Exposing the hypocrisy of journalists

Fame Monster said:
Great post mate.

We need to challenge the lies any way we can so they realise they can't just write any old negative shit about us to pander to Liverpool and United fans.

Obviously, the best way to do is that with reasoned argument and showing why their article is untruthful or hypocritical so we need the generals like you and Rabin to intelligently point out their mistakes.

Given that I have no official affiliation with the club, I also think we need soldiers like me who carry out the civilian bombing campaigns by writing negative book reviews of said journalists so they're hit where the money hurts too.
Click to expand...
If City fans want to write polemics in the commercial media against certain positions that's fine. However, I do not agree that City fans should spend their leisure time discussing football, and generating media revenue in so doing, on a hostile media-hosted platform. Boycotting Guardian media group is entirely compatible with an activist approach. If City fans want to take on Jamie Jackson, Barney Ronay, Sachin Nakrani etc in their newspaper that's fine by me, but the activity I object to is post-match discussion and arguing with other fans on their platform. It effectively supports a hostile media. Seems an obvious point, and I have yet to see a rational argument against it.
 
Marvin said:
If City fans want to write polemics in the commercial media against certain positions that's fine. However, I do not agree that City fans should spend their leisure time discussing football, and generating media revenue in so doing, on a hostile media-hosted platform. Boycotting Guardian media group is entirely compatible with an activist approach. If City fans want to take on Jamie Jackson, Barney Ronay, Sachin Nakrani etc in their newspaper that's fine by me, but the activity I object to is post-match discussion and arguing with other fans on their platform. It effectively supports a hostile media. Seems an obvious point, and I have yet to see a rational argument against it.
Click to expand...
They publish good recipes in the lifestyle section?
 
Marvin said:
If City fans want to write polemics in the commercial media against certain positions that's fine. However, I do not agree that City fans should spend their leisure time discussing football, and generating media revenue in so doing, on a hostile media-hosted platform. Boycotting Guardian media group is entirely compatible with an activist approach. If City fans want to take on Jamie Jackson, Barney Ronay, Sachin Nakrani etc in their newspaper that's fine by me, but the activity I object to is post-match discussion and arguing with other fans on their platform. It effectively supports a hostile media. Seems an obvious point, and I have yet to see a rational argument against it.
Click to expand...

It depends really.

If you're donating money to The Guardian, I'd agree that's bad and would question whether you're a City fan.

If you're a free reader of it and there's a blatant, outrageous lie about City contained in the article (which is sadly quite common) or even one of the top comments then an intelligent, factual riposte will probably do more to help our reputation than a few clicks or comments does to harm it.
 
Fame Monster said:
It depends really.

If you're donating money to The Guardian, I'd agree that's bad and would question whether you're a City fan.

If you're a free reader of it and there's a blatant, outrageous lie about City contained in the article (which is sadly quite common) or even one of the top comments then an intelligent, factual riposte will probably do more to help our reputation than a few clicks or comments does to harm it.
Click to expand...

Dead right, the alternative would be an echo chamber with City fans just talking amongst themselves. The Guardian is a paper that needs death to take it and quickly, horrible rag.
 
Fame Monster said:
It depends really.

If you're donating money to The Guardian, I'd agree that's bad and would question whether you're a City fan.

If you're a free reader of it and there's a blatant, outrageous lie about City contained in the article (which is sadly quite common) or even one of the top comments then an intelligent, factual riposte will probably do more to help our reputation than a few clicks or comments does to harm it.
Click to expand...
Some City fans have been using Guardian Football as they would use Bluemoon. I don't object to people exposing arguments, lies, etc. but that's not so easy. In practice, it provides a focus for trolls and ends in a mud-slinging exercise. You get drawn into arguments that you cannot win, all hosted by a grateful platform that keeps stirring the pot.
 
“First they ignore you. Then they ridicule you. And then they attack you and want to burn you. And then they build monuments to you,” - Nicholas Klein.

