Locker room privacy ??

[papazoid]

The part of the NFL media policy pertaining to locker-room access (courtesy of the latest PFWA newsletter):

 

 

1. POSTGAME ACCESS – After a reasonable waiting period, defined as 10-12 minutes maximum after the completion of the game, the home and visiting team locker room areas will be opened to all accredited media with immediate access to all players and the head coach.

 

 

WOW....locker room opened only 10 -12 minutes max after game is over.....

 

heck, i get done walking 18 holes of golf and i need about an hour to cool down before i feel like a shower...lol

 

you'd think they would give them a lil longer time.

[BuffaloBill]

WTF are you talking about? TG left b/c he was tired of people trashing his friends and employer. I don't think questioning the value of locker room interviews is quite in the same category.

 

 

Did you read the specific post I was responding to?

[Mr. WEO]

Is it not enough that one reporter - that I know of - left the forum due to idiotic remarks like this? While John may choose to do so, he is under no obligation to have to defend himself or his profession from your obvious disdain. If you do not like what is done in the media then simply ignore it. In my opinion you have now stepped out of the boundaries of debate. Your comment is entirely uncalled for and inappropriate.

Really?

 

Idiotic? It's a simple question that goes to the heart of the subject: is it necessary for reprorters to infringe on the privacy of players? Some argue it is because of the interesting info that can be obtained only in that specific moment. I say it is not because I have not routinely seen (if ever) any interesting reportage as a result of this. It's not a specific judgement of jw or his performance. I'm sure almost all of his stories are written from info he accrues form everywhere but the locker room after a game.

 

 

Look, if you ask a reporter if he or she thinks their access to this plum assignment should be limited, their response will be predictable and uniform. It's reasonable to disagree here (many in the public are, you know) and if jw was to "leave" because of my pointing this out ( I'm sure he won't).....come on!

 

I have no "disdain" for his profession-- I, like you, read the production of it everyday. Just because jw is a friend of the Wall, shuld he be immune to criticsm of his position on this or other topics? Seems like no other member of the press enjoys that type of insulation here.

 

You need to reconsider your anger and view things from another angle.

Edited September 15, 2010 by Mr. WEO

[SwampD]

Really?

 

Idiotic? It's a simple question that goes to the heart of the subject: is it necessary for reprorters to infringe on the privacy of players? Some argue it is because of the interesting info that can be obtained only in that specific moment. I say it is not because I have not routinely seen (if ever) any interesting reportage as a result of this. It's not a specific judgement of jw or his performance. I'm sure almost all of his stories are written from info he accrues form everywhere but the locker room after a game.

 

 

Look, if you ask a reporter if he or she thinks their access to this plum assignment should be limited, their response will be predictable and uniform. It's reasonable to disagree here (many in the public are, you know) and if jw was to "leave" because of my pointing this out ( I'm sure he won't).....come on!

 

I have no "disdain" for his profession---save your I, like you, read the production of it everyday. Just because jw is a friend of the Wall, shuld he be immune to criticsm of his position on this or other topics? Seems like no other member of the press enjoys that type of insulation here.

 

You need to reconsider your anger and view things from another angle.

C'mon! Those shaving cream pies to the face are priceless. Without cameras in there we wouldn't get to see those anymore.

[akm0404]

I like that they get the scoop in the locker room, I just think its really weird when they are showing an interview, and some giant naked dude is walking behind the subject, and they have to pixelate his penis. It's just really bizarre, and you don't really see the shower-cam show up in a lot of other venues, leading some to think there might be a different and possibly better way to get the story.

[papazoid]

shrinkage ??...locker room humor ??

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1cUNNKzj_Nc

[Captain Caveman]

I'm sure almost all of his stories are written from info he accrues form everywhere but the locker room after a game.

 

You're sure of this because?

[Delete This Account]

Not sure how I'm explaining your job to you.....

 

....but anyway, where are all these good reports form these good reporters in the locker room? Point them out.

right, my mistake. you've never been happy with anything except, as i've recently uncovered, that you do favor Christmas.

you think some of the anecdotes that turn into good leads on player profiles, or Aaron Schobel contemplating retirement, or insights into the mood of the locker room, mood in regards to teammates, injuries (not announced by teams), other nuggets of information are plucked out of thin air.

you seem to dislike the "give 110 percent" quotes. well, put a player in room with 20 TV cameras and leave it at that, and that's generally more of what you'll get.

 

and to all those who think player privacy is such a key issue, if you deny locker room access and prevent the media from building these relationships, well, i predict it will lead to more reporters calling players at home during off-hours. that's not what any one wants, as i respect a player's privacy during his off-hours. ...

 

jw

 

I'm sure almost all of his stories are written from info he accrues form everywhere but the locker room after a game.

well, that's where you're wrong, but i'm sure you'll find a way to dispute me on that one.

