Media thread 2022/23

Status
Not open for further replies.
Kinkys Left Foot said:
So according to the Independants Tyrion, club ownership and the much discussed "Sportswashing" is nothing to do with image projection and publicity , good or bad and is more to do with influence.

This "influence' the irish midget speaks of, is this in any way to be confused with the other buzzwords like "Soft power" or other such boardroom speak? He speaks in riddles and doesn't answer simple questions. It's a relatively simple analogy as to why investment in sports is somehow viewed by his like as negative yet the investment of billions into a country's economy via housing projects or scientific research or other industry is somehow treated differently.
Where and how is this influence to be allegedly wielded?
By whom and in what capacity?

I have seen no sign of any such attempted influence by City's ownership in any field I can think of, sports, political, what exactly?
Moreover to what end is this "influence" employed. Is it allegedly nefarious and if so again to what end.
Who exactly is affected by this deployment of "influence".

It's no secret the middle eastern countries don't get a good press in respect of human rights and correctly so in some instances.

We cannot escape the fact there are distinct economic, religious, political, cultural and social differences to Western European countries and those of the middle east, some far east, Asia, Russia etc. There will inevitably be clashes of culture due to these differences. We will never be the same and the pursuit or concept of some ideological nirvana, whilst worthwhile is I fear, imaginary and unachievable.

So that leaves us with levels of tolerance of each other. Whilst I vehemently disagree with persecution of groups because of sexual orientation or ethnicity or skin colour, or the contractual enslavement of individuals as migrant workers to what degree am I to be outraged by these things occurring in another country? I choose not to go to these places. Am I to be guided by Amnesty International on who does and doesn't fall into an acceptable category? Is there a line or is it a sliding scale? I fear AI has its own agenda and therefore my opinion is that each individual must make up their own minds on these matters by informing themselves of the facts and not listening to the likes of Dan Roan or Said Mohammed (the ping pong cheat).

The Western Europeans should remember that he who casts the first stone etc Considering information such as that within the following article Legalised Homosexuality it seems somewhat ironic to be pontificating to other countries about their laws on such matters when we have barely got our own house in order.

The western media headlines decrying the capital punishment of individuals in middle eastern countries as barbaric and inhuman yet say nothing regarding the USA's policy on capital punishment. To an outsider it would seem its not the act but the method that draws such ire. They also rarely comment on the shipping off of prisoners to another countries borders, held without trial or due process to be beaten, tortured and killed to avoid international law sanctions in what is considered a major breach of human rights and seems to be a process only likely to occur in some fascist dystopian nightmare society yet we know it is not! It's hard to argue that these media opinions are not partly borne from a racist agenda or standpoint. SOme will agree others not.

Certainly many would not consider these matters at all in respect of an individual's (or state) ownership of their Football Club yet media in this country would have you view football ownership through some kaleidoscope filter whereby they get to judge who and what are fit and proper owners and they choose the terms and conditions by which this test is applied. Its sanctimonious claptrap at best. I don't have a problem with a correctly administered fit and proper test for ownership albeit I would be reticent about those chosen to apply such a test and who draws up the "rulebook". Interestingly that no doubt some would like to see the "Test" applied retrospectively in the hopes that somehow foreign ownership would be penalised in some way.

It will be interesting to see the outcome of the sale of Trafford Rangers and my distinct feel of the media view is that they are not in favour of the Qatar bid and would much rather see jolly Jim INIOS installed as the new owner, renowned polluter and sworn enemy of the Green lobby. What a dilemma, which of the ugly sisters to marry eh?
Click to expand...
If it was about influence the term would be used for every owner of every sports team to varying degrees but it’s only used in relation to owners from certain areas. What more is I suspect our owner is the one that needs a football club the least for influence. Well he would certainly be up there with PSG and Newcastle
 
Kinkys Left Foot said:
So according to the Independants Tyrion, club ownership and the much discussed "Sportswashing" is nothing to do with image projection and publicity , good or bad and is more to do with influence.

This "influence' the irish midget speaks of, is this in any way to be confused with the other buzzwords like "Soft power" or other such boardroom speak? He speaks in riddles and doesn't answer simple questions. It's a relatively simple analogy as to why investment in sports is somehow viewed by his like as negative yet the investment of billions into a country's economy via housing projects or scientific research or other industry is somehow treated differently.
Where and how is this influence to be allegedly wielded?
By whom and in what capacity?

