Interview with Daniel Taylor from The Guardian

[George Hannah]

I thought it was fine too.

Some posters seem less able to forgive a repenting sinner than you and I, mate.

The shock for me was him saying how city are the most reactive to the media bad press when every poster on here thought we were the worst .an eye openner to what goes on behind the scenes

Not every poster, mate. A number of us have stated many times that City's press strategy is fine. All this 'ban them' nonsense is the rantings of the ignorant.

Other people's ignorance is indeed your specialist subject. Funny that.

 

[George Hannah]

I thought it was fine too.
Some posters seem less able to forgive a repenting sinner than you and I, mate.

except that he's only a pretend penitent

I find your lack of faith disturbing.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

The thing about Vicky Kloss that some people seem painfully unable to appreciate is that she's clearly working within the limits that have been imposed upon her by the owners.

For reasons which extend beyond footballing ones, they wish to engage with the media in as collaborative a way as is practicable. This means that we are a soft target for those that seek to abuse that state of affairs and why claims from those on here that we receive a fair crack of the whip from the press descend even further into the absurd.

Comparisons with Taggart's banning culture at united are entirely anomalous, as this is not something our owners would wish to contemplate except in the most egregious of circumstances.

If it was up to me I'd be banning the fuckers at will, and I expect Ms Kloss would, at times, yearn for the capacity to do the same, but she's working within a job description with a wider purpose at its heart than her personal wants and needs.

Most people, even those who are self-employed, have limits placed upon the way they operate in a working environment, sports journalists included. Vicky Kloss is simply doing what she's told and those who criticise her personslly for the club's policy of non-confrontation with the press either haven't thought things through, or don't really understand how the world works.

 

[mrtwiceaseason]

I thought it was fine too.

Some posters seem less able to forgive a repenting sinner than you and I, mate.

The shock for me was him saying how city are the most reactive to the media bad press when every poster on here thought we were the worst .an eye openner to what goes on behind the scenes

All this pro-active it's working hey

I guess the flip side to this is if we reckon we get a rough ride from the press now with city being pro active what would it be like if it was like we thought city doing nothing ?
It sorta makes you wonder what is going on at times.

 

[blueinsa]

The thing about Vicky Kloss that some people seem painfully unable to appreciate is that she's clearly working within the limits that have been imposed upon her by the owners.

For reasons which extend beyond footballing ones, they wish to engage with the media in as collaborative a way as is practicable. This means that we are a soft target for those that seek to abuse that state of affairs and why claims from those on here that we receive a fair crack of the whip from the press descend even further into the absurd.

Comparisons with Taggart's banning culture at united are entirely anomalous, as this is not something our owners would wish to contemplate except in the most egregious of circumstances.

If it was up to me I'd be banning the fuckers at will, and I expect Ms Kloss would, at times, yearn for the capacity to do the same, but she's working within a job description with a wider purpose at its heart than her personal wants and needs.

Most people, even those who are self-employed, have limits placed upon the way they operate in a working environment, sports journalists included. Vicky Kloss is simply doing what she's told and those who criticise her personslly for the club's policy of non-confrontation with the press either haven't thought things through, or don't really understand how the world works.

Spot on and she and Garry Cooke confirmed as much when we discussed this in South Africa.

Am I doing this name dropping thing correctly mate?

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

The thing about Vicky Kloss that some people seem painfully unable to appreciate is that she's clearly working within the limits that have been imposed upon her by the owners.

For reasons which extend beyond footballing ones, they wish to engage with the media in as collaborative a way as is practicable. This means that we are a soft target for those that seek to abuse that state of affairs and why claims from those on here that we receive a fair crack of the whip from the press descend even further into the absurd.

Comparisons with Taggart's banning culture at united are entirely anomalous, as this is not something our owners would wish to contemplate except in the most egregious of circumstances.

If it was up to me I'd be banning the fuckers at will, and I expect Ms Kloss would, at times, yearn for the capacity to do the same, but she's working within a job description with a wider purpose at its heart than her personal wants and needs.

