Manchester Evening News

[Prestwich_Blue]

Nobody minds opinions. We can disagree with them but if they're honestly held then fair enough. But this idiot has broken one of the key rules of journalism, which is 'check your facts'.

If he was at the match then he was presumably there in the media section. So why not ask one of the media team about the justification for building the extension given there are a few empty seats? It's a legitimate question after all. Then I'm sure he'd have found out about the 5,000 people on the waiting list and the fact that every league home game is sold out.

But he didn't. He saw a few empty seats and came up with a bullshit story questioning the need for the expansion. No thought about people not being able to get there because of work or distance, or the fact that young kids had school the next day. It's like seeing a few empty seats on a plane and questioning whether an airline should be shutting the route down.

 

[Didsbury Dave]

What I don't understand is why the MEN would write overly negative City and United stories. Surely their target audience is both sets of fans and they can write articles with constructed criticism and praise as well. Why on earth would a regional newspaper publish a snidey jibe of an article at one of their potential audiences? it is basic business to keep their readers on side.

If this is an article written to please the United audience then it says more about their fan base, that they need to criticise us rather than praise them to get them onside.

Because one of their journos is a fanzine-level young "Bantz"merchant without the savvy to let go his teenage club loyalties for the sake of his readership. And someone somewhere in editing is a fucking idiot who let this piece be published.

For me I have no issues with the paper writing critical articles about the club. The decision- makers should be accountable to those who holds the clubs best interests at heart and as fans we require an independent press to facilitate this.

Sometimes the truth is not neccessary easy reading and as fans we have to accept constructive criticism of the club.

What is inexcusable is the article appears agenda driven, is factually incorrect and highlights a complete lack of research by the author.

Also ive noticed the landscape of the argument is trying to be amended by the 'investigative' journalist responsible for this piece. Trying to deflect from the fact the articles main point is we cannot sell out the stadium to the author and the MEN are concerned by the number of no-shows at the game.

Factually the author did not have a clue:
A) The game was sold out
B) The capacity of the stadium is not 47,805 when segregation is considered.

Furthermore there was no mention of the season ticket waiting list to give the article balance nor any research into the frequency of games selling out at the Etihad.

That is why the article has little journalistic merit and reflects badly on the competency of the journalist responsible and raises questions why a local paper would run a story criticising the club and its fan base without underaking any proper research and with no justification.

That's what's horrified me as much as anything. The way that on twitter he's changed his 'argument' bit by bit as he's been exposed. Like people losing an argument on here, grasping at anything irrelevant to try to hold ground and save a bit of face.

The point of the article was that we haven't the demand to expand the stadium. When he realised it sold out three weeks ago and we've sold out every home league game (bar one dead rubber) in the last three years, it was quickly "I'm concerned with the no-shows". Which, as well as being a silly and facile point, is not what the article was about.

 

[BringBackSwales]

At any one time how many fans are out of their seats having a gipsy's kiss?

If it was just before or just after half time then how many people will have been having something to eat or drink?

As has already been said how many junior season ticket holders will not have been there as it was a school night?

If it was earlyish in the match how many were delayed by the bad traffic?

How many season tickets were unsold and how many are there on the season ticket waiting list?

The imbecile who wrote this article is clearly a demented rag, and he should also ask himself this - the rags like to claim that they have 700 million fans (and apparently they say they are all from Manchester don't you know), so if they are getting 75k at a home game, that means something like 0.01% of their fans turn up for an average home match, now that's loyal support

 

[Blue Punter]

What sort of editorial control is happening at that joke of a publication?

Not the first time it's happened. The tragic thing is, that almost certainly it won't be the last

A disgrace of a newspaper.

 

[franksinatra]

Because one of their journos is a fanzine-level young "Bantz"merchant without the savvy to let go his teenage club loyalties for the sake of his readership. And someone somewhere in editing is a fucking idiot who let this piece be published.

For me I have no issues with the paper writing critical articles about the club. The decision- makers should be accountable to those who holds the clubs best interests at heart and as fans we require an independent press to facilitate this.

Sometimes the truth is not neccessary easy reading and as fans we have to accept constructive criticism of the club.

What is inexcusable is the article appears agenda driven, is factually incorrect and highlights a complete lack of research by the author.

Also ive noticed the landscape of the argument is trying to be amended by the 'investigative' journalist responsible for this piece. Trying to deflect from the fact the articles main point is we cannot sell out the stadium to the author and the MEN are concerned by the number of no-shows at the game.

Factually the author did not have a clue:
A) The game was sold out
B) The capacity of the stadium is not 47,805 when segregation is considered.

Furthermore there was no mention of the season ticket waiting list to give the article balance nor any research into the frequency of games selling out at the Etihad.

