Media Thread 2020/21

[stonerblue]

Rashford (as sickly as the coverage is) doesn't deserve the hate in this thread. He got out there and helped out and he's doing a good thing for poor people who don't have enough food. I quite like that it took a lad from Wythenshawe to highlight the issues.

Well fucking said.
How anyone can slag the lad off, day after day, post after post, for what he's doing is beyond me.
Suppose it's a lot easier to sit behind a keyboard dishing out insults than actually doing summat to help.

 

[Onholiday(somemightsay)]

Well what he has had for sure is a similar level of sneering hate on opposition message boards for trying to bring serious issues into the media.

Personally I think if you remove Rashford's name, and swap it for Sterling, you'll find identical posts on Rag Cafe or RAWK moaning about everything being a PR stunt and him trying to raise his personal profile.

Yeh fair point - I would like to think that people can see through my posts that my general 'issue' with Rasford's crusade is fairly tongue in cheek.

My actual problem is with the over the top reporting and coverage that is given to this due to the club that he plays for (hence it is in the Media thread).

The reporting really has nothing to do with the very worthwhile cause of feeding hungry children (I think it's a fair assumption that the people who do have an issue with this are very few and far between).

In keeping with this thread, the BBC and the the like should not be given a pat on the back for the constant reporting on one of their favourite subjects, positive Manchester United news.............

 

[TheBlueDune]

Depeche Mode like this post.

But why should it be?

 

[LongsightM13]

Fair play to Winter, credit where it’s due

 

[BillyShears]

Again you're missing the point entirely.

I'm not sure what you do for a living and if you don't think I have any empathy you clearly dont know me.

I was also a fsm kid myself brought up by a single parent so please don't tell me that I have no empathy.

I have seen first hand the economic situation decline for many over the last 12 months.
Families that need help and support are given this and my own school has close links with the local food bank and my colleagues and I have raised a lot of money for it recently.

We have some families whose parents always worked that never envisage being in this situation.
I myself have been out of work in the past and struggled but sought help and got myself back I to employment eventually as I know that these parents will because they want to.
These families deserve and are getting help.

We also have families whose parents have become ill or disabled and will probably never be able to work and again these families also deserve help and support as it's the right thing to do.

There are also some families with parents that are perfectly healthy that have never worked and have no intention of working that are always at the front of the queue asking our school to provide a laptop or supermarket vouchers,these are the people I was referring to with my fishing parable not the kids.
Agencies offer to help these parents to "catch their own fish" however engagement is voluntary and most won't engage.
This is the main issue that needs to be tackled in my opinion and the daily BBC publicity isn't helping with this in any way shape or form.

Rashford managed to get the government (well the taxpayers) to fund meal vouchers over the summer holidays which has never been done before as Fsm is actually a benefit claimed for meals in school.
This helped a lot of families and some told me it was a big help so I won't criticise him for that however neither he or the BBC are tackling the route cause and it hardly encourages those who don't want to learn to fish does it?

During the autumn term, we had to send "bubbles" of kids home for a week or two at a time and we offered all Fsm families food parcels.
Our ratio of Fsm kids is double the national average yet the take up was very low.

You're right, this is a thread about media bias and you implying that I'm against this because Rashford plays for the Rags and is black ( also inferring that I'm a racist which I find personally offensive) is way off the mark.

Do I think the BBC would have kept up with this if this was a City player?
Not a chance so to answer your question, it's the publically funded BBC that is biased.

I understand your point of view but I don't necessarily agree. As you say, those parents who won't engage with the idea of catching their own fish, won't do it. You can't force them.

So the conversation becomes about punishing the children as the parents clearly don't give a fuck. That doesn't sit comfortably with me, but maybe I'm being too simplistic or overly empathetic.

 

[oakiecokie]

Fair play to Winter, credit where it’s due

Spurs fans did the same for Marine apparently.
But well done Blues also.

 

[stonerblue]

Fair play to Winter, credit where it’s due

more like it, i think..

 

[BillyShears]

Seems to me that to be a Liverpool or United writer requires a huge dose of sycophancy, in order to appeal to the simple-minded hordes who lap that stuff up.

Whereas to be a City writer requires someone who those people can also relate to, who can be ambiguous and occasionally critical. A disgruntled Blue sounds perfect for that.

Haha. I see what you did there.

Personally I'd love an agenda-less, normal, City supporter who can write well.

 

[Pablo ZZZ Peroni]

I've supported City for nearly 30 years now and I don't recall too many if ANY actual City supporters from Manchester covering the club. What we've had are proper rags like Ogden, Jackson, Custis, who are basically cheerleaders for United writing about City in the most negative ways possible.

I'm not privy to the Athletic's policy on writers per club, but I know that they have been interviewing for another City reporter to join their team. It won't be a City supporter because sadly, there are very few of us in the mainstream media.

EDIT:

Also, for the record. The Blues who have been given a platform by the mainstream media, are in the main, horrible twats. Conn and his ilk are as bad as Delaney.

Something strange has happened to Ogden. At least if this latest article is anything to go by:

Liverpool vs. United title race is box office but Man City are team to watch

It's enticing to imagine Man United and Liverpool battling it out for the title, but recent form suggests the team to watch is actually Man City.

www.espn.co.uk

 

[domalino]

Seems to me that to be a Liverpool or United writer requires a huge dose of sycophancy, in order to appeal to the simple-minded hordes who lap that stuff up.

Whereas to be a City writer requires someone who those people can also relate to, who can be ambiguous and occasionally critical. A disgruntled Blue sounds perfect for that.

Haha. I see what you did there.

Personally I'd love an agenda-less, normal, City supporter who can write well.

This place might mock James Pearce et al, but it's pretty clear from the absolute vitriol every single journalist in the country gets on here that actually, a sycophant who never entertains a bad word about the club is exactly what they want.

There is literally not a single journalist in the sport that has not been attacked in this thread or its predecessors for being biased against us or having some unnamed ulterior motive. Maybe Martin Samuel because he only comments once a year and is anti FFP.