DIII programs have enough trouble bringing attention to their programs (attention that is well deserved). Twitter is an easy, no-cost way to promote your program, athletes, coaches, and college/university. Saying that a program cannot use any electronic means other than faxes or email makes me believe that whoever voted on this was not given all the facts about social media.
Let me backup and explain (and please if I am wrong about this I would love to hear from you). According to the NCAA Division III Manual (Section 13.02.10 - Electronic Transmissions).
So let me get this straight. Not only can a coach NOT use twitter because a prospective athlete COULD follow that coach but a DIII athletic department could not use twitter because their message may be sent to a prospective athlete? I am going to leave the coach part out of my argument but the athletic department I really don't understand. Let's say an athletic department sets up a Twitter account and they strictly use the account to send out score updates and news (the same news and scores that are on their website) then according to the way I am reading this they would be in violation. Really? How is this any different than if a prospective athlete went to the Website to read the latest news and scores? Twitter is just a way that people are CHOOSING to communicate and follow people - how can this be considered a bad thing? Please make me understand.
Electronically transmitted correspondence that may be sent to a prospective student-athlete by, or on behalf of, a member of the institution's athletics department staff is limited to electronic mail and facsimiles. All other forms of electronically transmitted correspondence (e.g., instant messaging, text messaging and social networking Web sites) are prohibited. (Adopted: 1/14/08 effective 8/1/08) Source: http://tinyurl.com/ncaadIII
So let me get this straight. Not only can a coach NOT use twitter because a prospective athlete COULD follow that coach but a DIII athletic department could not use twitter because their message may be sent to a prospective athlete? I am going to leave the coach part out of my argument but the athletic department I really don't understand. Let's say an athletic department sets up a Twitter account and they strictly use the account to send out score updates and news (the same news and scores that are on their website) then according to the way I am reading this they would be in violation. Really? How is this any different than if a prospective athlete went to the Website to read the latest news and scores? Twitter is just a way that people are CHOOSING to communicate and follow people - how can this be considered a bad thing? Please make me understand.
I guess the part I also don't understand is why is a Website not listed in Section 13.02.10 - Electronic Transmissions. I mean can't a prospective athlete go there and potentially watch videos interviews with coaches and players, potentially hear podcasts from coaches and student athletes, certainly read news which could contain quotes from coaches. Why is the Website allowed and Twitter is not? Isn't just another form of communication?
Ok let me move on. According to the NCAA Division III Manual (Section 13.4 - Recruiting Materials).
Institutions are permitted to provide to prospective student-athletes, prospective student-athlete's relatives [or guardian(s)], and to coaches of prospective student-athletes any official academic, admissions, athletics and student-services publications or electronic media published or produced by the institution. Institutions are also permitted to provide other information of a general nature that is available to all students or prospective students. (Revised: 1/11/89, 7/24/07, 4/21/09, 4/29/09)
Source: http://tinyurl.com/ncaad3
Source: http://tinyurl.com/ncaad3
So is my frustration for nothing or is anyone else confused? Doesn't this say that an athletic department can send any information to a prospective athlete as long as the electronic media is officially from the athletic department? So if an athletic department is using Twitter to send out official news and scores is that allowed? I guess it depends which you read first. I interpret it to say yes you can do this but Section 13.02.10 limits you to fax and email.
I then found a great interview that was done with Jay Jones, the NCAA's Director of Academic Affairs and Membership Affairs for Division III. He says
Within Division III, social networking of any type that has an athletics nexus or athletics information and engagement with prospective student-athletes is not permissible. Therefore, information through a social networking site that with an athletics focus in which prospective student-athletes are allowed to be members are not permissible.
Source: http://www.dantudor.com/2009/05/post_208.htm
Source: http://www.dantudor.com/2009/05/post_208.htm
Folks, we are in the information age. While I completely understand the need to limit interaction between recruits and coaches I feel that by prohibiting an athletic department or coach from using Twitter is absurd.
Please please please... If anyone can shed more light on this or tell me where I am misunderstanding the facts I would be forever grateful.
5 comments:
The legislation was proposed to keep coaches from endlessly texting to recruits, interrupting their lives and running up the phone bills. They also banned "social networking sites" like Facebook, because they din't want coaches trolling those sites trying to make contact with recruits. Both of these are things nearly all D-III schools would agree with.
However, the NCAA interpreted the legislation in a few unexpected ways. The first was they took the phrase "for recruiting purposes" and defined it to mean anything a potential recruit could possibly get their hands on via their phones. So, by that definition, everything is "for recruiting purposes." Score alerts, Twitter updates, everything. SIDs have been pointing out the folly of that interpretation. By that definition anything we put on our website could be illegal since one way or another a recruit could receive all of it via a text message if they so chose. By that definition, our website itself is "electronic communication" that is not e-mail or fax.