 

jw

[akm0404]

Guys - Wawrow is fine on this one. Candid chats inside the locker room are great for insight into athletes and teams. That level of access is great, and it should be preserved.

 

It just gets very dicey when we're talking about combining professionalism with 53 sweaty dudes, high on the primal adrenaline rush, with their genitals exposed.

 

To an outsider, it seems like everyone should be a bit more comfortable if there was a bit less genitals in the workplace. Some sort of no nudity policy, however it was implemented, would seem to reduce the chances of these unprofessional male/female interactions, and heck, I doubt that the male reporters would mind fewer testicles during their work hours.

 

20 minutes to shower and get some pants on before the reporters enter, with the players adhering to a pants-policy in the public areas of the locker room thereafter doesn't seem unreasonable to an outsider.

 

Keep the access, but lose the nudity. Would this be ok somehow?

[Mr. WEO]

right, my mistake. you've never been happy with anything except, as i've recently uncovered, that you do favor Christmas.

you think some of the anecdotes that turn into good leads on player profiles, or Aaron Schobel contemplating retirement, or insights into the mood of the locker room, mood in regards to teammates, injuries (not announced by teams), other nuggets of information are plucked out of thin air.

you seem to dislike the "give 110 percent" quotes. well, put a player in room with 20 TV cameras and leave it at that, and that's generally more of what you'll get.

 

and to all those who think player privacy is such a key issue, if you deny locker room access and prevent the media from building these relationships, well, i predict it will lead to more reporters calling players at home during off-hours. that's not what any one wants, as i respect a player's privacy during his off-hours. ...

 

jw

 

 

well, that's where you're wrong, but i'm sure you'll find a way to dispute me on that one.

 

jw

Fair enough, jw.

 

But my position, and that of many here and in the public, is that infringing on someone's privacy for the chance that he may favor you with a quote or tip with which you may write a better story represents an imbalance tilted away from the player's favor. Also, your "it's either the locker room or I call him at home" presupposes that he would answer your call when home....

 

And if you trained your reporter's eye on my posts (how about my boffo report form the first Saturday camp!!) you would see I try to give credit where I see it's due. Not much of that lately....so I'm with many here in that way.

Edited September 15, 2010 by Mr. WEO

[papazoid]

Guys - Wawrow is fine on this one. Candid chats inside the locker room are great for insight into athletes and teams. That level of access is great, and it should be preserved.

 

It just gets very dicey when we're talking about combining professionalism with 53 sweaty dudes, high on the primal adrenaline rush, with their genitals exposed.

 

To an outsider, it seems like everyone should be a bit more comfortable if there was a bit less genitals in the workplace. Some sort of no nudity policy, however it was implemented, would seem to reduce the chances of these unprofessional male/female interactions, and heck, I doubt that the male reporters would mind fewer testicles during their work hours.

 

20 minutes to shower and get some pants on before the reporters enter, with the players adhering to a pants-policy in the public areas of the locker room thereafter doesn't seem unreasonable to an outsider.

 

Keep the access, but lose the nudity. Would this be ok somehow?

 

i agree.....keep everything the same...just give them a lil more time to get dressed.

[Delete This Account]

Fair enough, jw.

 

But my position, and that of many here and in the public, is that infringing on someone's privacy for the chance that he may favor you with a quote or tip with which you may write a better story represents an imbalance tilted away from the player's favor. Also, your "it's either the locker room or I call him at home" presupposes that he would answer your call when home....

 

And if you trained your reporter's eye on my posts (how about my boffo report form the first Saturday camp!!) you would see I try to give credit where I see it's due. Not much of that lately....so I'm with many here in that way.

see, i don't know how this is infringing on a player's privacy be being in a locker room. it's been a long-held tradition that the locker room is a place where reporters and players can interact. suddenly, it's not. as i've noted, there are many areas of the bills facility -- the showers, the trainers room, the equipment room, the players' lounge -- where players do and can have their privacy.

and it's not as if the locker room access is open-ended. we are only allowed in there for a certain period of time.

 

is it too much to ask to have them available in a relatively casual setting for 40 minutes? this is somehow an infringement on something? ... and i know a player would answer my call. many have and many have even returned my calls on the rare occassion i need to talk to them.

i just don't like to make this a habit. i'm sure they don't either.

 

jw

[Mr. WEO]

see, i don't know how this is infringing on a player's privacy be being in a locker room. it's been a long-held tradition that the locker room is a place where reporters and players can interact. suddenly, it's not. as i've noted, there are many areas of the bills facility -- the showers, the trainers room, the equipment room, the players' lounge -- where players do and can have their privacy.

and it's not as if the locker room access is open-ended. we are only allowed in there for a certain period of time.

 

is it too much to ask to have them available in a relatively casual setting for 40 minutes? this is somehow an infringement on something? ... and i know a player would answer my call. many have and many have even returned my calls on the rare occassion i need to talk to them.

i just don't like to make this a habit. i'm sure they don't either.