That is why the article has little journalistic merit and reflects badly on the competency of the journalist responsible and raises questions why a local paper would run a story criticising the club and its fan base without underaking any proper research and with no justification.

That's what's horrified me as much as anything. The way that on twitter he's changed his 'argument' bit by bit as he's been exposed. Like people losing an argument on here, grasping at anything irrelevant to try to hold ground and save a bit of face.

The point of the article was that we haven't the demand to expand the stadium. When he realised it sold out three weeks ago and we've sold out every home league game (bar one dead rubber) in the last three years, it was quickly "I'm concerned with the no-shows". Which, as well as being a silly and facile point, is not what the article was about.

I have read some of your comments in relation to a press bias against City and like you I mock those who see an agenda in every article.

However I cannot understand the papers reasoning for printing a subject which is rightly or wrongly a sensitive issue to any clubs fan base.

This is exacerbated by the lack of facts and like you I find it incredible the journalist and paper have taken to twitter to try and shift the nature of the debate to deflect criticism from such a poorly written piece. Hardly the work of a professional organisation.

It really makes you question the papers motives.

 

[andyhinch]

34 pages in and not one pitch fork Gif. What's this forum coming to?

 

[mammutly]

34 pages in and not one pitch fork Gif. What's this forum coming to?

This is way beyond pitchforks.

 

[cyberblue]

Stuart Brennan did a good counter argument

 

[Lucky Toma]

I've told this story a few times on here and Im in danger of being a one-trick pony regarding it but it's pertinent to this so...

When I started writing for a fairly big website (bigger than MEN) I was asked to write an opinion piece on why a player should join City and not United. My remit was to 'wind a few United fans up' because their ire translates to hits.

So I did and it was my pleasure.

The response was incredible, the most extreme being a couple of death threats (plus all manner of 'I know where you live and Im going to chop your fucking hands off' rants) and me gaining a genuinely creepy online stalker who would comment wherever I was subsequently published with a plea to the publication not to hire me in future. This weirdo pieced together various info about me from my articles and would mention them in his rants beneath something else Id write in another publication entirely. Was unnerving.

Anyway I digress. When I got the threats I was elated. Bring it on. Its incredibly difficult to make a name for yourself in the modern media full of blogs and to stand out so it was all grist to the mill for me.

In this instance though - although I suspect the circumstances are similar in that the lad's boss has obviously told him to write an inflammatory piece to wind a set of supporters up - it is noticably different.

Firstly what he has written is a pack of lies. Pathetic, wumming untruths. Whereas mine was entirely opinion so I could stand by that.

Secondly, the response from most blues here isnt trolling abuse but rather a genuine anger.

And its an anger that has prompted the paper - who I suspect initially wanted this degree of response - to bottle it and backtrack furiously.

I may have read this all wrong but my feeling is that the lad will be thrown to the wolves after being asked to do something by an employer. I have little sympathy for him but that doesnt detract from who the real villains are here.

 

[Skashion]

I've told this story a few times on here and Im in danger of being a one-trick pony regarding it but it's pertinent to this so...

When I started writing for a fairly big website (bigger than MEN) I was asked to write an opinion piece on why a player should join City and not United. My remit was to 'wind a few United fans up' because their ire translates to hits.

So I did and it was my pleasure.

The response was incredible, the most extreme being a couple of death threats (plus all manner of 'I know where you live and Im going to chop your fucking hands off' rants) and me gaining a genuinely creepy online stalker who would comment wherever I was subsequently published with a plea to the publication not to hire me in future. This weirdo pieced together various info about me from my articles and would mention them in his rants beneath something else Id write in another publication entirely. Was unnerving.

Anyway I digress. When I got the threats I was elated. Bring it on. Its incredibly difficult to make a name for yourself in the modern media full of blogs and to stand out so it was all grist to the mill for me.

In this instance though - although I suspect the circumstances are similar in that the lad's boss has obviously told him to write an inflammatory piece to wind a set of supporters up - it is noticably different.

Firstly what he has written is a pack of lies. Pathetic, wumming untruths. Whereas mine was entirely opinion so I could stand by that.

Secondly, the response from most blues here isnt trolling abuse but rather a genuine anger.

And its an anger that has prompted the paper - who I suspect initially wanted this degree of response - to bottle it and backtrack furiously.

I may have read this all wrong but my feeling is that the lad will be thrown to the wolves after being asked to do something by an employer. I have little sympathy for him but that doesnt detract from who the real villains are here.

Instead we should all read a quality website who don't engage in such nonsense: <a class="postlink" href="http://www.thedaisycutter.co.uk/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.thedaisycutter.co.uk/</a>