bobbyowenquiff
Well-Known Member
It is virtually all driven by online clickbait which drives revenues. These media firms are all struggling to survive because their print versions have such tiny audiences compared to the online versions. The biggest global audience is from L FC and MUFC fans. A positive story about United is read by all their fans (and ignored by everyone else) A positive story about Liverpool is read by their fans and so on. But a negative story about City is read by LFC and MUFC fans plus all the other fans who hate us. And this is the biggest audience. When you add in the racial element from all the Little Englanders out there it just adds more to the commercial opportunity.I'd love to know how some of these larger websites, and newspapers work in the modern day, in terms of editorial decision making.
I'm guessing it's not like the old press days where there would be a smokey sports or football meeting every day with lots of people debating which articles should be headline news, what the headline should read, how the article should be fine tuned to get home the message the paper wants to get across.
I'm trying to understand how this bias we all see against city in the media actually materialises in the background. Are there really chief editorial people setting the agenda based on word from above?
Or is there just a general culture of like-mindedness built up over a long period of hatred (from our success) by many journalists, who just happen to be red shirt supporters?
Or is it a mixture of both, in that the management ensure that pro-city journalists simply aren't put into positions where their articles are submitted by the media outlet?