Media bias against City

[Why Always Ste]

Anyone questioning the way in which the Media do obviously operate need to go and watch a pantomime over Christmas time... Or any Hollywood action flick from the 80's.

Basic sales narrative of having the good guy vs. the bad guy to engage the audience.
I don't personally think we are always the bad guy, media sources will flick between who the good/bad guys are to fit their story narrative...
But where we fall short is the Rags were that iconic Hollywood blockbuster we all remember watching as kids.

It was a shit film, but because it was marketed in such a way with big named actors to a new fresh audience who had only ever watched coronation street before.... many people were hooked and would defend this movie as being the best ever, even when film experts would point out far better movies.

Fast forward to 2015 and those superstar actors (footballers) are now retired, and thus get picked to feature on the pundit shows.

We don't have players retired yet from the Mansour era.
Give it a decade and you'll see Kompany, YaYa, Silva and so on invited to these shows.
The likes of Quinn never played under a Mansour owned club.

 

[mat]

Anyone questioning the way in which the Media do obviously operate need to go and watch a pantomime over Christmas time... Or any Hollywood action flick from the 80's.

Basic sales narrative of having the good guy vs. the bad guy to engage the audience.
I don't personally think we are always the bad guy, media sources will flick between who the good/bad guys are to fit their story narrative...
But where we fall short is the Rags were that iconic Hollywood blockbuster we all remember watching as kids.

It was a shit film, but because it was marketed in such a way with big named actors to a new fresh audience who had only ever watched coronation street before.... many people were hooked and would defend this movie as being the best ever, even when film experts would point out far better movies.

Fast forward to 2015 and those superstar actors (footballers) are now retired, and thus get picked to feature on the pundit shows.

We don't have players retired yet from the Mansour era.
Give it a decade and you'll see Kompany, YaYa, Silva and so on invited to these shows.
The likes of Quinn never played under a Mansour owned club.

Good Star Wars anology there...

 

[franksinatra]

I don't want you to believe anything at all.

Sky/BT are in it for the money, they give their customers what they want, if that means creating a narrative where City are the big bad wolf then that's what they'll do as that is what will keep the ratings up. Like I said it's all rather simple, they'll do what makes them money.

As for the BBC, the Salford based BBC, they've been pulled up on their rag bias by the footballing public in general, it's not just us saying it. Naturally if they have a bias in favour of them then their bias is going to be against us.

So lets touch on your first point Sky/BT are in it for the money and they give their customers what they want.

So they run City down to keep the ratings up. If this was the case would one of their leading anchors, on Sky Sports of all things be (mike wedderburn) a City fan and one who fires jibes at the fans of the club who the majority of the agendaists think receive biased coverage (United and Liverpool)

Why have they just done a special feature on our academy??? Seems a strange move promoting City's work with youngsters, community if they are trying to portray them as you state. They could have easily not visited just like they don't bother visiting other clubs academies.

As for BT following the same business model. It seems strange that their method of portraying City as the big bad wolf, to keep their ratings up, is to sign a three year sponsorship deal with the club (The only one in the Uk) to provide digital content and sponsor City square or BT City Square. You will have to explain how that fits in with the bad wolf analogy?

Then to the BBC. You state they have a bias against the club based on a positive bias towards United. So I presume this extends to Liverpool also? They must be biased against them also or have you just cherry-picked City to suit your narrative??

 

[Rolee]

So lets touch on your first point Sky/BT are in it for the money and they give their customers what they want.

So they run City down to keep the ratings up. If this was the case would one of their leading anchors, on Sky Sports of all things be (mike wedderburn) a City fan and one who fires jibes at the fans of the club who the majority of the agendaists think receive biased coverage (United and Liverpool)

Why have they just done a special feature on our academy??? Seems a strange move promoting City's work with youngsters, community if they are trying to portray them as you state. They could have easily not visited just like they don't bother visiting other clubs academies.

As for BT following the same business model. It seems strange that their method of portraying City as the big bad wolf, to keep their ratings up, is to sign a three year sponsorship deal with the club (The only one in the Uk) to provide digital content and sponsor City square or BT City Square. You will have to explain how that fits in with the bad wolf analogy?

