Media thread 2022/23

[solley attwell]

Remember how colin mafham was hounded out of his job for simply voicing an opinion. Maybe someone should send an email to Andy Burnham and see can he be an proactive as his scouse counterpart

 

[halfcenturyup]

If I recall correctly ADUG did pay the Etisalat sponsorship but UEFA accepted that was later refunded by Etisalat.

Oh yes, I remember now.

Etisalat 2 stipulated that Etisalat pay sponsorship monies to ADUG and ADUG pay the monies to City. It took two years to finalise the contract though, during which time the parties worked under a Heads of Agreement, which allowed City to invoice. Etisalat corporate governance didn't allow them to make payments under a HoA, so for two years they didn't pay. For those two years, ADUG advanced the monies to City and were later paid in full by Etisalat when the contract was signed.

City mentioned in their submission that UEFA had accepted that Etisalat had paid ADUG for the sponsorship monies for these two years.

But it was all time-barred anyway, so CAS didn't conclude on it.

Is that about it?

The second Etisalat contract was all a bit messy IIRC, and hopefully lessons about the need for simplicity and transparency have been learned.

 

[halfcenturyup]

It was almost as I'd he was perfectly aware of the situation like most people in the world at the time, and thought I'll take the job anyway.

I would imagine most intelligent people knew what Al-Jazeera was when it first appeared. I used to watch it for the different viewpoint, but stopped when it became a bit too much. I went in with my eyes wide open, I am sure Lineker was able to do the same.

Not criticising him for it, don't care that much. But I can't imagine he didn't know what he was doing. He's not an idiot.

 

[doobyedoobye]

I would be very surprised if City doesn't contact Sky to ask questions....

 

[tolmie's hairdoo]

The problem is, the apology/ rebuttal statement will be made at 3am. Its like when the newspapers print a front page headline that is a lie. 3 weeks later, on page 9, bottom left hand corner a 3 line, 'we accept our report regarding xxx was inaccurate and we have taken steps to address it'

Those apologies are always worked out with both sets of lawyers beforehand.

Certainly true, however, the paper will put it somewhere that is least damaging.

 

[KS55]

Ha ha ha. Introduced as an authority on the subject, then outright accuses City of fiddling the books. Pmsl

She is a journalist who lives in London and has never lived elsewhere. She is a Juve supporter basically trying to say that so many clubs are “at it” that the accusations against Juve are about actions which are common in football, so let us off, please.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Those apologies are always worked out with both sets of lawyers beforehand.

Certainly true, however, the paper will put it somewhere that is least damaging.

I’ve always felt that it should be mandated that any apology/retraction in the press should have the same prominence and column inches as the article that gave rise to it.

 

[Plays By Sense Of Smell]

I think rather , she sells herself, to anyone willing to pay for her goods.

Or in, let's say more colloquial terms, whores her wares?

 

[cheekybids]

I’ve always felt that it should be mandated that any apology/retraction in the press should have the same prominence and column inches as the article that gave rise to it.

That makes sense - front page on a Sunday lie gets a front page on a Sunday apology.

I assume the only way you’d get that is after a lengthy court case so a page 19 Weds 1 inch apology is the closest you get.

 

[KS55]

Done. Hopefully our useless media department will actually take some action

I think they will be acting on orders to complain only via the usual channels rather than publicly.
We need the Press office to convince the hierarchy that the lack of public refutation by us is damaging.