Manchester Evening News

It wasnt lazy, bad work. It was deliberate. The tone is nasty and mocking. I will never buy another paper or go on the awful website again.

This is the best team we have ever had. We are in a position to have our most successful season ever and this is what the pick on?

The blue side of Manchester needs to vote with it's feet and leave the paper alone. Next time Im in the supermarket, i'll be doing my bit by putting a copy of the Financial Times in front of the M.E.N. :-)
 
Their website was bookmarked, and their City articles were also highlighted on my Newsnow account.

Both have been removed... not that this will make any difference as these "shock" articles produce vast amounts of web traffic = more advertising revenue.

The paper may have "Manchester" in its Title but I bet most of its readers are based in China and India.
 
de niro said:
Bluekiwi said:
Count me in - I'll join the boycott.
Oh, hang on, the MUEN doesn't get distributed in New Zealand - thank god.


To all faraway blues.
It's clicks they are after so just don't click.

They can't give the thing away in Manchester.


Total boycott please.

And of course ban from the stadium and all things city.

This but not just to faraway Blues, ALL Blues. They want the clicks for advertising. Starve them of money and publicity. DONT click.
 
Clearly written on the back of a beer mat during a lonely evening nestled in the corner of the snug having sipped through 2 and a half pints of skol
 
When one of my rag mates put this up on Facebook last night I assumed I'd stumbled into a 'fanzone' area of the MEN site where they let City and united fans blog mind-numbing 'banter' about each other. I was staggered to realise that this guy is actually a fully paid-up staff member and this nonsense was published in the main section of their site.

What I find even more staggering is that a professional sports journalist has spent the biggest football match of the season scanning the crowd for empty seats rather than focusing on the action in the middle. These are not 'swathes' of empty seats; in fact they're barely noticeable, even with Lynch's ridiculous red rings around them.

This is clearly someone who attended this match (or watched it on TV) with a preconceived idea of what he was going to write afterwards, and then spent 90 mins trying to find the flimsiest of evidence to back it up. I suppose the question is, whose preconceived idea was it - his own or his superiors'?

We all read the police reports last year about the thousands of weekly no-shows at the Swamp, and we've all seen sellout games at City that are well below capacity, so there is a modicum of potential for delivering a fairly sensible opinion on the matter, but this particular game was clearly not relevant.

The MEN could have attempted to explore the myriad reasons behind this growing phenomenon for ALL football clubs (TV companies messing around with kick-off times, wealthy JCLs buying up season tickets with the intention of only going to 'big' games, the growing geographical spread of supporters, the impact of televised games, too many seats going to sponsors/corporates, inadequate ticket exchange schemes etc etc), but instead they chose to have a pathetically ill-informed sly dig at ickle old Ciddy, alienating a huge slice of their readership in the process.

It tells you everything you need to know about this pathetic excuse for a newspaper that their so-called journalists would rather throw playground jibes around than properly investigate the actual issues affecting real football fans. Shame on them. I certainly won't be clicking on it again.
 
de niro said:
Bluekiwi said:
Count me in - I'll join the boycott.
Oh, hang on, the MUEN doesn't get distributed in New Zealand - thank god.


To all faraway blues.
It's clicks they are after so just don't click.
They can't give the thing away in Manchester.


Total boycott please.

And of course ban from the stadium and all things city.

Meant to put this on last night. I think it is our very policy with trying to get the press on board that this "newspaper" follows its agenda from the top to the bottom (Lynch). Can you imagine them doing a similar story at Old Trafford? There are plenty of other avenues for all things City for all blues without having to resort to this outlet and its ill advised leanings. Lets put it out of business.

From:
Date: Wed, 05 Feb 2014 18:09:34 +0000
To: Manchester City <mcfc@reply.mcfc.co.uk>
Subject: Manchester Evening News


I am sure by now you will be aware of the article on the Manchester Evening News’ website.

