Media Thread 2020/21

[HelloCity]

 

[Fiftyyearsandcounting]

Perhaps it is you that doesn't understand social media. If City issue any kind of statement the main stream media would then be able to publish the story, it would be slanted, after passing through the lawyers, in a way to make Walker sound guilty even though he was in Manchester throughout. Idiots with a keyboard will in this day and age spew any old shite out, (look at Trump on Twitter) By posting it on here we are just giving it life instead of letting it die a quick quiet death.

Mark Twain(?) -
"A lie gets halfway around the world before truth puts on its boots"

 

[LongsightM13]

The trouble is, and where I have sympathy for City, is that you can't react to everything on social or mainstream media. Because the trap you fall into is that if you then don't explicitly deny or confirm something, it's taken as being true or can be spun whichever way the media want.

I can give you a first hand example involving my first interaction with the MEN years ago. I was asked a question and thought I was being clever by refusing to confirm or deny whether I'd spoken to Franny Lee (who was then a significant shareholder when Wardle was chairman). The story got written as "Trust spokesman refuses to deny he's spoken to Franny Lee".

So mostly it's best to ignore most of the shit out there, however much it irritates us. But some stuff crosses the line and I think this is one of those. But it's up to Walker to sort it out, although i'm sure City will be all over it and give him their full support.

Sometimes it is best not to dignify it with a comment

 

[ali benarbia's studs]

Yep - social media reaches millions... some Youtube channels get far more views that television shows or movies for each uploaded video – it cannot be stressed how important it is to get a grip on it... as much as I hate the Rags, they recognised in 1992 what the PL would mean in terms of TV and sponsorship revenues exploding due to the global reach Sky offered – they exploited that to their gain from day one, like no-one else did – and it would seem they're very savvy when it comes to Social Media too... and regardless of what anyone thinks of Twitter or Youtube etc. etc. etc., a club like us has more than embrace it, we actively have to use it as a propaganda tool to project a positive image.

YT is bile, bar the algorithms which are awesome. It s better to work and invest with a separate independent streaming Co. IMO.

 

[manchester blue]

Ah but the non-game was days ago, PR/shamed into it perhaps?

He does always come across as a nice guy in general.

Absolutely!

 

[jrb]

This is the power of social media.

Some no-mark Scouser.

210 comments.
587 retweets.
5400 likes.

Now replicate that with the same story posted by other social media outlets and users.

I won’t post the link. But you can guess the narative.

 

[BringBackSwales]

View attachment 7407

Not so much as a fucking question mark

 

[bobbyowenquiff]

Perhaps it is you that doesn't understand social media. If City issue any kind of statement the main stream media would then be able to publish the story, it would be slanted, after passing through the lawyers, in a way to make Walker sound guilty even though he was in Manchester throughout. Idiots with a keyboard will in this day and age spew any old shite out, (look at Trump on Twitter) By posting it on here we are just giving it life instead of letting it die a quick quiet death.

I agree it would be a mistake to always respond to every bit of tittle tattle on social media but when a false damaging story is in wide circulation you have to quash it. It is possible City have briefed the main media outlets privately with a strong denial and if they have done so then that's great.
But you simply can't ignore false narratives because they can be incredibly damaging to an organisation and everyone who works for it. Trump is a bad example to use because he ended up as President precisely because his opponents were complacent about what he did on Twitter until it was too late.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

What is happening with walker? Is this true or is this manufactured shit?

Kyle Walker's Christmas Party In London Causes Premier League COVID Infections - Global247News All the News, All the Time

Football fans across the world are furious at reports that Manchester City’s star defender has brought about the spreading of Coronavirus throughout the

global247news.com

The report seems to come from a lfc echo reporter so not sure if it is bollocks or not

In fact if it is bollocks feel free to delete this, I hate being duped into misinformation spreading

Looks like age has caught Elton by surprise.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Sometimes it is best not to dignify it with a comment

Mostly that's exactly right. But it seems in this particular case that City are briefing sources that it's not true. If that's the case then they should put out a public statement to that effect, saying that they will be taking action against the originator and any outlet repeating it. And then take that action.

Because it's one thing just denying it but that will lay them open to more shit like this, when someone publishes something and Vicky Kloss and her team spend all day and night on the phones sorting it out. If you take firm action then people know they're liable to pay a heavy price for being lying dickheads in future, instead of it just being a laugh they get away with.

 

[remember arthur mann]

Seriously. Have these Hacks got now shame about stealing living by continually making up fake and untrue stories?

Hack =
1. A person who works solely for mercenary purposes.
2. A writer who works on order, also a writer who aims solely for commercial success.

 

[manchester blue]

about fucking time

Shall we put this to bed? Bernardo was banned 52 days after his Tweet and Cavani 29 days. The FA have at least been consistent in the time taken and upholding their rules whilst they allowed Cavani time to respond.

The real story here is Sky Sports who had 18 Bernardo stories, most pushing for a ban, including comments from university race experts and the like. For Cavani they had three stories, universally apologetic and insisting that the word, which is deemed that awful it's been pixilated out of most reports, was lost in translation.

 

[Shirley]

L

... as some have said, look at how Rashford's campaign has been reported opposed to Vinnie's campaign for the homeless... that's down to United using their influencers to constantly post positive stuff.

The BBC were certainly their influencer for that campaign.