Then to the BBC. You state they have a bias against the club based on a positive bias towards United. So I presume this extends to Liverpool also? They must be biased against them also or have you just cherry-picked City to suit your narrative??

Tell me this, why do commentators continuously refer to the price of our players yet they don't do it for other clubs? Why do they constantly refer to our attendances but don't do it for others?

Why did BT invest? Because they're smart business people.

Then to the BBC, I know a couple of journos in the Manchester area that have informed me of who is employed at BBC Sport, the place is crawling with rags, that much is obvious when you read their content.

 

[franksinatra]

Tell me this, why do commentators continuously refer to the price of our players yet they don't do it for other clubs? Why do they constantly refer to our attendances but don't do it for others?

Why did BT invest? Because they're smart business people.

Then to the BBC, I know a couple of journos in the Manchester area that have informed me of who is employed at BBC Sport, the place is crawling with rags, that much is obvious when you read their content.

They do reference other teams transfers. This argument was had with regards Di Maria and numeros links were provided regarding his fee. LVG and the falings of his team get the cost of the side thrown at it.

So BT are that smart they are reporting negatively against us, to undermine the club, but at the same time investing within the club. Yes it is a typical business strategy to invest in a club and then try to undermine it and stall its progress....real smart.

Can you not see the craziness your argument that an organisation who have invested in the club, sat down with our club at strategic level, agreed on a partnership with the club but are secretly trying to undermine us and forcing ex city players and other commentators to speak negatively against us.

I still await the explanation for SKY fawning over our academy.

 

[chaddblue]

I hate that advert (Betfair?) where the City fan celebrates on the quiet cos the Rags have beaten us 3-1 and he had money on it

Maybe taking it to the extreme but...

1) Their narrative has the Rags beating us 3-1.... yeah right !!!!
2) They portray this little weasel as a City fan

On the other hand I think I may be a bit too sensitive

 

[lasereyes]

I hate that advert (Betfair?) where the City fan celebrates on the quiet cos the Rags have beaten us 3-1 and he had money on it

Maybe taking it to the extreme but...

1) Their narrative has the Rags scoring more than 1 goal .... yeah right !!!!
2) They portray this little weasel as a City fan

On the other hand I think I may be a bit too sensitive

Edited for accuracy

 

[Shirley]

I still await the explanation for SKY fawning over our academy.

Do you know for certain if Sky approached City or did City approach Sky for the academy special?

 

[franksinatra]

Do you know for certain if Sky approached City or did City approach Sky for the academy special?

No I do not know that but either way as an independent broadcaster they could have chosen not to film. Instead they filmed, promoting City's good work and giving the programme (from memory) significant exposure.

Im struggling to think of another academy which has received such exposure?

 

[Dave Ewing's Back 'eader]

I hate that advert (Betfair?) where the City fan celebrates on the quiet cos the Rags have beaten us 3-1 and he had money on it

Maybe taking it to the extreme but...

1) Their narrative has the Rags beating us 3-1.... yeah right !!!!
2) They portray this little weasel as a City fan

On the other hand I think I may be a bit too sensitive

Who had money on Wigan in the Cup Final?

 

[aguero93:20]

This argument was had with regards Di Maria and numeros links were provided regarding his fee.

 

[manimanc]

Talkshite are the worst.
They can't stand the rags losing. It sends their schedule into chaos. They try to brush it under the carpet.
We lose and they spend all bastard day telling everyone as many times as they can.
It's quite obvious how they operate and what team they have interests in.
Fact.

 

[Fat Chance]

Sky did flash the stats up on to the screen rather sharpish to contradict Mike Summerbee whilst in full flow and defending Citys corner..only for the stats to be proved incorrect at a later date...call me cynical...

 

[mcfc1632]

I hate that advert (Betfair?) where the City fan celebrates on the quiet cos the Rags have beaten us 3-1 and he had money on it

Maybe taking it to the extreme but...

1) Their narrative has the Rags beating us 3-1.... yeah right !!!!
2) They portray this little weasel as a City fan

On the other hand I think I may be a bit too sensitive

No- you're good - some of the shit is in your face - some subliminal

 

[Newquayblue]

No thanks.

