PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[BertTrautmann'sParachute]

I think we all know whats coming regardless of whether were guilty or not. You only have to look at that terry flewers quote tweets on a post about settlement. Were going to be guilty regardless.

Guilty of being better than everyone else. I can live with that.

 

[BertTrautmann'sParachute]

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)

I hear the original article was written in crayon by Simon Stone.

 

[Mr Fraser]

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)

Not very knowledgeable about AI apart from it is in development , but if it was written by AI and about a high profile area of sports news then robust procedures would be in place prior to publication

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

BBCIAC

 

[Revolver]

A shoddy article that wouldn’t never have seen the light of day if it had been written about the BBCs beloved Liverpool or United.

Well done City fans who wrote into complain. It’s beyond me why the club didn’t officially complain. Fear of whatever is the only thing I can think of.

But again well done for those who called these amateurs out.

 

[bobbyowenquiff]

Not very knowledgeable about AI apart from it is in development , but if it was written by AI and about a high profile area of sports news then robust procedures would be in place prior to publication

I admire your optimism. I don't think procedures these days are as robust as they once were.

 

[mattcity5]

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

I sent them this, wonder if I'll get an actual answer...

YOUR COMPLAINT:


Numerous inaccuracies and no writer identified  


I understand you have made numerous changes to this article, which in its original format was horrendously inaccurate, biased and misleading. Well done for making the changes, but the article should never have been published in its original format and is still merely adequate now.

I have a question that I would like a response to, in order to understand something.

Why does the article not include who it was written by?

Is this because it was meant to be inflammatory? Is it because it was a team effort? Is it because it was rushed hatchet job that nobody wanted to admit to?

Seriously, I'm just speculating there. Please can you provide guidelines on why some articles give clarity of who they were written by, while some don't? It confuses me a little.


Thanks
Matt 

 

[blueinbrazil]

I sent them this, wonder if I'll get an actual answer...

YOUR COMPLAINT:


Numerous inaccuracies and no writer identified  


I understand you have made numerous changes to this article, which in its original format was horrendously inaccurate, biased and misleading. Well done for making the changes, but the article should never have been published in its original format and is still merely adequate now.

I have a question that I would like a response to, in order to understand something.

Why does the article not include who it was written by?

Is this because it was meant to be inflammatory? Is it because it was a team effort? Is it because it was rushed hatchet job that nobody wanted to admit to?

Seriously, I'm just speculating there. Please can you provide guidelines on why some articles give clarity of who they were written by, while some don't? It confuses me a little.


Thanks
Matt 

If I had to hazard a guess, and their reply hints at this, I would say it is mostly AI generated giberish that is pulled from the internet to generate hits

 

[mcfcphil]

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.

Disagree.

If an organisation the size of the BBC publishes an inaccurate/ misleading article about your business you tell them to take it down.

I’m not saying City issue a public statement, they just flag it with the BBC and tell them to get it unpublished.

It’s no big deal. It’s a 10 minute job and it happens all that time in large businesses.

 

[Gaylord du Bois]

It's a mute point if you don't pay a licence fee

Shush now.

 

[ufo]

If I had to hazard a guess, and their reply hints at this, I would say it is mostly AI generated giberish that is pulled from the internet to generate hits

Your honour , it’s not me , it’s that AI thing.Again.

 

[LeonardoDaVnci]

There is a media organization that all of us are legally forced to subscribe to, it's called the BBC and the annual fee is currently £169.50. They are absolutely front and central on the constant attacks into City and have been from day one. The content used by Der Spiegel and the Sunday Times was all provided by a group called "European Investigative Collaborations", (https://eic.network/) the BBC are quite open about their leading role in that group. Last summer after the treble victory they ran a "115 Charges" story on BBC World presented by Ross Atkins. It was an absolute hatchet job that could have been scripted on Rag Cafe. Right at the very end after five minutes of besmirching the club, smearing the owners and sponsors it ended with the cursory "City deny any wrong doing". It's estimated that 320 million people watch BBC World. Although the BBC coverage of Co-Live morphed into a weird rant about Ms Tiffin on here, it was a perfect illustration how a good news story was turned into an attack on MCFC. There are far too many examples of Dan Roan and Simon Stone attacks to be mentioned here.

So I would say the BBC is the absolute litmus test of any change or moderation in the media treatment of the "115 Charges". I'll be watching them in the next few days...

[aside] has anyone noticed how they never mention anything negative about the owners of MCFC in the coverage of the Women's team. That must be caused by a "clash of BBC agendas"...

Did I provoke them ? Delusional by me I know but seems quite a coincidence. Are the BBC so petty and in such a rush to prove C&D letters had NOT been sent they produced that abomination. Makes you wonder how the hell can the public believe anything they say about extremely serious issues, Israel, climate change, Russia...

 

[waspish]

I sent them this, wonder if I'll get an actual answer...

YOUR COMPLAINT:


Numerous inaccuracies and no writer identified  


I understand you have made numerous changes to this article, which in its original format was horrendously inaccurate, biased and misleading. Well done for making the changes, but the article should never have been published in its original format and is still merely adequate now.

I have a question that I would like a response to, in order to understand something.

Why does the article not include who it was written by?

Is this because it was meant to be inflammatory? Is it because it was a team effort? Is it because it was rushed hatchet job that nobody wanted to admit to?

Seriously, I'm just speculating there. Please can you provide guidelines on why some articles give clarity of who they were written by, while some don't? It confuses me a little.


Thanks
Matt 

Also why wasn't something so serious wasn't fact checked?

 

[Paladin]

Let's hope they don't get AI to carry out the investigation.

 

[Gorton_Tubster]

Also why wasn't something so serious wasn't fact checked?

Its a very wierd one isnt it. Almost like they wanted to show bias against City.

Wouldnt it be good for all parties if the media were held to account for spoiling the PL case and it had to be dropped.

 

[Chris in London]

What happended to a public funded broadcaster being impartial.

That ship, so far as football is concerned, set sail a long time ago.

 

[HarrytheBlue]

Pretty much word for word the same response I got. You’d almost think that they’ve used an email template and banged it out to every City fan that complained :-)

Standard reply - generalised lines to take from a list of bullet points.

 

[Stoned Rose]

Let's hope they don't get AI to carry out the investigation.

Bundy?

 

[JASR]

You never know.

If so, worrying that even AI is against us...

Not really, the AI will have been trained on what’s out there in the media, and we know on this thread, the media is pretty much a frothing at the mouth fantasy when it comes to City, the AI will just reflect that. Garbage in = garbage out.

 

[Champions again in 2012]

Standard reply - generalised lines to take from a list of bullet points.

surely one of the key questions should be “how does this get approved by the duty editor?”