 

[blue b4 the moon]

Shall we put this to bed? Bernardo was banned 52 days after his Tweet and Cavani 29 days. The FA have at least been consistent in the time taken and upholding their rules whilst they allowed Cavani time to respond.

The real story here is Sky Sports who had 18 Bernardo stories, most pushing for a ban, including comments from university race experts and the like. For Cavani they had three stories, universally apologetic and insisting that the word, which is deemed that awful it's been pixilated out of most reports, was lost in translation.

This is the point we should all be aware of.

It's fallen lucky for the 'luckiest' team in the world that his ban really with respect to Villa & Watford only really covers one important game ....ours.

 

[bobbyowenquiff]

No, the original poster was right - I truly don't think City have grasped what Social Media does... and whilst your right about City posting would spark keyboard idiots - that's because City have allowed this to happen by being 'reactive' instead of 'proactive'.
Clubs like United and Liverpool... and many more (businesses, movie companies etc.) all employ influencers – people with blue checks that reach large audiences that will post positive articles about them and negative articles about their rivals/competition, and because they have a blue tick, and reach a larger audience research shows people will more readily believe and agree with what they post.
Now Football is a bit different in so much as some influencers are fans first and will do the clubs bidding for free - people like Luckhurst or Mitten, who United fanzine writers that have bizarrely got themselves into a position whereby they can influence by being 'journalists' – if Joe Bloggs posts something on Twitter, not many take notice - but if Joe Bloggs, Chief Sportswriter for the MEN posts, a lot of people suddenly take notice.
Then you have journalists that maybe have no real affiliation with a club like United, but because the club have played the game right and got such a massive audience online, they will tow the clubs line for fear of missing out on that audience – clicks generate money, simple as that.
You then get a more sinister side – that we're very familiar with whereby it's political due to our owners nationality – blue-checkmarks posting derogatory things about them... which again, Joe Public will believe verbatim, without realising those said Posters have very strong ties to political/national openants to them... How many of the nobs we regularly see posting sh!t on Twitter have Qatari links for example.

What City need to do is - instead of taking on the crap that's already there - is to start 'influencing' positivity about City... it won't be easy, but they have to start getting blue checkmarks to bang the City drum... as some have said, look at how Rashford's campaign has been reported opposed to Vinnie's campaign for the homeless... that's down to United using their influencers to constantly post positive stuff.

Great post. Being proactive with your communications is almost always the right approach (the exceptions being sensitive legal battles where caution is often the best course till you know the outcome) It is a very complex business and an area of weakness for City in my view. We are very good at the soft community material though.These days there is no real separation between established media and social media. The only thing that matters is audience.

 

[citizen_maine]

Mostly that's exactly right. But it seems in this particular case that City are briefing sources that it's not true. If that's the case then they should put out a public statement to that effect, saying that they will be taking action against the originator and any outlet repeating it. And then take that action.

Because it's one thing just denying it but that will lay them open to more shit like this, when someone publishes something and Vicky Kloss and her team spend all day and night on the phones sorting it out. If you take firm action then people know they're liable to pay a heavy price for being lying dickheads in future, instead of it just being a laugh they get away with.

Problem is this story originated on twitter and no 'legitimate' media source has touched it with a bargepole. I can just imagine the furore if we went after some no-mark to make an example of them

 

[Heath Park]

This is the point we should all be aware of.

It's fallen lucky for the 'luckiest' team in the world that his ban really with respect to Villa & Watford only really covers one important game ....ours.

True but that is the only game we care about!!!

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Problem is this story originated on twitter and no 'legitimate' media source has touched it with a bargepole. I can just imagine the furore if we went after some no-mark to make an example of them

Liverpool got a veteran journalist sacked and there was no furore. It would make some other no-marks stop and think. One click bait site has published it and they should be the first port of call for our lawyers.

 

[LongsightM13]

Shall we put this to bed? Bernardo was banned 52 days after his Tweet and Cavani 29 days. The FA have at least been consistent in the time taken and upholding their rules whilst they allowed Cavani time to respond.

The real story here is Sky Sports who had 18 Bernardo stories, most pushing for a ban, including comments from university race experts and the like. For Cavani they had three stories, universally apologetic and insisting that the word, which is deemed that awful it's been pixilated out of most reports, was lost in translation.

Dont think The Mirror’s back page headline about Bernardo was “NOT A RACIST” either.
About as subtle as Father Ted’s slideshow presentation to the residents of Craggy Island’s Chinatown

 

[bobbyowenquiff]

Mostly that's exactly right. But it seems in this particular case that City are briefing sources that it's not true. If that's the case then they should put out a public statement to that effect, saying that they will be taking action against the originator and any outlet repeating it. And then take that action.

Because it's one thing just denying it but that will lay them open to more shit like this, when someone publishes something and Vicky Kloss and her team spend all day and night on the phones sorting it out. If you take firm action then people know they're liable to pay a heavy price for being lying dickheads in future, instead of it just being a laugh they get away with.

Agreed. You should always choose your battles carefully but you would never see big organisations like Coca Cola, Disney etc being pushed around and undermined by these sort of incidents. If this story is false then it is as libellous as it gets and we have some of the toughest libel laws in the world. It would be very easy to shut these clowns down. In the long-run this robust approach would make life easier for people like Vicky Kloss. I have a lot of sympathy for our Comms people because I suspect City's softly softly approach (which hasn't really worked for us in the last decade) is driven by people at the top. I wouldn't be surprised if there has been a lot of internal debate about how we approach these sort of issues.