It takes too much energy to try and convert the unconvertible.

How about this: A Journo', representing the BBC, who's utter desperation to demean City, totally blinds him from reporting, accurate, factual reality. I'm just saying!

 

[Newquayblue]

Sky did flash the stats up on to the screen rather sharpish to contradict Mike Summerbee whilst in full flow and defending Citys corner..only for the stats to be proved incorrect at a later date...call me cynical...

And there's the oft used 'freezing the replay a frame or two out, in order to confirm their claim re a tight offside decision affecting a goal - and while I'm at it, why was Yaya's deflected effort awarded to Kelechi, whilst Liverpool's deflected equaliser, against the Baggies, was attributed to Origi? Rhetorical question!

 

[Newquayblue]

Well in this instance I was only giving examples of our representation not commenting on their affiliation in any way.

Interesting though even players who have represented us are being accused of showing bias against us in the media bias thread. Mills I would agree does not have a good word to say but why would Francis, Quinn, Walsh, James etc be biased against us?

Does the fact that even ex-players, get accused of being biased suggest maybe were seeing bias where it does not really exist?

Maybe they've had their nose's put out because they want to be on our gravy train but have been snubbed (hope so anyway - lol).

 

[Newquayblue]

They do reference other teams transfers. This argument was had with regards Di Maria and numeros links were provided regarding his fee. LVG and the falings of his team get the cost of the side thrown at it.

So BT are that smart they are reporting negatively against us, to undermine the club, but at the same time investing within the club. Yes it is a typical business strategy to invest in a club and then try to undermine it and stall its progress....real smart.

Can you not see the craziness your argument that an organisation who have invested in the club, sat down with our club at strategic level, agreed on a partnership with the club but are secretly trying to undermine us and forcing ex city players and other commentators to speak negatively against us.

I still await the explanation for SKY fawning over our academy.

Re Di Maria a gaf of that magnitude couldn't be overlooked, but imagine it was one of ours it'd be the opening of every article about us EVEN NOW - re BT the landscape's changing on the macro scale before the micro- re the academy, It's a 200M GBP investment creating hundreds of jobs, the first of it's kind and it's the best in the world - they should have something on it every week, or maybe a documentary (two parts of course) - I know what your saying but imagine what coverage would be like if nited had built it - nuff said!

 

[Why Always Ste]

Could this be a game changer regarding News Corp. (sky)

http://www.theguardian.com/world/20...-worlds-media-xi-jinping-tells-rupert-murdoch

This was published in September.

Murdoch had his ass kicked in China if I remember correctly when he bought Star Tv, which bombed.
Many news outlets he owns have been blocked by China, such as Wall Street/NY Times websites and so on.

BT have business ties with ESPN, which is jointly owned by Disney, and Disney have good business links with China.
Disney was mentioned by the Chinese consortium which invested %13 in CFG recently, as one of the key investors into CFG is a Media Mogul in China.
I can't remember his name right now.

BT sponsoring CitySquare was no coincidence. yes they may be showing unfavourable coverage of City right now, but don't you think the fact they have all these Ex-Rag/Ex-Scouse players on their shows is a clear indication that BT/ESPN/Disney is trying to drag over the big Rag audience which are/were once Sky customers, bring them on to the BT Platform, and eventually BT will have enough clout to buy the Premier League Rights....

ESPN also show UFC, in which Adu Dhabi Govt. invested in this sport, no coincidence that UFC has priority on BT these days.

If this masterplan rolls on, then the outcome will be Murdoch no longer having control of the Prem, to which you'll see significant decrease in coverage of the sport in his publications empire.

Long term this may result in the English Top league bubble bursting as emerging leagues appear such as The MLS and Chinese Leagues take prominence... which is why CFG is using a Premier league club (us) as it's stepping stone to establishing clubs in other leagues.

 

[Silva61]

Always thought there was an agenda against City, however I think we have reached a tipping point and the media now clearly see which way the wind is blowing, especially now with the Chinese investment which is media led and Sky's broadcast from the academy if it was them who approached City. It could b getting close to putting this thread to bed. Goodnight all.