Media Thread 2017/18

[franksinatra]

You were obviously on vacation during the great Fraudiola campaign of Nov/Dec 2016. As for Maureen you’ve also forgotten the rewriting of history this season to the effect that Pep inherited a team full of stars, but Jose inherited a squad in transition.....?

Sorry Exeter I do not think that has been the overall media narrative about Mourinhos failings. Yes his words have been reported but he has been heavily criticised and the consensus is his teams are dire and should be playing better not he has been handicapped by the players he inherited.

The reality is another United manager has been slated continuously which does not fit in with the favourable press coverage.

 

[Exeter Blue I am here]

But that is three managers now given a tough time. What happened to this united media bias I keep reading about on this forum?

Take away our view on Mourinho and the football and put yourself as a united fan for one minute (ok make it a second) and you might be wondering why your manager is getting so much abuse when he took a team unable to qualify for champs lge football, won two trophies in his first year, 2nd following season and in the Fa cup final. Bias can be seen in so many ways dependent upon the prism you look through.

Incidentally agree with you about the little englander thing. Its all part of the narrative of the Premiership being the ‘toughest’ league and I think prople did not want Pep to smash it. Fortunately for us he has.

You make some good points on this thread Frank and serve as a welcome counterbalance to some of the madder conspiracy theorists, but if you’re trying to tell me that United and City get equable treatment and respect from the media, then you’ve become fixated by a tree and lost sight of the woods completely. If you accept the premise that newspapers make their money from selling advertising space attached to hundreds of deliberately provocative clickbait articles, then you should surely also accept that they maximise those incomes by filling space with puff pieces about the clubs with the biggest fanbases. Martin Samuel told us all precisely that on Sunday Supplement this season

 

[kaz7]

You make some good points on this thread Frank and serve as a welcome counterbalance to some of the madder conspiracy theorists, but if you’re trying to tell me that United and City get equable treatment and respect from the media, then you’ve become fixated by a tree and lost sight of the woods completely. If you accept the premise that newspapers make their money from selling advertising space attached to hundreds of deliberately provocative clickbait articles, then you should surely also accept that they maximise those incomes by filling space with puff pieces about the clubs with the biggest fanbases. Martin Samuel told us all precisely that on Sunday Supplement this season

I saw what Samuel said,it was remarkably candid,if anyone can find that clip i'd like to see it again

 

[franksinatra]

You make some good points on this thread Frank and serve as a welcome counterbalance to some of the madder conspiracy theorists, but if you’re trying to tell me that United and City get equable treatment and respect from the media, then you’ve become fixated by a tree and lost sight of the woods completely. If you accept the premise that newspapers make their money from selling advertising space attached to hundreds of deliberately provocative clickbait articles, then you should surely also accept that they maximise those incomes by filling space with puff pieces about the clubs with the biggest fanbases. Martin Samuel told us all precisely that on Sunday Supplement this season

I would not say equal Exeter but I think currently they are more newsworthy and in some respects that can be positive for them its also likely we will not receive the same level of scrutiny. The managers being a case in point.

I fully understand the concept of click bait. I posted that a few pages back its a business fact United will get more coverage than ourselves and that will not change until our popularity levels increase. Its pointless bemoaning as bias United getting more coverage as no independent business has to give us parity and similarly its not bias that say West Ham/Everton/Chelsea (arguably) do not receive the same anount of coverage as us.

We do suffer from a lot of the lads bantz nonsense, empty seats etc. Its difficult to gauge a comparison to other clubs without following them and their forums but I can concede we probably get more. The lines though are not as distinct as many like to make out.

 

[waspish]

But that is three managers now given a tough time. What happened to this united media bias I keep reading about on this forum?

Take away our view on Mourinho and the football and put yourself as a united fan for one minute (ok make it a second) and you might be wondering why your manager is getting so much abuse when he took a team unable to qualify for champs lge football, won two trophies in his first year, 2nd following season and in the Fa cup final. Bias can be seen in so many ways dependent upon the prism you look through.

Incidentally agree with you about the little englander thing. Its all part of the narrative of the Premiership being the ‘toughest’ league and I think prople did not want Pep to smash it. Fortunately for us he has.

Agree but what Mourinho has won with the rags we would get it ain’t good enough with the Money spent its premier league and champs league you have to be wining not level to trophies

 

[Tanzeylee]

On the BBC main website front page this morning (the news front page not BBC Sport) is the earth-shattering story that Eric Cantona is returning to the Pit of Misery for a charity game. If ever you needed proof that the BBC was now an offshoot of the rag PR department, this is it.

Dilly Dilly

 

[chesterguy]

I posted that a few pages back its a business fact United will get more coverage than ourselves and that will not change until our popularity levels increase. Its pointless bemoaning as bias United getting more coverage as no independent business has to give us parity and similarly its not bias that say West Ham/Everton/Chelsea (arguably) do not receive the same anount of coverage as us.

We do suffer from a lot of the lads bantz nonsense, empty seats etc. Its difficult to gauge a comparison to other clubs without following them and their forums but I can concede we probably get more. The lines though are not as distinct as many like to make out.

But the BBC is an institution that should be fair and free from bias but you cannot tell me on any level that City and United or United and any other club are treated equally. You do agree that the "lads bantz" is more agianst City but as has been pointed out this "bantz" is written by national and local reporters whose words are read by millions of people around the thanks to the power of the internet and outlets like NewsNow hence why the jibe about the Emptyhad is now almost a given despite those of us who go knowing that it is rubbish

 

[Fred_Quimby]

It has been said many times, the people in charge of the media grew up in an era of wall to wall rags. The BBC are no different. They are supposed to be unbiased but if you are in charge you can do what you like if your bosses are rags also.

 

[MillionMilesAway]

It has been said many times, the people in charge of the media grew up in an era of wall to wall rags. The BBC are no different. They are supposed to be unbiased but if you are in charge you can do what you like if your bosses are rags also.

And the BBC do still need webclicks to justify the website, and also for foreign access which does have adverts.

 

[jrb]

And the BBC do still need webclicks to justify the website, and also for foreign access which does have adverts.

The remit of the BBC is not to drive click bait.

It is supposed to be impartial, because we all fund it.

It does not rely on advertising or clicks to generate revenue.