BlueAnorak
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 31 Oct 2010
- Messages
- 27,986
Fair dos. He's one of the very few exceptions though.Exeter Blue I am here said:BlueAnorak said:No consequence?Exeter Blue I am here said:Whilst I think there is plenty of lazy ill-considered, and often economically driven, bias out there, and whilst I happily acknowledge that there are a handful of c*nts like Jackson and Ogden, whose raggy bitterness is bottomless, the search for an agenda becomes comical when you start looking for it in red chairs or dodgy refereeing decisions and so forth. So too when you start looking for it not in words but in potential intent. The fact that a large number of hacks may support the rags or the dippers is of no consequence whatsoever, until they start portraying City in a deliberate and unnecessarily bleak light. In this instance, whatever you may speculate the motive to be, a perfectly reasonable prediction has been made by a journalist that City will finish 4th. There is nothing in that statement that constitutes an agenda
You're living in cloud cuckoo land if you really think that doesn't help shape what the journos write. Chasing clicks is the other motive for City bad press, but both clearly set out and define an agenda - ie they do it on purpose for specific reasons.
To say anything else is simply picking a gainsay argument of the sort: "a cloudless daytime sky on Earth is not sky blue"!
I said "no consequence..... until they start portraying City in a negative light". It's perfectly possible to be a rag and comment on City objectively. Gary Bumfluff manages it every week. Not saying he doesn't have a tiny bulge in his trousers when City have lost and he can put the boot in, but his analysis is invariably bang on the money and very fair.