The internet, with its message boards and chat rooms, is a worldwhere comment can be made largely without accountability. Manystatements made by football followers range from white lies to thelibellous, yet little is done to stop this dangerous practice.
The dangers are well documented. There is, though, a new perilfor professional footballers looming large on the horizon: thespectre of "bringing the game into disrepute" regarding socialnetworking sites.
Recent tweets by Ryan Babel and Jack Wilshere have broughtTwitter to the fore and it is becoming clear that the footballauthorities are monitoring every comment made. I thought Babel'scomments had an element of humour, but clearly that is no longerallowed in football.
For younger people, social networking is a must. It is nodifferent for players; everyone wants to have their say on thelatest issue or refereeing decisions and the game benefits from suchcheap publicity. The biggest concern, however, for players is thatmedia outlets have people whose job is simply to "follow"celebrities and players online, monitoring every comment andpublishing those that can generate headlines.
On Facebook, players can ensure that their page has privateaccess and any comments made can be seen by "friends" only. This, ofcourse, makes perfect sense as the world at large therefore cannotget access to what is being posted. There is, though, a problem;many players have journalists as "friends" who are therefore able tolook at everything posted. Does it not occur to players that theremay be a reason why comments made in private are suddenly on anewspaper front page?
I am aware of situations where the club, as an employer, hasaccess to players' Facebook pages.
All this public comment raises dangers for players in acontractual and regulatory sense. Players' contracts are tightlywritten and any player making comment publicly, including on socialnetworking sites, may be deemed to be bringing the club's name intodisrepute and liable to disciplinary action.
One player was heavily fined last season for saying that hisclub's pitch was in terrible condition; apparently this was not goodfor the club's image. A strict interpretation but the clubsthemselves relies on the same players to promote season tickets andcommercial partners.
The Scottish Football Association recently wrote to all clubsstating that they will be looking carefully at comments made byplayers on social networking sites such as Twitter and Facebook. Myconcern is that, post referees' strike, the authorities are going tocome down hard on players and managers for public comment to satisfythe strikers' complaints.
While I acknowledge that everyone in football has an obligationto ensure that comments which may be construed as libellous are notmade in public, I think it only fair that those who are under themost scrutiny are able to make fair comment about any area of thegame.
Interestingly, the regulations are not specific to players ormanagers making comment about referees. Any person under thejurisdiction of the SFA can be disciplined for observations made.Players and managers' integrity and performance are arbitrarilyquestioned by many within the game, including people in authoritycalling players cheats.
I have yet to hear of anyone being disciplined for such comments,but I trust the new interpretation of the rules will treat thequestioning of players and managers' integrity with an even hand.
In this age of 24-hour news, footballers are required to speak tothe media and promote everything from new strips to new sponsorshipdeals. Players have made their unhappiness known to me with regardto the onus that is thrust upon them by club and country.
On a daily basis, players are required to put themselves in frontof the media to be questioned about the latest hot topic. We allwant to hear what they have to say and the publicity generatedpromotes the game. The problem is that every word is scrutinised,and if not used responsibly, can cause problems.
This is especially so when taken out of context and used to sellnewspapers or increase audience figures; if one word is contentious,it will make headlines. In essence, every time a player speakspublicly he is opening up the possibility he will be disciplined
There is little, if any, media training put in place by clubs andthe SFA. Having attended many a press conference, I understand thepressures that this brings. Clubs now record press conferences, thetranscripts of which have been used against players at disciplinaryhearings. Big Brother, it would appear, is indeed listening.
Media training should be made compulsory at clubs therebydiminishing the possibility of expensive "mistakes" being made.
There has to be a more relaxed attitude to the whole issue. Ifnot, then players may decide not to speak in public for fear ofsanction by their club or football authorities. The question hasbeen raised with me: why should I speak to the press when I may befined for things said without malice?
I admit I cannot comprehend why anyone would wish to publicisetheir every move or what they had for dinner, but players today mustbecome streetwise very quickly when it comes to online matters.
comment Footballers must quickly become streetwise in onlinematters, writes Fraser Wishart
No comments:
Post a Comment