Disgraceful Journalism again by MUEN

[Hamann Pineapple]

I think it's difficult not to have bias when it comes to football. My opinion on incidents depend on whether a City player is involved or not. Journalists are no different to anyone else and will write articles with their own interests at heart. It's easy to say 'be professional' or 'be impartial' but in reality we all hold our own prejudices. I have an irrational hatred for anyone from Torquay and treat them accordingly at work. Look at The Telegraph and SKY's headline on Cavani's quotes today. He said he'd like to play for Pellegrini or Mourinho yet the headlines states his desire to play for Chelsea. No agenda here.

 

[ancoats]

somebody said to me the other night would you buy the Manchester evening news without any sport pages

I had to think about it but still said no

 

[Dethred]

Why put an apology in the MEN? He was commenting and should be commended on it for being honest. It is not the first time SB has been on here

I'd be more interested in wondering... why post the apology on a fan forum, when you admit to fucking up in the actual press? Apologizing to a relatively small audience in a forum is the easy, ineffective attempt at solving the problem.

The professional solution would be to remove the article, post the proper information (which in this case would be a rebuttal of the Daily Mail hack job) and an apology - or at least an acknowledgment of wrong-doing.

Perhaps Mr. Brennan could put the issue of the "MUEN" moniker to bed, by posting a few instances of his employer reporting slanderous, or patently false and damagingly misleading information about Manchester United. I'd love to see actual evidence from a news outlet.

 

[The Flash]

Why put an apology in the MEN? He was commenting and should be commended on it for being honest. It is not the first time SB has been on here

I'd be more interested in wondering... why post the apology on a fan forum, when you admit to fucking up in the actual press? Apologizing to a relatively small audience in a forum is the easy, ineffective attempt at solving the problem.

The professional solution would be to remove the article, post the proper information (which in this case would be a rebuttal of the Daily Mail hack job) and an apology - or at least an acknowledgment of wrong-doing.

Perhaps Mr. Brennan could put the issue of the "MUEN" moniker to bed, by posting a few instances of his employer reporting slanderous, or patently false and damagingly misleading information about Manchester United. I'd love to see actual evidence from a news outlet.

But that is what exactly Stuart Brennan did. The article was removed and, as senior football correspondent, he acknowledged the report was incorrect.

What should have happened is that the article shouldn't have been posted at all. It's not the MEN's place to 'rebutt' a story printed in another newspaper.

However, what I'm in total agreement with you on Dethred, is that had such a 'story' been written about United, it would never have seen the light of day. And had even a watered down version been printed in the nationals, there is no way on God's earth it would ever have been seen in The MEN.

There is a complete media blackout on United at the moment. Because they all know that if Moyes doesn't hit the ground running from day one, they WILL NOT be able to ignore it and not report on it. Fergie retiring is the WORST thing that could have happened for a United reporter. The scent of possible cataclysmic failure is in the air. However they try and dress Moyes up, the BEST they can print at the moment is that "he's a safe pair of hands", when in reality it is a horrible horrible gamble.

He has to be getting results from day one, because if he doesn't, United face the awful prospect of 35000 empty seats at league games. Serve up the dross witnessed at Neverton over the last decade and it is the worst scenario imaginable for Sky, the press, everyone.

I for one will be sat with Popcorn cat when it comes to the Rags this season.

 

[stuart brennan]

I'd be more interested in wondering... why post the apology on a fan forum, when you admit to fucking up in the actual press? Apologizing to a relatively small audience in a forum is the easy, ineffective attempt at solving the problem.

The professional solution would be to remove the article, post the proper information (which in this case would be a rebuttal of the Daily Mail hack job) and an apology - or at least an acknowledgment of wrong-doing.

Perhaps Mr. Brennan could put the issue of the "MUEN" moniker to bed, by posting a few instances of his employer reporting slanderous, or patently false and damagingly misleading information about Manchester United. I'd love to see actual evidence from a news outlet.

For a start, this didn't go in the newspaper at all - it was up on the website overnight, piut there by someone temporarily standing in for the sports website fella (we have a skeleton staff on a Sunday), and was taken down as soon as I and the regular sports website lad became fully aware of it.
It wasn't "slanderous" (when written, it is libellous, "slanderous" is only word of mouth), nor patently false, nor was it damaging, in any way.
And, of course, we try not to publish things that are slanderous etc, about any club - as I said, this was an error, made by one individual working on his own, under pressure. To ask us to come up with instances of writing "slanderous" things about United is just stupid.
Why would we knowingly libel United, or City, or anyone, when to do so costs you money?
You seem to think it was done deliberately, as part of some stupid agenda - if that's the case, why would we take it down, just because a few Blues moaned about it.
Some people are just so busy trying to fit things to their ridiculous MUEN agenda, that they can't see the fact of the matter.

 

[Ducado]

I'd be more interested in wondering... why post the apology on a fan forum, when you admit to fucking up in the actual press? Apologizing to a relatively small audience in a forum is the easy, ineffective attempt at solving the problem.

The professional solution would be to remove the article, post the proper information (which in this case would be a rebuttal of the Daily Mail hack job) and an apology - or at least an acknowledgment of wrong-doing.

Perhaps Mr. Brennan could put the issue of the "MUEN" moniker to bed, by posting a few instances of his employer reporting slanderous, or patently false and damagingly misleading information about Manchester United. I'd love to see actual evidence from a news outlet.

For a start, this didn't go in the newspaper at all - it was up on the website overnight, piut there by someone temporarily standing in for the sports website fella (we have a skeleton staff on a Sunday), and was taken down as soon as I and the regular sports website lad became fully aware of it.
It wasn't "slanderous" (when written, it is libellous, "slanderous" is only word of mouth), nor patently false, nor was it damaging, in any way.
And, of course, we try not to publish things that are slanderous etc, about any club - as I said, this was an error, made by one individual working on his own, under pressure. To ask us to come up with instances of writing "slanderous" things about United is just stupid.
Why would we knowingly libel United, or City, or anyone, when to do so costs you money?
You seem to think it was done deliberately, as part of some stupid agenda - if that's the case, why would we take it down, just because a few Blues moaned about it.
Some people are just so busy trying to fit things to their ridiculous MUEN agenda, that they can't see the fact of the matter.

Well played for coming on here Stuart, I am sure many will give you some respect for that, I certainley do

 

[Blue Pimp]

Glad Mr Brennan has come on, shows that he may care, sadly I along with my family do not buy MEN now because of poor journalism like this story. May give it a chance again now he has come and replied on here.

 

[stuart brennan]

Glad Mr Brennan has come on, shows that he may care, sadly I along with my family do not buy MEN now because of poor journalism like this story. May give it a chance again now he has come and replied on here.

You needn't have worried, because this "story" did not go in the MEN - and it never would have done.

 

[penalty spot]

It is a shame that the MEN paper has become less well thought of by City fans these days. Once upon a time it was a United journo ...David Meek v Gardener in the blue corner . Then I suppose , the sports media at some stage, and to sell copies to vast United followers throughout the country, started to print " friendly articles" which is the state we are in at the moment. Very quiet on the Moyes front, eerily quiet.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

It is a shame that the MEN paper has become less well thought of by City fans these days. Once upon a time it was a United journo ...David Meek v Gardener in the blue corner . Then I suppose , the sports media at some stage, and to sell copies to vast United followers throughout the country, started to print " friendly articles" which is the state we are in at the moment. Very quiet on the Moyes front, eerily quiet.

Peter Gardener was a Blackpool fan iirc.