Media discussion - 2024/25

bobbyowenquiff said:
Times Radio interviewed a Politics Professor from Sussex University who used to work for the Centre for the Study of Corruption (Dan Hough) this morning about the APT case. It was utterly bizarre. He clearly has knowlege of football finance and just used the opportunity to unfairly lambast Manchester City. There were too many factual errors to list here. But to give you some context he failed to even mention what today's PL vote is actually about, namely that three independent Judges have ruled that the PL's updated financial rules are unlawful and unfair. Of course the Times made no attempt at any balance in their story. It is virtually impossible to trust anything reported in the UK media these days.
Click to expand...
Read some of Hough's stuff and that of the Centre for Corruption (David-Barrett and Barrington), as I have a professional interest in it.

The issue I have with the Centre is that whilst they have a good and clear methodology (as good as you are going to get in the context of corruption) it still relies on the knowledge and understanding of what is in many cases a very nuanced and partisan sphere. No matter how smart you are if your knowledge of the City case comes from bluemoon your views will be very different from if its from the sadcafe or Rawk, irrespective of how good your methodology is.

In short he probably believes the British press.
 
Last edited:
What pisses me off about the British media, in all it's forms is this.....
If I want to read/watch an independent article that sums up today's PL meeting, I wouldn't know where to look.
Until Martin Samuel pens something I am goosed.
There isn't one outlet that will cover the meeting with honesty, integrity and neutrality.
That's how fucked up the British media is.
 
oakiecokie said:
I sincerely hope at todays pre match talk with the media Pep states from the onset that he will NOT be answering any q`s on todays hearing, as he is coach of MCFC and NOT a "high flier in finance".
Pep just fuck `em off, especially that twat Rolling Stone.
Click to expand...
That is exactly what will happen oakie, 100%.

They will try their best not to get too deep into asking Pep about extending his contract but will go full on asking about the pricks at the Premier League.

Just look at the gusto they report on anything negative about us yet can barely put a word together when it's a positive story.
 
Last edited:
bobbyowenquiff said:
Times Radio interviewed a Politics Professor from Sussex University who used to work for the Centre for the Study of Corruption (Dan Hough) this morning about the APT case. It was utterly bizarre. He clearly has knowlege of football finance and just used the opportunity to unfairly lambast Manchester City. There were too many factual errors to list here. But to give you some context he failed to even mention what today's PL vote is actually about, namely that three independent Judges have ruled that the PL's updated financial rules are unlawful and unfair. Of course the Times made no attempt at any balance in their story. It is virtually impossible to trust anything reported in the UK media these days.
Click to expand...

Next time he studies corruption he should investigate why he failed to report honestly…..
 
Blue Pete said:
Read some of Hough's stuff and that of the Centre for Corruption (David-Barrett and Barrington), as I have a professional interest in it.

The issue I have with the Centre is that whilst they have a good and clear methodology (as good as you are going to get in the context of the corruption) it still relies on the knowledge and understanding of what is in many cases a very nuanced and partisan sphere. No matter how smart you are if your knowledge of the City case comes from bluemoon your views will be very different from if its from the sadcafe or Rawk, irrespective of how good your methodology is.

In short he probably believes the British press.
Click to expand...

Sounds like he’s not qualified to talk about the subject if he forms his opinion from newspapers.
 
Blue Pete said:
Read some of Hough's stuff and that of the Centre for Corruption (David-Barrett and Barrington), as I have a professional interest in it.

The issue I have with the Centre is that whilst they have a good and clear methodology (as good as you are going to get in the context of the corruption) it still relies on the knowledge and understanding of what is in many cases a very nuanced and partisan sphere. No matter how smart you are if your knowledge of the City case comes from bluemoon your views will be very different from if its from the sadcafe or Rawk, irrespective of how good your methodology is.

In short he probably believes the British press.
Click to expand...
I was surprised by how ignorant he was about the case. He didn’t have a clue what it was about. Just another rent-a-quote. It made the Times look stupid but no one in the national media seems to care about basic standards of balance and accuracy any more.
 
Simon Stone's done it again.

Another article on City, another (I quote) "City will get no sympathy because of their success and the money they have spent to achieve it".

Someone should spend a little time looking at how many times he decides who is worthy of sympathy and who isnt, and see which clubs 'deserve it'...

I don't think we'd be surprised.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

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.