Most people, even those who are self-employed, have limits placed upon the way they operate in a working environment, sports journalists included. Vicky Kloss is simply doing what she's told and those who criticise her personslly for the club's policy of non-confrontation with the press either haven't thought things through, or don't really understand how the world works.

Spot on and she and Garry Cooke confirmed as much when we discussed this in South Africa.

Am I doing this name dropping thing correctly mate?

Not bad. Not bad at all.

 

[mrtwiceaseason]

The thing about Vicky Kloss that some people seem painfully unable to appreciate is that she's clearly working within the limits that have been imposed upon her by the owners.

For reasons which extend beyond footballing ones, they wish to engage with the media in as collaborative a way as is practicable. This means that we are a soft target for those that seek to abuse that state of affairs and why claims from those on here that we receive a fair crack of the whip from the press descend even further into the absurd.

Comparisons with Taggart's banning culture at united are entirely anomalous, as this is not something our owners would wish to contemplate except in the most egregious of circumstances.

If it was up to me I'd be banning the fuckers at will, and I expect Ms Kloss would, at times, yearn for the capacity to do the same, but she's working within a job description with a wider purpose at its heart than her personal wants and needs.

Most people, even those who are self-employed, have limits placed upon the way they operate in a working environment, sports journalists included. Vicky Kloss is simply doing what she's told and those who criticise her personslly for the club's policy of non-confrontation with the press either haven't thought things through, or don't really understand how the world works.

Not sure if I agree with the non confrontation bit the interview reads exactly the opposite to me.it looks like we confront them but don't confront them by going through other media sources .I think the policy is to keep it in house

 

[Blue Punter]

I've posted about Daniel Taylor (DT) on here before. Specifically the Semi Final game Vs Chelsea at Wembley a few years ago. I was sat very close to him when he was in the press box that day. With City 2-0 up and apparently coasting, he and many others looked as if someone had shat in their pocket.

I was with a Derby fan and asked him what he was picking up from the press box. He pointed out that a few seemed genuinely happy, but the majority looked mightily pissed off. He had no idea who DT was, but singled him out as looking as unhappy as anyone.

When Demba Ba pulled one back, DT noticeably perked up. Now I can understand that to a point as the game was a contest again. However DT himself has stated that late goals and the rewriting of copy are the bane of the print media. During the second half and at FT, we gave him a bit of verbals, nothing sinister, "Chin up, Daniel" that sort of thing.

When we played Arsenal earlier this year I was waiting for a few lads at the barrier on arrival at Euston. I wasn't wearing colours, but DT approached me and asked me how I thought the game would go. We had a brief but pleasant chat about looking forward to an entertaining game and then he went on his way. I actually respected him for stopping and having a chat, regardless if he remembered me from Wembley.

There's plenty of posters who feel he's been less than even handed about us in the past. For years we were an easy target. Some of it self inflicted, but unnecessarily helped by the likes of Baconface throwing derogatory quotes out to his lapdogs.

As GDM pointed out there's a really good opportunity for someone to acknowledge the standing of City within the game now. We don't want DT or his peers to blow smoke up our arse, but give us credit where its due on and off the pitch.

 

[BillyShears]

I think City's attitude towards the media has changed in the last 18 months. We are much more aggressive these days in how we deal with journalists/media outlets when we feel they have crossed us. Taylor alludes to it in his interview and I know from a couple of friends who work for newspapers/magazines (european ones rather than british ones) that City's current policy is pretty much "we don't want any press", and if you a story is done City don't like, Vicky or Simon Heggie are straight on the phone kicking off about it.

This means lack of access and the lack of real insight we provide to the media is very different from two years ago. We don't covet press of any description, we don't see the value in it anymore I guess.

This was perfectly highlighted in last summer's US tour when most of the papers didn't send anyone on the City tour because City simply refused to make Pellegrini, Soriano, or anyone else of any value available to the hacks.

 

[blueinsa]

I will also add this. Does anyone seriously think that Vicky would still be in the job if she was anything other than 110% capable?