A fresh row over event credentials has reignited concerns about attempts to strip photographers and newsrooms of rights in exchange for access — with implications for Primary Source Journalism (PSJ) well beyond one organiser or one country.
The U.S. National Press Photographers Association (NPPA) has issued a sector-wide warning about rights-grabbing credential agreements following controversy involving The Gazelle Group, a major organiser of college basketball tournaments.
At issue was credential language requiring photographers to grant the organiser an irrevocable, no-fee licence to use “any and all photos taken at the event for any purpose whatsoever (other than resale)” and to provide digital access to their images. NPPA, joined by the New York Press Photographers Association (NYPPA) and ASMP, characterised the approach as a classic “pay-to-play” rights grab that is unworkable for independent photojournalists and a non-starter for news agencies.
Why this matters for PSJ – the NMC View
Credential terms that compel blanket, perpetual, zero-fee licences undercut the economic foundations of news photography, blur editorial independence, and risk gatekeeping access to newsworthy events. For PSJ — reporting from the scene by trained professionals — this is not a contractual nicety: it is about whether the public’s visual record of sport and civic life is produced independently and on sustainable terms.
As of Wednesday 29 October, it is unclear whether further changes will be made.
Where the revised language still falls short
The NMC’s CEO Andrew Moger stated: ‘Even with cosmetic changes, bundling access with compelled image supply flips the professional norm on its head. Credentials should enable reporting; any organiser use of images should be a separate, optional, limited licence agreed on fair market terms — not a ticket tax paid in pictures. Anything else distorts markets, compromises independence and shrinks the pool of organisations that can afford to cover events.’
Industry response
NPPA notes that agencies including Getty Images, The Associated Press, Imagn and Icon Sportswire have been engaged – underscoring that large newsrooms cannot accept forced, uncompensated licences tethered to accreditation. Such clauses conflict with agency contracts, editorial policies and client obligations, and they erode the ability to reinvest in the equipment, training and safety that professional sports coverage requires.
This episode is not isolated: NPPA has previously challenged overbroad credentials around major performers and tours, where organisers sought sweeping rights while attempting to control editorial use. The pattern is familiar to NMC members in sport and other organised events.
OASIS Tour Photo Restriction: a Recent Parallel
During the Oasis Live ’25 comeback, the band’s management introduced time-limited editorial conditions on press photography – at first mooted at one month and then set at 12 months for images from the opening Cardiff show. From the Manchester concerts onward, long-established international and national agencies – Reuters, Getty Images, AP, AFP, Shutterstock and PA Media – each independently suspended professional photo coverage of the stage performances rather than accept usage limits that conflicted with copyright and standard editorial practice.
The practical effect was immediate: editors had fewer professional images to choose from across print, digital and broadcast; in a number of titles this reduced the extent and prominence of coverage for what would ordinarily be a significant cultural moment. The episode also raised a broader concern: archival use is a cornerstone of independent journalism – underpinning retrospectives, tributes and future reporting on public figures and events. Imposing expiry dates on press images risks eroding the cultural and historical record and undermines newsroom planning for sustained, accountable coverage over time.
NMC formally challenged the time-based usage condition in letters to management and the tour’s press handler, and flagged industry impact in public updates as the tour moved from the UK to overseas legs. Revised accreditation terms were then issued which enabled coverage to resume. Our position throughout has been consistent: accreditation must not be bundled with rights demands that curtail normal editorial use or force de facto transfers of value from independent newsrooms to event organisers.
