Media Thread - 2021/22

[KS55]

Maybe our PR team should be putting these ignorant fuckers right, and in fact should have been doing so for years. By remaining silent and not calling out the lies we are being seen however these media bellends say we are, because no-one hears anything to suggest otherwise.

I can’t imagine many successful businesses that consistently received such negative press would not fight back and present the truth. Imagine if newspapers printed blatant lies about, say Amazon, or Tesla, they’d be facing a lawsuit in days. Why are we so fucking meek? I wish we’d take every one of the fat lying rag hacks apart.

Yes. We wouldn't even need a lawsuit, except in extremis. Standard PR techniques for reputation management should suffice.

 

[halfcenturyup]

Did you get Tenor Sky. I watched the 2nd half on it and it was a fantastic stream. and I didnt have to sign up or accept any cookies

Naah, a Tenor was too much. Would've paid a Fiver though.

 

[peter.evans]

Thee was a big Manchester indie scene in the mid to late 80s which collided with the rave boom around 88-89, spawning or influencing the bands which are associated with the movement. I think it was Happy Mondays "Madchester Rave On" EP which introduced the word "Madchester" in 1989.

I recall it was our fans that took to the scene first with the fashions, jeans and t shirts at the time that was noted by the media. Rag fans were well behind as usual like the neanderthals they are !

 

[KS55]

It’s a good answer, why give talkshite and all these bitter newspapers credence by taking them to court, by ignoring them we have the upper hand imo, some on here don’t like it but it’s the way our owners operate.

We certainly don't have the upper hand. Ultimately it is not a battle between us and the media, but a battle for our rep. which is sullied by all the lies. If the club don't care about our rep, what was all that talk about "A clear and organised attempt to harm our reputation"? Khaldoon made a big fuss about people in NY saying we were state owned. Club's position is illogical and inconsistent.

 

[Didsbury Dave]

It's my understanding that copyright exists in certain limited spheres.

So you can't copyright all uses of the word, but there is a clothing company called Madchester and by the look of the website - www.madchester.com it's very much a company that exists and would own a copyright which is probably why the Puma and City stuff is on there too - it's a collaboration.

But they couldn't come after you if you opened a bar called madchester, or started a brand of..electronics or something unrelated.

I can't be arsed to research it but i'm still not 100% convinced that that isn't just an offshoot of Puma or something. Or maybe just the designer himself. Selling the odd t-shirt with Madchester on it is totally tinpot, back bedroom stuff, and the website has only just gone live.

 

[bluealf]

It looks shite.

 

[KS55]

It's my understanding that copyright exists in certain limited spheres.

So you can't copyright all uses of the word, but there is a clothing company called Madchester and by the look of the website - www.madchester.com it's very much a company that exists and would own a copyright which is probably why the Puma and City stuff is on there too - it's a collaboration.

But they couldn't come after you if you opened a bar called madchester, or started a brand of..electronics or something unrelated.

When I was involved in copyrighting a few years ago, you had to state in every case the specific uses you were aiming to protect. E.g. "Puma: All clothing, liesurewear, shoes. Sporting awards......". Puma would not be protected for use as a brand of sausages.

 

[rowarta]

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

They already have that rule I thought. They certainly do in UEFA FFP.

 

[blue b4 the moon]

Why would the rags be involved in Madchester?

That'd just be cashing on on a name for try and get acceptance can't they get their own Tragicford?