Media discussion - 2024/25

Status
Not open for further replies.
Moss Side's Finest said:
I can accept every single legacy newspaper, online media outlet and social media hack jumping on us, I really can. As much as we love city, people are always going to be there to try and shoot down success, it's the British way. Add on to that the historic red shirt mafia power in the media and it's easy to see why we are facing many boots from many directions.

What I cannot tolerate however is for the supposedly unbiased, state backed British Broadcasting Corporation (who we have no real choice but to pay licence fees to if you live in the UK) to be ring leading much of the agenda against us. From sound bites created by MOTD ex red player pundits, to the regular city bashing articles on their site, to allowing opposing fans to break supposed house rules in their posts against us, to their social media accounts that really go to town taking the blatant piss out of us.

As city fans, if we complain about this behaviour, one of two things happen. One, if it's directed to the BBC, our complaints are disregarded and any anti city tripe remains in place on their media channels. Two, if we complain to other fans, we are seen as either being paranoid or spoilt.

Whatever or whoever is driving their agenda has cracked it, we can't do anything other than bend over and take it up the Tex Ritter.

Some will say, just don't read it, but that's like saying 'if someone is stabbing you just don't look'. Just because you don't see it, doesnt mean the damage being caused isn't substantial.

What is happening at the moment in the media, particularly from the BBC is an utter disgrace and is causing substantial damage to our club.
Click to expand...
I recall a journalist being sacked after having the balls to criticise liverpool fans, that’s the power they can hold.
Even after over 600 objects hit the City team bus at anfield there wasn’t that much in the media.
 
Shirley said:
I recall a journalist being sacked after having the balls to criticise liverpool fans, that’s the power they can hold.
Even after over 600 objects hit the City team bus at anfield there wasn’t that much in the media.
Click to expand...

I’d love to know what the settlement was, if you wanted to engineer a nice payoff, slag off the Dippers & then when the heat gets too much you’ll get a nice wedge.


“An employment tribunal was due to hear his case for unfair dismissal on 27 April. But last month Mafham accepted an undisclosed but substantial cash offer from Reach which came with an “expression of regret” about events.”

pressgazette.co.uk

Reach pays ‘substantial’ settlement to ex-Sunday Express football writer fired over column criticising Liverpool FC fans

A former Sunday Express football writer who was sacked last year over a column criticising Liverpool FC fans has accepted a substantial settlement from publisher Reach. Colin Mafham was suspended from the newspaper, where he spent 15 years on contract, in April last year and later dismissed for...
pressgazette.co.uk pressgazette.co.uk
 
Morning all.

Now just to give you the heads up it's derby day on Sunday and those pesky little terrors in the British media will be publishing all sorts of lies and waffle to make everyone hate on City even more and try to make everyone worry over nothing, be it 115,Pep, Grealish's hair blah blah blah...

Treat it as it should be treated. Laugh out loud, let them kick us when we are down because their is nothing more dangerous than a wounded lion.
Enjoy the hype (for those that read it). See you Sunday.
 
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?
 
Last edited:
deano ou812 said:
It’s a pile on at the moment and the media are loving their day in the sun so to speak..
Click to expand...
We may not turn the season around. We may not win anything this season. But, if we do, we have to somehow remind these feckers that they kfa and when they keep writing us off, it only reinforces the fact their scribblings have no weight or relevance.
 
Moss Side's Finest said:
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?
Click to expand...
In their heads, 'journalists' nowadays will be imagining they're editorialising around the Washington Post table like Jason ('Ben Bradlee') Robards, Robert ('Bob Woodward') Redford, Dustin ('Carl Bernstein') Hoffman and the rest discussing the next moves in investigating the Watergate scandal in 'All The President's Men'. There'll be gravitas a-plenty in their simple little minds, for sure.

But in reality, it'll be like a bunch of infant school kids running riot at an unsupervised birthday party, with ice cream and jelly thrown everywhere and all sorts of mayhem going on.

Let them do their worst between now and Sunday's game; between now and whenever we get our groove back and start winning again; between now and when we royally shaft the Red Cartel/PL over those trumped up 'breaches'.

F**k 'em.
 
Last edited:
Another day, another HYS comment was removed

Thank you for recently contributing to the BBC website.
Unfortunately, we've removed your comment because it broke the house rules
This is the text you wrote:
Neanderthal male fans.

Your comment was considered to have broken the following House Rule:

"We reserve the right to fail comments which...

Are considered likely to disrupt, provoke, attack or offend others Are racist, sexist, homophobic, sexually explicit, abusive or otherwise objectionable Contain swear words or other language likely to offend"



My reply to the cretins at the BBC

So in the HYS section there are 100's of 'men' giving woman's football a kicking. Please tell me what is really insulting about calling them Neanderthal men in reply to a poster asking why they are like that. I fail to see it breaking any of your COC's.
In fact, having just read your COC's I'm surprised so many misogynistic comments remain in that thread. It is always funny how you moderate some comments and others seem to fly right under your nose.
 
Moss Side's Finest said:
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?
Click to expand...
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.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top