Jump to navigation
Stupid Bowl
Mike Ahlf
I sort-of watched the Super Bowl this year... which is to say, I sort of flipped to check the score every so often while playing Oblivion.
The reasoning was simple: I didn't expect much of a game, expected even less of the commercials (which is bad considering that the commercials were why a lot of people watched a few years back). I was pointedly avoiding all the newscasters who would be doing nothing but wondering which of the two coaches they got to ask "How's it feel to be the first black coach to (win / lose) the Super Bowl?"
I left it on long enough to see Chicago completely fall apart by getting intercepted on and seeing the ball run back for a touchdown. At which point I realized that even if they asked that question, it didn't matter, because the coaching wasn't what won this game for the Colts or lost it for the Bears; the fact that the Bears were playing like the Keystone Kops is what lost it for them and won it for the Colts.
However, what really got me about it is that the NFL were apparently going around
trying to destroy anyone holding a public party.
See, as it turns out, part of our asinine copyright laws gives the NFL the right to set "rules" on public display of the game. Municipalities and Sports Bars are free to play it on whatever size screen they want, charge admission or a cover charge, sell drinks/food/booze, etc.
Churches, for whatever reason, the NFL doesn't want showing the game. Apparently football, even for kids as young as 6, must be watched either at home or in an establishment full of cigarette smoke, drunken people, and general bad manners.
Either that, or the NFL really needs to get a clue.
Observations
For the first time in history, I opted to clean up around the apartment rather than watch a football game, much less the Superbowl. If New England, New Orleans, or Seattle were playing I could see myself getting into it. But I really couldn't care less about the Colts and Bears (I ordinarily root against both).
Unless I'm misreading it, according to the Slate article it is not okay for a sports bar to charge admission. Sports bars rarely do because they make money on the drinks. A showing at a private residence, or a public place where no admission is charged is fine. So if the church wants to have a party and make money selling sandwiches (which my church did way back in the day) that's fine (as long as you're within certain TV size limitations). Similarly, if you're throwing a private party you're okay, too, subject to said TV limitations.. You can even charge if you're not opening it to the general public.
DirecTV had similar policies (except they had a way that you could pay for the right to charge admission and if you were a business you were paying more than a home consumer would), though since you have to pay for their programming that made a little more sense. I'm not saying that I agree with what the NFL is doing (I don't think I do), but if Slate is correct (and I'm reading it correctly) then it's not as stupid as initial reports suggested.
Some sports bars have an "X drink minimum or cover charge" thing going, RAW. Depends on the bar.
I think it's pretty stupid. They could have just sent a letter requesting that the church not advertise using the term "Super Bowl", and that probably would have been the end of it. The NFL's major beef is in protecting their trademark.
The problem I have with it is that they went so over-the-top, and against a church, and presumably nobody in their legal guys / Trademark Nazi office thought about the possible PR problems threating a church could cause them.
As I told RAW last week, the NFL rules make no sense since it's a publically broadcasted program. Although as he points out, maybe the rules are in place for the inevitable PPV that is to come for the Superbowl.
Add an Observation
Comment spam is an ongoing problems that we're trying to address. Previously we required people to create accounts and log in. I am thankful to say that is no longer the case. We're giving Captcha another try and are playing around with a text-based Q&A variant of Captcha. So bear with us as we try to figure out how to best get a handle ont he problem. Please note that any comment on a post more than 30 days old will go into the moderation queue, where I will get to it when I can which could be once a week.
