Sky’s Olympic rules rob public

Pay TV company Sky has the exclusive rights to air the Olympic Games.

That in itself is questionable. The Olympics are an ode to universalism – the ideal is all the countries, all the events, with all the people watching.

So there’s plenty of merit in the argument that the Games should be shown free-to-air in New Zealand, as they are required to be in countries such as Australia.

Still, it is not Sky’s fault that it bid for the rights and won them. That was the process, and Sky is a business that trades in exclusive broadcasting.

What Sky has done wrong is to try to zealously ward off every other media company in New Zealand from providing even the most basic rendering of this global event.

According to New Zealand law, copyright over broadcasts of current events are subject to ‘‘fair dealing’’ exceptions – others can use snippets of the coverage while reporting on the event.

The effect of this provision is to provide a wide audience with a snapshot of something they care about – brief highlights from a rugby match, lines from an important speech, or video of a protest captured by a bystander.

Sky essentially demanded that these rules be rewritten for the Olympic Games – if media companies wanted to go, they had to agree to substantially delay and truncate their access to footage of the events.

Sky’s criteria were initially so draconian as to include a ban on any criticism of its commentators – a truly precious move for a company that specialises in sports coverage.

The effects of this ultimatum were simple: If the news companies sent their journalists, they could show scant footage of the events – not the amount allowed by New Zealand law, nor that anticipated by online viewers.

If, on the other hand, they didn’t agree to the rules, the journalists could be barred from the Games.

After months of fruitless negotiation, Fairfax Media declined to send its usual supplement of journalists and photographers. This too has a downside: There will be less coverage of the Games, and it will inevitably lack something of the feel of first-hand reporting. The outcome will rob readers and viewers of an important New Zealand perspective on a global event. It will also rob athletes of some of the glory.

When taxpayers pour large amounts of money into highperformance sport, they can expect better treatment than this.

Only so much blame can go to Sky. Its claim that its news access rules are the ‘‘most generous in the whole world’’ is laughable, but the company is clearly trying to protect what it has in an age of enormous industry upheaval. Its tactics are not new either – it has tried to set overly restrictive conditions for major rugby tournaments before.

The broader blame needs to go to the New Zealand Olympic Committee, which gave such power to Sky in the first place. It was a decision that mocked the Olympic spirit. The Olympic charter, after all, says as many people as possible should be able to see the Games.

This isn’t just a stoush between media rivals. The real losers are the public – they get diminished New Zealand coverage of one of the world’s biggest events.