They call it 'control,' but there are other words for it

It pains me to say this, but Chuck Howard is absolutely right.

Howard is the sports anchor on the NBC affiliate in Charlotte, and even he'd tell you that his ego doesn't need any more stroking. But in our newspaper the other day he spelled out his objections to a new NFL policy that will remove local stations' cameras from the sidelines at the league's games, and he was on the money.

Under the new policy, your local station will be allowed to use highlights only from network telecasts or NFL Films crews. The real problem, though, goes deeper than that.

The local stations' crews won't be allowed on the sidelines to film during the games, so that means nobody who isn't writing the NFL a check will have cameras on what's happening on the field and on the sidelines during the games.

The networks have a lot of cameras at a game, and your local affiliate might have had one or two shooters working the sidelines. But those one or two guys, at least the good ones, have their eye out for local stories the networks might not be interested in.

If the Houston Texans are playing at New England, for example, the network's cameras are far more likely to be shooting a close-up of Patriots player than following what's happening on the Houston sidelines. That stinks for Texans fans.

You're probably asking yourself what it the heck I'm doing spouting off about this. Valid question. First, before I started covering NASCAR I wrote columns and television and radio sports for the Observer. Second, those of us who cover racing came up against a battle like this a few years back when NASCAR asked us all to sign what came to be known as "Article 4" in applying for our annual credentials.

Without any kind of warning or discussion, NASCAR slipped language into the form we all turn in to get our "hard cards" basically saying that anything written, said, heard, shot or basically even thought of at the track was NASCAR's "property." That February, there was a space shuttle launch that could be seen clearly from the track, and we all joked that in NASCAR's view that made the shuttle its "intellectual property."

But it was no joking matter.

Like the NFL this time around, NASCAR said it was merely trying to "protect" its broadcast partners' rights. In racing's case, though, NASCAR was trying to squeeze as many people out of making a buck of the sport as they could so it could get all those dollars.

That is, indeed, the NASCAR way. The media fought back on "Article 4" and largely its provisions were withdrawn. There are some parts of that debate that are valid, of course. If a network is paying millions of dollars for the rights to live broadcasts of NASCAR races or NFL games or the NCAA tournament or The Masters, those rights should be protected.

But if a station in Dallas or Fort Worth comes to Texas Motor Speedway, it should be allowed to shoot action as it sees fit as long as it uses that footage properly. A local station can't, for instance, repackage the footage it takes as a race and sell DVDs including that footage. But it can use it on its news shows to amplify and supplement the network highlights it also has the right to use.

In both the NASCAR and the NFL situations, local photographers, writers, videographers and on-air talent are there to represent their viewers and readers and to present parts of the story that might not otherwise be covered.

If the league or sanctioning body controls all of that, it by default controls what's being reported about its sport.

NASCAR would absolutely LOVE to have an arrangement like that. But as fans, trust me, you don't.