Exposing the hypocrisy of journalists

[blue b4 the moon]

Here's the thing about truth. He claimed in response to someone saying Daddy fixed him up with his career that his parents got divorced when he was 9. He's 34 now, so that would make it 1994 when his parents divorced. The trouble with that is that divorce didn't become legal in Ireland until 1996, with the first divorce in the country being granted in early '97. I merely asked was he sure of his dates, so he blocked me.

Haha a Ronnie Irani moment.

 

[jonah62]

He's not wrong though. My point -- and his -- is that these articles aren't being written for City fans, nor for those who have no view about City nor football -- they're being written for City haters, of which there is an inherently a great number and a greater number the better City get.

I could write about how much I hate the third cousin of the governor of Tasmania and no one would care -- except maybe the subject.

But it doesn't matter so much to me if we read them or not -- I read some, not others.

What matters is understanding why they're being written, not what they say. And it isn't because the author hates City (though he might). It's because it gets them eyeballs.

And the secret joy I get is that the journalists themselves can't and won't admit that, because that makes them whores to their readers -- exactly the opposite of how they see themselves!

Which is why they stumble over themselves like the stammering, weak-livered lemmings they are to defend their "value-added" perspective.

I live in Tassie and I care Foggy!

 

[FootballSense]

It has been reported that the Independent and The Evening Standard and have been explicitly accused by the British government of being part-owned by the Saudi Arabian state:

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2...oncerns-over-saudi-ownership?CMP=share_btn_tw

 

[Rolee]

It has been reported that the Independent and The Evening Standard and have been explicitly accused by the British government of being part-owned by the Saudi Arabian state:

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2...oncerns-over-saudi-ownership?CMP=share_btn_tw

The Independent owned by a state, you couldn't make it up.

 

[squirtyflower]

The Independent owned by a state, you couldn't make it up.

A rogue state funded by dirty oil money

 

[Patientman63]

It has been reported that the Independent and The Evening Standard and have been explicitly accused by the British government of being part-owned by the Saudi Arabian state:

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2...oncerns-over-saudi-ownership?CMP=share_btn_tw

This wouldn't be the same Saudi Arabia that treats women as 2nd class citizens (only last year granted women the right to drive cars) gives immigrant workers little or no rights whatsoever, murdered in cold blood a government critic on foreign soil. The same Saudi Arabia whom that champion of Human Rights, revealer of "sportwashing", and fierce critic of the Abu Dhabi involvement in MCFC, Miguel Delaney works for?

Could such astonishing irony be physically possible?

Surely it can't be?!

 

[Chris in London]

Yes, that, and that we were supporting mass murdering war criminals. Having that as a starting point (actually, I think the starting point was that the City board were mass murdering war criminals), the predictably angry response that was inevitable on Twitter moved it on to attacking fans. I think it was McKenna.

There is a story there which could be written, but the chosen starting point was a poor one.

I agree that the apparent unquestioning acceptance that the Spiegel hacks tell the whole story (a lack of denial from the club used to confirm the 'truth') is a curious standpoint to take. It's like a fan group and some of it is what they accuse the City fans of - anything anti-City is gospel, and anything pro-CIty is questionable.

It’s rhe starting point that tells you all you need to know, isn’t it? If the starting point had been ‘there is a story here that needs investigating, let’s keep an open mind and see where the evidence takes us,’ you might not like his conclusion but you might respect the journalistic process.

When your starting point is a pre conceived idea, it isn’t journalism, its a hatchet job. Which makes you wonder whether the hatchet is being wielded by somebody off their own bat, or whether they’re being paid to wield it.

 

[cheekybids]

It’s rhe starting point that tells you all you need to know, isn’t it? If the starting point had been ‘there is a story here that needs investigating, let’s keep an open mind and see where the evidence takes us,’ you might not like his conclusion but you might respect the journalistic process.

When your starting point is a pre conceived idea, it isn’t journalism, its a hatchet job. Which makes you wonder whether the hatchet is being wielded by somebody off their own bat, or whether they’re being paid to wield it.

Absolutely right, everyone seems to have their dirty hands in trough.

 

[MillionMilesAway]

It’s rhe starting point that tells you all you need to know, isn’t it? If the starting point had been ‘there is a story here that needs investigating, let’s keep an open mind and see where the evidence takes us,’ you might not like his conclusion but you might respect the journalistic process.

When your starting point is a pre conceived idea, it isn’t journalism, its a hatchet job. Which makes you wonder whether the hatchet is being wielded by somebody off their own bat, or whether they’re being paid to wield it.

Pretty much my point, yes. If Jonathan Wilson had writen it, there may be some questionable asides but it would be largely considered - Wilson's got quite a long history of writing about this type of thing, and while some of it I disagree with, most of it I can see what it's built on.

Twitter is perfect to provoke a resistance, and that's exactly what was done here. Some of the City fans argued poorly initially, which just gave the hacks something they could defend.

As for who's driving it, Delaney's post-Cup final piece was so strange (and possibly unique as a 'report'), that I assume the editorial position at the Independent agreed with it.

 

[Gorton_Tubster]

It doesn’t wind me up, who said that?
Sorry if you’re one of the sado’s who I described above X

There are reporters spreading misinformation about our club, some people choose to fight back (And well done to them imo) and some people dont want the stress or dont care or whatever.

Coming into a thread that you dont like and calling the people who do care enough saddo's is shit tbh.

The thread title is quite clear, steer clear of it obviously!