If PrestwichBlue says it's a war, then it's a war. I don't know what's the right approach but I can only say is that we're winning slowly but surely. Football journos underestimate City's growing international stature and fanbase. These guys aren't sitting in their ivory towers but on crumbling (news) businesses trying to survive by selling words for clicks.

I'd say, raise your voice, for long PrestwichBlue and a few others having been flying the flag of factual rebuttal, this summer a few of us chipped in and i'm sure there will be more.
 
Fame Monster said:
Great post mate.

We need to challenge the lies any way we can so they realise they can't just write any old negative shit about us to pander to Liverpool and United fans.

Obviously, the best way to do is that with reasoned argument and showing why their article is untruthful or hypocritical so we need the generals like you and Rabin to intelligently point out their mistakes.

Given that I have no official affiliation with the club, I also think we need soldiers like me who carry out the civilian bombing campaigns by writing negative book reviews of said journalists so they're hit where the money hurts too.
Click to expand...

Absolutely. We need a combination of approaches - the sensible, measured attacks, along with your tactics. Then you've got the likes of me who is long past the constructive stage and it's just a case of windmilling the ****s! Some might not agree with that and that's fair enough but the way I see it is that one of the worst groups of people one could ever unfairly attack are football fans. It doesn't really matter which club it is as fans will stick together in those circumstances and not take any shit, and if these whoppers think you can attack us as a collective and get away with it without any retaliation then it shows how fucking stupid they are.
 
Last edited:
City_rabin said:
“First they ignore you. Then they ridicule you. And then they attack you and want to burn you. And then they build monuments to you,” - Nicholas Klein.

If PrestwichBlue says it's a war, then it's a war. I don't know what's the right approach but I can only say is that we're winning slowly but surely. Football journos underestimate City's growing international stature and fanbase. These guys aren't sitting in their ivory towers but on crumbling (news) businesses trying to survive by selling words for clicks.

I'd say, raise your voice, for long PrestwichBlue and a few others having been flying the flag of factual rebuttal, this summer a few of us chipped in and i'm sure there will be more.
Click to expand...
The usual usual suspect Twitter bullies (Delaney, et al) definately 'don't like it up em' when folks point out the futile hypocricy of their arguments. They ignore perfectly rational, well though out rebuttal's. It's either their opinion, or nothing. They simply can't put forward an effective argument for any of the crap they spout, and eventually just end up blocking people.

I bet all of them were either bullies or bullied at school.
 
Trevor Morley's Tache said:
The usual usual suspect Twitter bullies (Delaney, et al) definately 'don't like it up em' when folks point out the futile hypocricy of their arguments. They ignore perfectly rational, well though out rebuttal's. It's either their opinion, or nothing. They simply can't put forward an effective argument for any of the crap they spout, and eventually just end up blocking people.

I bet all of them were either bullies or bullied at school.
Click to expand...

I don't know about that but interesting how their conscience doesn't extend to who they work for or didn't kick in when they were being paid by Abu Dhabi.
 
Trevor Morley's Tache said:
The usual usual suspect Twitter bullies (Delaney, et al) definately 'don't like it up em' when folks point out the futile hypocricy of their arguments. They ignore perfectly rational, well though out rebuttal's. It's either their opinion, or nothing. They simply can't put forward an effective argument for any of the crap they spout, and eventually just end up blocking people.

I bet all of them were either bullies or bullied at school.
Click to expand...


I am not much of gamble so i'ld play it safe with i bet they were friendless twunts at school and it didn't improve in their adult life.
 
M18CTID said:
Absolutely. We need a combination of approaches - the sensible, measured attacks, along with your tactics. Then you've got the likes of me who is long past the constructive stage and it's just a case of windmilling the ****s! Some might not agree with that and that's fair enough but the way I see it is that one of the worst groups of people one could ever unfairly attack are football fans. It doesn't really matter which club it is as fans will stick together in those circumstances and not take any shit, and if these whoppers think you can attack us as a collective and get away with it without any retaliation then it shows how fucking stupid they are.
Click to expand...

