Media bias against City

[dark 'n stormy]

A classic example, the BBC website leads with:

Manchester City manager Manuel Pellegrini believes £49m summer signing Raheem Sterling, 20, could be worth £100m in the future. (Manchester Evening News)

But the MEN article quoted correctly describes Sterling as a £44m summer signing.

Why doesn't the press office ask them to explain this.

 

[GaudinoMotors]

A classic example, the BBC website leads with:

Manchester City manager Manuel Pellegrini believes £49m summer signing Raheem Sterling, 20, could be worth £100m in the future. (Manchester Evening News)

But the MEN article quoted correctly describes Sterling as a £44m summer signing.

Why doesn't the press office ask them to explain this.

We've got a press office?

 

[SilverFox2]

A classic example, the BBC website leads with:

Manchester City manager Manuel Pellegrini believes £49m summer signing Raheem Sterling, 20, could be worth £100m in the future. (Manchester Evening News)

But the MEN article quoted correctly describes Sterling as a £44m summer signing.

Why doesn't the press office ask them to explain this.

Perhaps BBC see it as a 'correction' for a provincial mistake ?

Perhaps a comparison between the values printed by the various newspapers owned by Mirror Group would make this more incriminating. MEN compared with others in that Group would be interesting.

 

[CityStu]

who goes around accusing City fans of being a United fan? I thought my story was quite funny, I may have exaggerated - I can't remember if all those teams were on the poster (maybe Liverpool or Tottenham were not or something, I think Norwich were) but in scanning it I did not see the City badge and thought it was funny as it's the media (Sky) and they always put Rooney's face ahead of Aguero on posters and stuff. The poster is in the underground bit at Stockport train station.

I'm stood next to a Sky Sports poster covered in badges at Twickenham station. Clubs represented are City (largest and most central), Villa, Bournemouth, West Ham, Palace, Spurs, Everton, Swansea, Watford and Southampton. Sounds like it's luck of the draw.

 

[Sir peace frog]

I'm stood next to a Sky Sports poster covered in badges at Twickenham station. Clubs represented are City (largest and most central), Villa, Bournemouth, West Ham, Palace, Spurs, Everton, Swansea, Watford and Southampton. Sounds like it's luck of the draw.

haha,sounds like an also rans poster to me :)

 

[dark 'n stormy]

Perhaps BBC see it as a 'correction' for a provincial mistake ?

Perhaps a comparison between the values printed by the various newspapers owned by Mirror Group would make this more incriminating. MEN compared with others in that Group would be interesting.

You may be right and the BBC is just performing a public duty but this was taken from their 'rumours' section where they refer out to other sources. Why refer to a source but then 'correct' one of the figures quoted.

 

[Sir peace frog]

this isn't media bias ,but it is media related.

ssn have just done a comparison on benzema ,Walcott and that big donkey of arsenals ,using football manager stats .W.T.F.

 

[SilverFox2]

this isn't media bias ,but it is media related.

ssn have just done a comparison on benzema ,Walcott and that big donkey of arsenals ,using football manager stats .W.T.F.

I think it will be a little more accurate than the skewed views of their pre selected pundits.
Maybe their way of giving an ''Authentic'' look to what even they realise is polarised to interest their main subscribers.

MEN has a prediction for the next 1000 years of results for City cf United based on game play.

 

[prof-taf]

Would

yes he does this every week before the Monday game, pointless but there you go

be pointless even if he waited until tuesday

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Just watched a film about Robert Maxwell, who used to insist he was name-checked copiously in The Mirror. However, their circulation went down when he was prominent on the front page. So their analysts obviously had a keen eye for what sold papers and what didn't.

Analysis is even more sophisticated now so it's clear that the media outlets know that negative stories about us, or even negative comments in stories not directly relating to us, have a positive impact on hits and circulation.

Talking about banning people or getting more aggressive with the media simply misses the point. In fact it actually gives them an excuse to be even more negative about us as well as reflecting badly on our owners.

Until we get to the point that we can generate more hits for a positive agenda than we can for a negative one, this is going to be the pattern.