She isn't. That comes from higher up. And (without being funny) the fact it's not working for you is not their primary objective. It's all tied up with bigger stuff. They've got a lot of the more respected journalists on-side since the Hughes/Mancini debacle. The red-tops are a different story though and we'll have to put up with it until the positive stories generate more interest than the negative ones.
But I'm pretty sure, as tolmie's hairdoo says, that we will have a reaction of some sort to that shite in the Mirror, although we may not be aware of it. I do agree that there are times though when we should put our foot down. My solution would be to charge them for a ticket to come in and then put them in a room with just water and stale biscuits, rather than the splendid hospitality they usually enjoy.
The NZ cricket authorities have just gotten into a spot of bother. In a match against Pakistan, involving a Pakistani player who had just returned from a ban for match fixing, when he ran in to bowl they played the sound of a cash register on the PR system.
Perhaps we should do something similar when the official attendance is announced?
All good points. I suppose if we are looking for fairness, we shouldn't really have had the temerity to become one of the most high-profile clubs in the world!
I really don't see how much more we, as a club, can curry good faith, having spent £200m on redeveloping a deprived area of Manchester, sending our kids to grammar school regardless of whether they make the grade with us?
It's done little for the wider narrative and we have seen with FFP how much some things count for.
As you rightly state, the PR strategy is flawed. It's all well and good wanting to be liked, although if they lack respect for you in the first place...
Just keep winning trophies, it hurts more than anything else.
If anyone asks the club for an exclusive interview (with a player for example) they are told that the price of that is a positive piece about what we're doing in the community or for East Manchester. Most aren't interested which is why you see so few genuine City exclusives. No PR person, however good, can force a paper to carry a positive story or to withdraw a negative one, unless it's legally actionable. And at the moment, the numbers of clicks for negative City stories are generally higher that those for positive stories. And at most of the red-tops, journalists are judged by the number of clicks they attract so if they've a choice between a story that paints us in a good light that might only get 1m hits or one that paints us in a negative light, which gets 10m hits, which one do you think they'll go for?
How do you suggest we stop that? Because banning people won't stop that, unless you're someone like the rags where you can actually hurt that paper or journalist by banning them. We can't do that and there's no point in thinking that we can.
I've said it before, but it absolutely deserves repeating. The last time Anfield had a crowd of over 50,000 for a game of football, John Lennon was alive.
Back on topic about tickets what's the planner like atm?
That's hard to imagine? ;-)