Yeah, right. I read a lot of live blogs and I've never thought of reading one instead of watching or listening to a game. Who would? Well, I could watch this game on tv... or I could read a sarcastic and satirical post on it without any play-by-play. Right.

The NCAA needs to wake up. Not only does this have little effect seeing as most live blogs are done by people who themselves are at home watching games watching TV, but it also negatively affects college sports. More coverage means more exposure and attention for athletes. It means more information for fans. Why limit that when, realistically, it isn't hurting anyone? On top of limiting the big time sports, they limit posts on other, non-revenue, ones as well. If a member of the press wants to provide an endless stream of updates to a cross country or a track meet that otherwise has no media exposure, why stop them?
Trackbacks (0) Links to blogs that reference this article Trackback URL
http://www.grizzoulian.com/admin/trackback/54339
Comments (0) Read through and enter the discussion with the form at the end
Post A Comment / Question Use this form to add a comment to this entry.







Remember personal info?
Send To A Friend Use this form to send this entry to a friend via email.