Exposing the hypocrisy of journalists

Metalartin said:
I can't get over how petty and childish some of the "professional" journalists are acting.

They've repeatedly been caught stating bullshit and not knowing their own subject matter by everyday fans, which they rightly should be embarrassed by. Instead of owning it and taking the necessary steps to rectify their loss of face properly, by doing some proper impartial research with an open view. Not just cherry picking bits and pieces, to justify the conclusion they wanted before they started writing.

Instead they just weaponise their medium and claim Rabin is a whole PR department and the fans who do engage with them via social media, have been "weaponised by those tricky Arabs"(whenever this kind of logic is applied by a member on here it's usually met with tinfoil hat jokes).

It just reeks of sad little men coming up with reasons why nobody is allowed to disagree with them or play them at their own game.

Since City fans have cottoned onto what you were clearly doing and in some cases continue to do. Why not instead knock that bullshit on the head and show the fans you have learned? That you aren't just out to tar and feather a club because you're a childish little Rag/Liverpool fanboy with a job that gives you a voice and a little bit of power that goes with that.

In any other line of work you'd have been called into the boss' office and given your marching orders, so stop with self pity inspired articles.
Click to expand...
Its also a sign of small cock syndrome ..
 
Gorton_Tubster said:
If I have learnt anything about these guys its that they are not professional. No way. How are they allowed to have such a loud voice.
Click to expand...
Because folk give them oxygen by spreading their output on here.
If you unplug from it all and stop “following” them it all disappears (until someone posts it all on here obviously). You’re all giving them exactly what they want and helping pay their salaries.
Twitter is infested with grown-arse man-children pursuing social media drama and gossiping like bitches.
 
Gorton_Tubster said:
If I have learnt anything about these guys its that they are not professional. No way. How are they allowed to have such a loud voice.
Click to expand...

Because people read their stuff. And people read their stuff because the world suffers from a rag 'n' dipper overpopulation problem.

I personally don't care who they support; they don't have a "red" agenda. They have a "be read" agenda.

City is an easy target. That's the motivation, and as the club's success grows, journos need to find larger and larger issues to whack the club for to ensure red-supporting eyeballs.

We've moved on from the football, which can't be criticized (and even they, in a modicum of periodic professionalism as writers, sometimes praise it as they fall over themselves to point out).

I keep coming back to the fact that this is all pretty simple really.

And what journalist wants to admit its their topic not their own investigative chops, deep insight or mellifluous prose that catches eyeballs in a headline-only world?

No journalist.
 
FogBlueInSanFran said:
Because people read their stuff. And people read their stuff because the world suffers from a rag 'n' dipper overpopulation problem.

I personally don't care who they support; they don't have a "red" agenda. They have a "be read" agenda.

City is an easy target. That's the motivation, and as the club's success grows, journos need to find larger and larger issues to whack the club for to ensure red-supporting eyeballs.

We've moved on from the football, which can't be criticized (and even they, in a modicum of periodic professionalism as writers, sometimes praise it as they fall over themselves to point out).

I keep coming back to the fact that this is all pretty simple really.

And what journalist wants to admit its their topic not their own investigative chops, deep insight or mellifluous prose that catches eyeballs in a headline-only world?

No journalist.
Click to expand...
Spot on mate. Blues are falling for it left right and centre and are worryingly obsessed with it all.
The sad thing is this forum is slowly being taken over by content from twitter - even if you’re not on it you can’t escape its absolute childish bollocks.
 
Machiavelli said:
Spot on mate. Blues are falling for it left right and centre and are worryingly obsessed with it all.
The sad thing is this forum is slowly being taken over by content from twitter - even if you’re not on it you can’t escape its absolute childish bollocks.
Click to expand...
Yet here you are, following this thread, and replying to it....

Why not just ignore it, if it winds you up that much?
 
Bilboblue said:
Yet here you are, following this thread, and replying to it....

Why not just ignore it, if it winds you up that much?
Click to expand...

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.
 
FogBlueInSanFran said:
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.

"There is only one thing in life worse than being talked about, and that is not being talked about."

But it doesn't matter to me if we read them or not -- I read some, not others. What matters is why understand why they're being written. And it isn't because the author hates City (though he might). It's because it gets them eyeballs. And the joy 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!

I could write about how much I hate the third cousin of the governor of Tasmania and no one would read it nor care -- except maybe the subject.
Click to expand...

I meant about twitter being linked on here, and Machi, no, I'm not sad, but whingeing about something that you contribute too, could be construed as sad. Each to their own.
 
Bilboblue said:
I meant about twitter being linked on here, and Machi, no, I'm not sad, but whingeing about something that you contribute too, could be construed as sad. Each to their own.
Click to expand...
It’s only you doing the whingeing here. Not just about folk like me pointing out what I have but whingeing about some arseholes on Twitter who’ve said nasty things about us. Boohoo. Man-children.
 
Rolee said:
They wanted City fans to take the Der Spiegel articles as proof of wrongdoing despite the fact we hadn't been found guilty of anything. When we didn't we were labelled 'vicious rats', if anything weaponised City fans it was when some in the press start attacking us.
Click to expand...

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.
 
Rolee said:
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.
Click to expand...
Haha a Ronnie Irani moment.
 
FogBlueInSanFran said:
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.
Click to expand...
I live in Tassie and I care Foggy!
 
FootballSense said:
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
Click to expand...

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?!
 
MillionMilesAway said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
Chris in London said:
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.
Click to expand...

Absolutely right, everyone seems to have their dirty hands in trough.
 
Chris in London said:
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.
Click to expand...

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

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!
 
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