Media Thread 2017/18

  • Thread starter Thread starter mat
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
According to Sky sports news, City were involved in a 5 goal thriller with Real Madrid.

Can you imagine if that was the scum.

Jose Mourinho HAMMERS HIS FORMER CLUB to prove his title credentials for the coming season and sends a message out to the whole of EUROPE.
 
jrb said:
Not a f***ing chance of a Media level playing field.

We might as well accept the on-going, never to change situation and move on.

Today's Daily Fail online football page.

In order of articles.

The first article is the headline article.

The rest are further down the page.

The last article is so far down the page it isn't worth finding.

*The 2nd article is all you need to know about the Daily Fail and the bullshit it comes up with to create a fake United headline article/story*. Please!

IMG_0350.png


IMG_0351.png


IMG_0352.png


IMG_0353.png

IMG_0353.png


IMG_0355.png
Click to expand...

Just been on it and you have failed to mention the Brahim Diaz story which is above all the united stories bar the lead article.
 
The blue phantom said:
Bias and Agenda's are two different things.

The most cringeworthy thing on here is the cup draws and hot/vibrating balls. The amount of blues who think this is what happens to stop us is fuckin staggering.

One example was Ian Wright & Steven Gerrard drawing us out for West Ham away. Instantly on here. Fuckin agenda, corrupt ****s. Another away match the FA have stitched us up on

I actually asked how do Wright and Gerrard fit into this agenda. Was met with they were generously paid to stop us.

I mean just WTF. This is the shit where other club fans take the piss out of us

No one doubts the bias of Ogden, Bates, Jackson & Mcdonnel and the other Rag sycophants. They are fair play to have a pop at.
Click to expand...

Totally agree.

Fight the right battles.

Too much of this 'bias' is paranoid whinging

Just makes us look small.
 
franksinatra said:
Just been on it and you have failed to mention the Brahim Diaz story which is above all the united stories bar the lead article.
Click to expand...

Was that the small article/picture to the right of the main headline picture and article I posted? Apologies, I missed it. You're right.

So in your unbiased opinion Frank, what should the bigger story be, United arriving home or City beating Real Madrid 4-1. Well?

Or let me give you a chance.

What would be the bigger article/story be?

City coming home or United beating Real Madrid 4-1.(with Rashford and Pogba scoring, say)

I'll leave it at that and finish my bath.

Feel free to come up with more excuses for the on-going media bias that doesn't exist.(in your mind)
 
jrb said:
Was that the small article/picture to the right of the main headline picture and article I posted? Apologies, I missed it. You're right.

So in your unbiased opinion Frank, what should the bigger story be, United arriving home or City beating Real Madrid 4-1. Well?

Or let me give you a chance.

What would be the bigger article/story be?

City coming home or United beating Real Madrid 4-1.(with Rashford and Pogba scoring, say)

I'll leave it at that and finish my bath.

Feel free to come up with more excuses for the on-going media bias that doesn't exist.(in your mind)
Click to expand...

We all know now its about clicks and the scum get more clicks thats why they will be top billing
 
Neville Kneville said:
'What we learned' according to Mark Ogden.

1 City are getting the ball forward quicker, which will be harder to stop by bus parking.
2 Real will be much better with Ramos & Ronaldo & Kroos etc..
3 Bale is becoming a bit part player but the way he left VK 'for dead' will interest Man Utd etc...
4 Sterling & Jesus need to stay on their feet more as basically, they are a pair of divers etc etc...
5 Danilo showed flaws which would be exposed in the Premier League & will have to shape up...

So on the whole, not that many positives for City, on the night they beat Real Madrid 4-1 but encouragement for Utd in their chase for Gareth Bale.
Click to expand...

Not sure how close to the actual article your interpretation is but it reads like a united scouting report.

The general football media these days is basically united advertising; given the extent, i'm pretty sure they must be funding a lot of it too
 
There is no point even arguing the matter.
The media are biased.
No question.
They pander to popular demand. The rags have a much bigger following after all. I think we can understand that.
Once we start winning on a regular basis and playing the sort of football we are capable of the bias will definitely shift towards us but it will take some time. We will then become just as hated by every other football fan as those red ****s are at present.
It will be an unpleasant side effect of success.
Pointless to bang on about the media imho. They just feed the people what they want...
 
One has to understand that the role of the media isn't to report the news. The role of media is to "create news" that sells units or advertising space in order to make a profit. Read that again.

Any news or newspaper that is framed as being critical of City as a club or articles that are written in such a way that reflects well on other teams in relation to City will have more continuous unit sales or webclicks because the readership potential target of non City fans is millions times more than the City fan base. (utd, lfc, afc cfc etc).

It is therefore perfect commercial sense to produce and maintain what is labelled here as an anti City agenda. It has become a sustainable business and marketing tactic that produces the results that the media accounts departments want to see.

The above explanation also goes someway to explaining how certain journalists can constantly get away with a more personal agenda, ie.Jackson, Castles and many other ****s via Twitter and the online versions of the companies they work for. Their accounts are simply avenues for millions of potential readers which will in turn assist their employers to produce more revenue.

I'll stop here because I've just bored myself as well as you.
 
Now I had a moan about Jackson, this morning and I do believe that some reporters are biased towards the clubs they are fond off and can be negative about those teams rivals, and unfortunately we are one of them teams.

However the rags and scousers in partucular have spent years building up this image as the clubs to look at and read about, fuck sake the rags were shite from 71 - 92 yet still managed to spend the 70's and 80's being wanked over.
I even remember spurs were always the glamour club, and fawned over and the myth about winning a trophy every year ending in 1 despite it being bollocks.

