PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

Roachy said:
Any indication which wanker wrote it and allowed it to be published?
Click to expand...
No mate. They wrote:

We’re sorry for the mistakes made here, and we’d like to thank you for flagging this to us. We’ve shared your disappointment with the team at BBC Sport, which helps to inform our work moving forward

who the team are at BBC sport fuck knows
 
nmc said:
I personally had a conversation re the Pete the Badge story with a senior Exec at the BBC and even when banged to rights…. He just kept repeating the lie…. Have zero respect for the BBC following that.
Click to expand...
There is a cultural problem in the online and social media teams. They are unprofessional and inexperienced. There is a lack of editorial control. There are good people at Salford but they are frozen out. It’s a total shitshow.
 
Bluemoon230989 said:
Reply received about that BBC "article". I'll post in the media thread as well.

Thanks for contacting us about an article on our BBC Sport website, now headlined ‘Manchester City 115 charges explained: What is latest on club's PSR case?’ (https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/cgrjv9ydv31o).

The initial version of this article featured some errors in language in some of the headings and subheadings, which could have given readers the impression that we were assuming guilt on the part of Manchester City, relating to alleged breaches of Premier League rules.

The article was written as an internet search ‘Question and Answer’, setting out to answer some of the most popular searches off the back of Everton and Nottingham Forest’s breaches of PSR rules. The headings in the article were made up of the most prevalent searches by fans, but we didn’t explain this context in the piece, which then could have given the impression we were assuming guilt. The article itself however, did repeatedly outline City’s defence and denial of all charges.

We have now corrected this language, and added some further context as to where the questions in the piece were taken from.

We’re sorry for the mistakes made here, and we’d like to thank you for flagging this to us. We’ve shared your disappointment with the team at BBC Sport, which helps to inform our work moving forward.

This is our response at Stage 1a of the BBC’s complaints process. If you’re dissatisfied with this reply, a follow-up complaint may be considered at Stage 1b. You must submit a follow-up within 20 working days through the BBC Complaints webform. If you do decide to contact us again, please include your case number, and explain why you feel your complaint has not been addressed. We will then review your complaint.

Thanks again and wishing you all the best,

BBC Complaints Team
www.bbc.co.uk/complaints
Click to expand...
At least they listened to you but they should have done more than just correct the article. They should have apologised publicly for the errors and explained why their initial comments were wrong.
You can do no more though. Well done
 
mcfcphil said:
Great perseverance, well done.

It was clear as day that something had gone badly, badly wrong with that article which is demonstrated in the BBC’s response - completely indefensible even for them.

I’m also not one to bash the City comms team because it’s a tough gig, but they should have been all over this and had it pulled - not corrected - as soon as it was published.

The fact it took a fan to intervene is ridiculous.
Click to expand...
They probably didn’t comment on legal advice but I hope someone at City sees this thread and passes the information on to Khaldoon.

They should be aware, if not already, that the fans are sick of this now. I was always happy to win this case and move on but it’s so bad that if/when this case is won I would hope City take the necessary action to ensure media outlets can’t get away with this indefinitely.

Elton John used to sue every untruth printed about him and give the money to charity. The mainstream press lost so much money it wasn’t worth it in the end and they eventually stopped. I’m not saying City should do the same but winning the case isn’t enough, they have to make a point in the same way Sterling did and call the worst of them out for what it is.

We pay for the BBC to give us facts not one idiot’s opinion. They should have the guts to print their name and fire them.

Good on Bluemoon.
 
Last edited:
TueartsOHK said:
No mate. They wrote:

We’re sorry for the mistakes made here, and we’d like to thank you for flagging this to us. We’ve shared your disappointment with the team at BBC Sport, which helps to inform our work moving forward

who the team are at BBC sport fuck knows
Click to expand...
Exactly - would have been better if they’d shared it with their readers.
 
TueartsOHK said:
No mate. They wrote:

We’re sorry for the mistakes made here, and we’d like to thank you for flagging this to us. We’ve shared your disappointment with the team at BBC Sport, which helps to inform our work moving forward

who the team are at BBC sport fuck knows
Click to expand...
Thanks.
 
Sale Moor Blue said:
The BBC should be shut down.
Click to expand...
It's a mute point if you don't pay a licence fee
mcfcphil said:
Great perseverance, well done.

It was clear as day that something had gone badly, badly wrong with that article which is demonstrated in the BBC’s response - completely indefensible even for them.

I’m also not one to bash the City comms team because it’s a tough gig, but they should have been all over this and had it pulled - not corrected - as soon as it was published.

The fact it took a fan to intervene is ridiculous.
Click to expand...
The club are playing it right, no response only winds them up more, to the point where they become negligent.
Yes unfortunately us fans have to take this shit but that last response is a admission of wrong doing from them.
The mood has changed this last week or so.
I think I know why.
 
Silva61 said:
It's a mute point if you don't pay a licence fee

The club are playing it right, no response only winds them up more, to the point where they become negligent.
Yes unfortunately us fans have to take this shit but that last response is a admission of wrong doing from them.
The mood has changed this last week or so.
I think I know why.
Click to expand...
Did you mean 'moot' or have I missed some clever joke about silencing the BBC?
; )
 
The content in the article was probably created by AI similar to ChatGPT, verified by AI and edited by AI (no AI was used in the creation of this post)
 
That article by the BBC was so amateurish that it makes me wonder if they have had these mythical letters?

It's almost as if they wanted to be biased. Maybe it was a City fan that did the article, hoping to influence the case against City.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top