Every campaign needs an element of shithousery and I'm glad I'm not alone in providing it.
 
City_rabin said:
I don't know about that but interesting how their conscience doesn't extend to who they work for or didn't kick in when they were being paid by Abu Dhabi.
Click to expand...

Have seen some fascinating mental gymnastics in evidence in certain journalists' earnest explanations of why it's perfectly morally acceptable to take cash to write for a state-owned news title based in a repressive Middle Eastern nation but utterly beyond the pale to support a football club owned by a member of the royal family and minister of the government in such a state. Of course, if this is pointed out, they then resort to accusations of 'whataboutery', the weapon of choice for egregious hypocrites everywhere when faced with a need to shut down a discussion of their own rampant double standards.
 
petrusha said:
Have seen some fascinating mental gymnastics in evidence in certain journalists' earnest explanations of why it's perfectly morally acceptable to take cash to write for a state-owned news title based in a repressive Middle Eastern state but beyond the pale to support a football club owned by a member of the royal family and minister of the government in such a state. Of course, if this is pointed out, they then resort to accusations of 'whataboutery', the weapon of choice for egregious hypocrites everywhere when faced with a need to shut down a discussion of their own rampant double standards.
Click to expand...

Fantastically put as always
 
petrusha said:
Have seen some fascinating mental gymnastics in evidence in certain journalists' earnest explanations of why it's perfectly morally acceptable to take cash to write for a state-owned news title based in a repressive Middle Eastern nation but utterly beyond the pale to support a football club owned by a member of the royal family and minister of the government in such a state. Of course, if this is pointed out, they then resort to accusations of 'whataboutery', the weapon of choice for egregious hypocrites everywhere when faced with a need to shut down a discussion of their own rampant double standards.
Click to expand...
The repressive state you refer to was a creation of a British foreign-office that once controlled half the globe, and yet its reporters are forever questioning the governance of its former colonies.
 
Delaney's posted on his Twitter about that review on one of his books (that turns out doesn't exist) so he's obviously reading this thread. He also forgot to mention the 1 star review given to one of his books that does exist and is so bothered about it, he's set up a fake Amazon account to give it a 5 star review. Haha what a pathetic man.

Amazon product ASIN B004BN2D84
If you start to be a bit fairer (and a bit less hypocritical) with the way that you report on City, you might not get all this hassle Miguel.
 
Fame Monster said:
If you start to be a bit fairer (and a bit less hypocritical) with the way that you report on City, you might not get all this hassle Miguel.
Click to expand...
From what I've seen of this Delany character, getting way to personal with City fans, going after Rabin and his wife etc. He can have no complaints. Probably told himself "They have no fans, my twitter fans told me. So I can do what I want" you reap what you sow Miguel.
 
franksinatra said:
To be honest it will probably not work but at least fans who get upset by the coverage wont be ‘casting a vote’ for its continued production.

The positive coverage we get, like the Mirror piece on Silvas goal, should be shared and supported but bizarrely that gets posted and few people comment on it.
Click to expand...
You are right we do focus on the negatives but to offer an argument to your reasoning. Shouldn't that be more like the norm for City instead of what we usually get? Should it really be like finding a needle in a haystack for positive coverage? To the point where we act like we've struck gold down a mine.
 
Metalartin said:
From what I've seen of this Delany character, getting way to personal with City fans, going after Rabin and his wife etc. He can have no complaints. Probably told himself "They have no fans, my twitter fans told me. So I can do what I want" you reap what you sow Miguel.
Click to expand...

When Delaney was spouting off about City and FFP a while back on Twitter, and implying that we were guilty, I told him to stop being a stupid **** and not to believe everything he reads in the papers. For some reason, he went and promptly blocked me.

Fucking shithouse!
 
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