 

jw

Two reasons.

 

First, they are naked. Some don't care obviously, but does that make it OK?

 

Second, the elephant in the room is the Mexican female "sports reporter" who was credentialed by the team. You put a credentials tag around J Lo's neck--iut doesn't make her a sports reporter.

 

There are very few examples in society where people of the opposite sex, no matter what their mission or vocation, are essentially given permission by an employer to watch their employees get dressed. It doesn't happen in the women's locker room, yet I see post game sport reports being filed all the time by reporters covering those beats. How do they do it?

[Heels20X6]

given the intellectual level and quality of most TV programming, this doesnt surprise me at all...

 

We now know that we can thank SwampD for the classic game show "Hole in the Wall".....

[shrader]

see, i don't know how this is infringing on a player's privacy be being in a locker room. it's been a long-held tradition that the locker room is a place where reporters and players can interact. suddenly, it's not. as i've noted, there are many areas of the bills facility -- the showers, the trainers room, the equipment room, the players' lounge -- where players do and can have their privacy.

and it's not as if the locker room access is open-ended. we are only allowed in there for a certain period of time.

 

It really has nothing to do with the discussion, but I'm curious. Do those off limit rooms always have a wall separating them? The showers and trainers room sound pretty obvious, but I could picture there being no natural border between a locker room and the players' lounge.

[Hplarrm]

because he didnt put 100% of the responsibility on the men in the situation. according to the pundits, she could have walked in with only a g-string and pasties, and the jets were expected not to notice.

There are two different but related issues here. One is a question of style and morality as to whether she was dressed appropriately. The other is a business issue of how the NFL reacts when its well-paid players act in a manner that while human is unbecoming to the NFL's economic interests.

 

I think most folks agree that the Azteca reporter like the other Azteca reporter who showed up at an SB game in a wedding dress and asked Brady to marry her was looking for attention and succeeded. The silly hazing and catcalls she got from the Jets was unprofessional and stupid but it was a purposeful act by her that triggered their juvenile reaction. Every individual is entitled to their own moral views about this stupidity, and fortunately it did not tread into any area that mandates government sanction.

 

It is not a first amendment issue at all (nada, zippo, zero, etc) as this episode involved no government sanction at all (much less Congress passing any law that undercuts the right to expression which is what the free speech amendment is all about).

 

However, this does kick into the separate but related to folks sensibilities (or lack thereof) in regard to the business of the NFL.

 

1. A level of professional behavior and advertising their product through media coverage means that these well paid athletes and anyone associated with the Jets is well compensated to handle this with professional behavior that ignores any provocation the reporter supplied.

 

If someone is scandalized or gets a hard-on they cannot control due to her dress then they should forgo their compensation if they must say what they want.

 

2. The problem here strikes me as an NFL issue as they should not accredit reporters who are more interested in promoting themselves than promoting the game.

 

3. The NFL, WNBA, and NBA for that matter are private businesses and have no demand that they perform in any manner which does not violate and individuals right to reasonable expression. Any of these parties can choose different rules for setting up press availability as long as the rule is applied to all without bias on a non substantive issue like gender.

[SwampD]

Ah yes, the old "I work in XYZ Profession so I know everything about it" argument.

Followed right up with this tired argument.

 

given the intellectual level and quality of most TV programming, this doesnt surprise me at all...

We now know that we can thank SwampD for the classic game show "Hole in the Wall".....

This is exactly why I don't watch TV (other than sports). When you see how the sausage is made, you don't want to eat it.

 

(Cue 4th grade joke in 3..2..1..)

[Phil Hansen Forever]

Are male reporters allowed into WNBA or women's college or professional soccer teams' locker rooms?

 

No, they are not. In women's college sports, a male reported from the Minneapolis Tribune was trying to interview a star WNBA player and was ejected from the locker room. It's pure sexism, and then they complain. You can't have it both ways.

[Stl Bills]

Am I missing something here? Or is this the most contradictory post ever on TBD? As far as I know, male reporters in a WNBA locker room would be reporters of the opposite sex in the locker room. Hint: The "W" in WNBA stands for Women's (or words to that effect) I believe.

Yeah pretty sure you missed my attempt at a lame joke about WNBA players looking like dudes..... Thanks for clearing up what the "W" stands for in WNBA though.

[shrader]

No, they are not. In women's college sports, a male reported from the Minneapolis Tribune was trying to interview a star WNBA player and was ejected from the locker room. It's pure sexism, and then they complain. You can't have it both ways.

 

If it's college sports, why was he trying to interview a WNBA player?

 

But anyway, if reporters aren't allowed in college locker rooms (I have no clue, but I'd guess they aren't), we have to remember that we're dealing with a younger group of players. There are also going to be some 17 year olds in those locker rooms. That right there can cause a whole new world of problems.

Edited September 15, 2010 by shrader