I have seen no sign of any such attempted influence by City's ownership in any field I can think of, sports, political, what exactly?
Moreover to what end is this "influence" employed. Is it allegedly nefarious and if so again to what end.
Who exactly is affected by this deployment of "influence".

It's no secret the middle eastern countries don't get a good press in respect of human rights and correctly so in some instances.

We cannot escape the fact there are distinct economic, religious, political, cultural and social differences to Western European countries and those of the middle east, some far east, Asia, Russia etc. There will inevitably be clashes of culture due to these differences. We will never be the same and the pursuit or concept of some ideological nirvana, whilst worthwhile is I fear, imaginary and unachievable.

So that leaves us with levels of tolerance of each other. Whilst I vehemently disagree with persecution of groups because of sexual orientation or ethnicity or skin colour, or the contractual enslavement of individuals as migrant workers to what degree am I to be outraged by these things occurring in another country? I choose not to go to these places. Am I to be guided by Amnesty International on who does and doesn't fall into an acceptable category? Is there a line or is it a sliding scale? I fear AI has its own agenda and therefore my opinion is that each individual must make up their own minds on these matters by informing themselves of the facts and not listening to the likes of Dan Roan or Said Mohammed (the ping pong cheat).

The Western Europeans should remember that he who casts the first stone etc Considering information such as that within the following article Legalised Homosexuality it seems somewhat ironic to be pontificating to other countries about their laws on such matters when we have barely got our own house in order.

The western media headlines decrying the capital punishment of individuals in middle eastern countries as barbaric and inhuman yet say nothing regarding the USA's policy on capital punishment. To an outsider it would seem its not the act but the method that draws such ire. They also rarely comment on the shipping off of prisoners to another countries borders, held without trial or due process to be beaten, tortured and killed to avoid international law sanctions in what is considered a major breach of human rights and seems to be a process only likely to occur in some fascist dystopian nightmare society yet we know it is not! It's hard to argue that these media opinions are not partly borne from a racist agenda or standpoint. SOme will agree others not.

Certainly many would not consider these matters at all in respect of an individual's (or state) ownership of their Football Club yet media in this country would have you view football ownership through some kaleidoscope filter whereby they get to judge who and what are fit and proper owners and they choose the terms and conditions by which this test is applied. Its sanctimonious claptrap at best. I don't have a problem with a correctly administered fit and proper test for ownership albeit I would be reticent about those chosen to apply such a test and who draws up the "rulebook". Interestingly that no doubt some would like to see the "Test" applied retrospectively in the hopes that somehow foreign ownership would be penalised in some way.

It will be interesting to see the outcome of the sale of Trafford Rangers and my distinct feel of the media view is that they are not in favour of the Qatar bid and would much rather see jolly Jim INIOS installed as the new owner, renowned polluter and sworn enemy of the Green lobby. What a dilemma, which of the ugly sisters to marry eh?
Click to expand...
Good post mate. Enjoyed reading it.

The media demand that we should all be in a constant state of anger. At everything!

Brexit to Club ownership. It don’t matter anymore, be angry! Facts? Nah forget about them. All to keep everything in check and for those in power to remain. Keep the bad Arab out at all costs. Ramp up the hate campaign, slander their good name. They don’t belong here etc etc. in my experience there is good and bad everywhere you look. In all walks of life. City have good people in charge. The mistake we made was making the rest look bad.

Until the majority of people start thinking for themselves again and not what some random internet person tell them it will not have a chance to change.
 
Last edited:
Ornstein on Sky referring to Citys ownership (the club) as a "regime" that wants to win the CL.
Collins definition.
If you refer to a government or system of running a country as a regime, you are critical of it because you think it is not democratic and uses unacceptable methods.
Fuckoff Ornstein you bellend.
 
That Fletch last night when the score was at 2 nil, "what a game Steve between 2 heavyweight giants".
Then later "tomorrow City play liepzig but make sure you tune in on Thursday for The Big One Manchester United vs Barcelona, that's not to be missed".
No red shirt bias being plugged
 
Kippax77 said:
That Fletch last night when the score was at 2 nil, "what a game Steve between 2 heavyweight giants".
Then later "tomorrow City play liepzig but make sure you tune in on Thursday for The Big One Manchester United vs Barcelona, that's not to be missed".
No red shirt bias being plugged
Click to expand...
It really was like a shame our little distraction was inconveniently shoehorned in.
"Fletch " - should stick to go-cart racing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.