Those clubs will always get more reads/watches when reported on because they have spent 20-30 years plus managing their press well.

We are not in that situation and only will be over time, it's getting better, but no point fans aguing or having a moan about each other for believing we are unfairly treated, as we are by some intentionally and not by others.
Along with that we are not clickbait enough yet so wanky articles about the rags getting off a plane will be top story.

Fuck em we know who and what we are who gives a shite about what others think in the media.

Only bit that bothers me is the bullshit myths by other fans like the empty seats bollocks that then become the norm.
 
Last edited:
jrb said:
Was that the small article/picture to the right of the main headline picture and article I posted? Apologies, I missed it. You're right.

So in your unbiased opinion Frank, what should the bigger story be, United arriving home or City beating Real Madrid 4-1. Well?

Or let me give you a chance.

What would be the bigger article/story be?

City coming home or United beating Real Madrid 4-1.(with Rashford and Pogba scoring, say)

I'll leave it at that and finish my bath.

Feel free to come up with more excuses for the on-going media bias that doesn't exist.(in your mind)
Click to expand...

No it wasnt. It was directly under the United article along with an article on Sanchez.

For your information City beating Real madrid was the lead article for part of the day on the mail website. I think Ric posted it earlier??

Sadly you are misunderstanding bias and commercial decision-making. Many have wrote about it on here and to a certain extent they are quite correct.

They put on there website what they think there readership want to read. So sadly you will probably get more United articles than City. Just like you will get more City articles than the other 95 percent of football
clubs in the football pyramid. Not bias just the fact the paper makes commercial decisions. Do you also bleat that City get more coverage than say Southampton or Watford for example? Is this also bias against those clubs?
 
franksinatra said:
Just been on it and you have failed to mention the Brahim Diaz story which is above all the united stories bar the lead article.
Click to expand...

And that is exactly the type of smug comment I was talking about. You are ignoring the gist of someones argument by highlighting one thing as though that disproves the genral tenor of the argument and that is what gets people annoyed.

I have 2 simple yes or no questions for you.

Do you think that the media treat each club equally?
Do you think the BBC treat each club fairly?
 
The media bias towards United has always been there. The relentless rise of the blue half of the city is rightly seen as a massive threat to all concerned in the red half. I think all concerned at the swamp are in a tailspin, desperately thinking up trivial snippets of news to fling at the media, who, at the moment gobble it up, thinking it increases 'clicks' and newspaper sales. It will change, it's just a matter of time.
 
chesterguy said:
And that is exactly the type of smug comment I was talking about. You are ignoring the gist of someones argument by highlighting one thing as though that disproves the genral tenor of the argument and that is what gets people annoyed.

I have 2 simple yes or no questions for you.

Do you think that the media treat each club equally?
Do you think the BBC treat each club fairly?
Click to expand...

I wouldn't bother, it has been discussed with him on numerous occasions, he doesn't believe it and that is that, he somehow doesn't get bored with coming onto these types of threads to say it is all in your minds and there is no bias at all, seriously it has been going on since the takeover he has already changed name once for whatever reason.

At the end of the day you will only agitate yourself trying to argue with him.
 
franksinatra said:
No it wasnt. It was directly under the United article along with an article on Sanchez.

For your information City beating Real madrid was the lead article for part of the day on the mail website. I think Ric posted it earlier??

Sadly you are misunderstanding bias and commercial decision-making. Many have wrote about it on here and to a certain extent they are quite correct.

They put on there website what they think there readership want to read. So sadly you will probably get more United articles than City. Just like you will get more City articles than the other 95 percent of football
clubs in the football pyramid. Not bias just the fact the paper makes commercial decisions. Do you also bleat that City get more coverage than say Southampton or Watford for example? Is this also bias against those clubs?
Click to expand...
For somebody that has admitted to me he does agree there is a media bias, you are doing a lot of denying it mate ;o)
 
The more successful we become the more hated we will become , much prefer this to the yo-yo team we used to be when the Rag/Dipper media basically took the piss out of us for 30 odd years , the media machine despises us because we are a real threat and there is a strong possibility we will dominate English football in the next few years and thus nullifying their Rag/Dipper cash cow. "Its not personal its business"
 
There is bias, but important thing to note though - It is because of money, clicks mean ££££ and Utd for eg bring in more of that, It isnt right but it is market economics in most cases.

But it all goes away if City start winning things.

And then we will get the same bias that they get now gauranteed
 
The casual football fan is influenced by the media. They have impressions created by motd , sky and the the gutter.
So it is no surprise that they see us as , Johnny come lateley's , empty seat, oil rich, sugar daddy lottery winners.

Most serious intelligent people see through it.
There are agendas and bias throughout the media, why would we be exempt
 
Glad to see we beat RM in any match never mind a pre season friendly just as I was disappointed to lose to United, but thats me as a City fan wanting anything to get over on the opposition.
These matches were very real to fans in USA (93K in Los A) so the publicity will do football good out there but are we really worried that we are not getting the fantasy football pre season hype that the press always indulge United with every pre season that I can remember ?
Do we really need to worry about bias on games that frankly don´t matter, if so we are just as bad as United fans wanting to read how they are going to win everything in sight and the PL will be a cakewalk.

Lets see how the media deal with real games in the PL and CL because then it matters to every fan whatever their allegiance because to be honest apart from us and RM fans who gives a toss about a friendly anyway ?
The PL games make the neutral fan more aware of any obvious bias or omissions and table places and results must be dealt with.
Obviously still negative slants but that table cannot lie during the football season however I refuse to get upset because newspapers give preference to United because of a friendly.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top