My own thoughts on the Manchester Evening News are that they are a paper which leans heavily against City, as does its owner, the Mirror. I have never seen a piece written by any newspaper, let alone a local one which purports to support its local teams, which is as ill judged as this one. They are openly mocking the club and its time to take firm action.

I know you take the opposite view to me with the press but I think enough is enough. The Manchester Evening News need City more than City need it. It is now time to ban them from Carrington and the Etihad along with the Mirror. I would be interested to hear your views on the club’s relationship with this organisation.

Regards
 
Dubai Blue said:
When one of my rag mates put this up on Facebook last night I assumed I'd stumbled into a 'fanzone' area of the MEN site where they let City and united fans blog mind-numbing 'banter' about each other. I was staggered to realise that this guy is actually a fully paid-up staff member and this nonsense was published in the main section of their site.

What I find even more staggering is that a professional sports journalist has spent the biggest football match of the season scanning the crowd for empty seats rather than focusing on the action in the middle. These are not 'swathes' of empty seats; in fact they're barely noticeable, even with Lynch's ridiculous red rings around them.

This is clearly someone who attended this match (or watched it on TV) with a preconceived idea of what he was going to write afterwards, and then spent 90 mins trying to find the flimsiest of evidence to back it up. I suppose the question is, whose preconceived idea was it - his own or his superiors'?

We all read the police reports last year about the thousands of weekly no-shows at the Swamp, and we've all seen sellout games at City that are well below capacity, so there is a modicum of potential for delivering a fairly sensible opinion on the matter, but this particular game was clearly not relevant.

The MEN could have attempted to explore the myriad reasons behind this growing phenomenon for ALL football clubs (TV companies messing around with kick-off times, wealthy JCLs buying up season tickets with the intention of only going to 'big' games, the growing geographical spread of supporters, the impact of televised games, too many seats going to sponsors/corporates, inadequate ticket exchange schemes etc etc), but instead they chose to have a pathetically ill-informed sly dig at ickle old Ciddy, alienating a huge slice of their readership in the process.

It tells you everything you need to know about this pathetic excuse for a newspaper that their so-called journalists would rather throw playground jibes around than properly investigate the actual issues affecting real football fans. Shame on them. I certainly won't be clicking on it again.

Excellent piece DB. Regarding the bit I have highlighted I doubt there is anyone there bright enough to write this let alone think about it. They should stick with their childish Facebook/Fanzone jibes and keep those United fans onboard.
 
not to have a go at utd because this article is not about them but could someone post the gmp figures for the swamp last season as this would give a figure of how many go thro a clubs turnstyle againnst seats sold .it should be quite easy to give a % for saturdays and mid week games ? .from memory i think its about 5000 out of 7500 that dont attend so going off that would we expect 3000 out of 47000 as the norm of paying punters that dont attend for what ever reason ?
sorry meant 5000 out of 75,000 .the 7500 was at the end of the 6-1
 
F*** the MUEN.

From BUSINESS DESK NORTH WEST.(part article/free subscription)

City set for stadium expansion

COUNCILLORS in Manchester are expected to wave through Manchester City's plans to add another 14,500 seats at the Etihad Stadium when they meet next Thursday.

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.thebusinessdesk.com/northwest/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.thebusinessdesk.com/northwest/</a>
 
mrtwiceaseason said:
not to have a go at utd because this article is not about them but could someone post the gmp figures for the swamp last season as this would give a figure of how many go thro a clubs turnstyle againnst seats sold .it should be quite easy to give a % for saturdays and mid week games ? .from memory i think its about 5000 out of 7500 that dont attend so going off that would we expect 3000 out of 47000 as the norm of paying punters that dont attend for what ever reason ?
sorry meant 5000 out of 75,000 .the 7500 was at the end of the 6-1
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.theguardian.com/football/2013/apr/12/manchester-united-attendances-police-figures" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.theguardian.com/football/201 ... ce-figures</a>
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.