They've also said if you can't prevent a recruit from signing up for such a service, then tyou can't use it. Again, we can use opt-in, opt-out techniques and try to control our users, but ultimately it's impossible. How can I possibly tell if "gmballer86" is a potential recruit?
It appears our message is getting through and new legislation to (hopefully) more accurately define the old legislation is on the way.
On the SIDBoard we have been playing around with some new language to help define the objective and create some deliniation between "for recruiting purposes" and "for marketing/informational/publicity purposes." The most recen draft looked like this:
A member school’s athletic department may host a page on social networking sites and/or use a broadcast text message alert, provided the following conditions are met:
1. Information on the page must be of a general nature such as scores, news, alerts, and that information must also be found on the school’s athletics website.
2. The website must be created and administered solely by the school’s sports information, athletic communications, media relations and/or marketing office.
3. Information targeted toward a specific recruit or recruits in general is prohibited.
4. Users must be able to freely opt-in or opt-out from receiving the information at any time they choose. The ability to receive information must be open to the general public. Schools are not permitted to sign-up any users on their behalf, even if requested. Schools are also prohibited from directing or encouraging recruits to sign up on their own.
5. Schools may not use their site to exchange personal correspondence with any recruits.
Yes, Jeff, it is ridiculous.
Twitter is really no different than an email, RSS feed, or phone hotline.
Most SIDs are using Twitter for updates, pushing people to the sites, rather than linking with recruits.
When I asked our conference commissioner about this, she said this use of Twitter is OK for SIDs to do. So I have the green light (although the wording seems to say the contrary).
Seems to me the need to change wording rather than just the "interpretation."
-Bob Lowe
David
I completely agree about limiting the endless interaction between a coach and recruit (however, even that can be controlled/monitored in many forms of Social Media - including Twitter).
I think it's great that some of you have been working on new language and I hope it gets approved. I can't thank you enough for sharing this.
If I am reading the language correctly this would still prohibit a coach from having a Twitter account. Having coaches on Twitter can have many benefits for a program (including financial). While it's true that we won't know if user gmballer86 is a potential recruit and chooses to follow the coach - it's really no different than if gmballer86 uses his/her Gmail account to email the coach. Coaches need to be educated on how to use social media the same way we were trained on how to use the web and email years ago.
Thanks again for sharing this information.
Jeff, I think you have to take a step back and understand the context of when the legislation was adopted by the Division III membership.
The legislation was approved by the membership at the January 2008 NCAA Convention (by a 362-72-2 margin), which means the proposal went through the legislative review process in 2007. At that time, I don't think as many administrators knew then (like they know now) what Twitter was, or the fact that probably very few, if any, athletic departments and staff were utilizing Twitter.
The intent of the legislation is to limit electronic transmissions of recruiting activities to email and fax only. One of the sources of the legislation was the Division III Student-Athlete Advisory Committee (SAAC) - the students themselves - because they felt at the time that these other types of transmissions, as outlined by 13.02.10 (instant messaging, text messaging, and social networking websites), were not a professional means of communication and therefore should not be use for recruititng purposes. The other items already mentioned in other posts, such as cost to the PSA and their famlies, were also reasons given.
It sounds as if Twitter was lumped into the 'social networking' definition by the NCAA because that's how they classify it, therefore it's impermissible for Division III institutions to use. It's my understanding that an institution can use Twitter if a) they put a disclaimer on their page about the purpose of the page, and b) they monitor to make sure there are no PSAs using it, but I would advise consultation with your institution's compliance officer.
In looking at the whole issue, I think you have to first understand that the NCAA is enforcing the rule that the membership voted on; they're just doing their job. The other item is the fact that technology changes at a pace that current legislation may not be able to keep up/adapt to. If the membership wants it, then the membership has the ability to review and alter its bylaws as it sees fit through the legislative process.
I think one of the original sponsoring bodies of the legislation is investigating the best way to alter the legislation so that the intent (as I mentioned above) is kept but institutions are allowed to use Twitter for the purposes you outlined.
As for my personal thoughts on Twitter, I'll leave those for another time.
- Dan Fisher
Dan - great response - Thank you.
I think this is a great topic for discussion as there seems to be a lot of confusion as to what can and cannot be done.
If you get a chance can you send me your email address so I can follow-up with you? You can email me at: jhrubin@sidearmsports.com
Thanks again for contributing.
Post a Comment