Media thread 2022/23

[Rochdale Blue]

I wonder if the lack of City coverage of this pre-season might be connected with the fact that they went on tour much later than everyone else... makes sense to get people out reporting than at home waiting for a team to go off and play twice in the US.... Just a thought not a defence but it makes sense.

Most of them report from an armchair in their living rooms anyway.

 

[Inter Me Nan]

Fuck the media we're ace the end.

 

[Maly]

Sure but did you see the font they used? Arial sans serif...
If that was United or Liverpool, they'd have used Arial AVEC serif!!
;-)

Ha ha, very good mate. It does make a nice change to read such a positive & fair article tho. I’m pretty certain I’ve read some other articles from Ben Ransom & if memory serves, I think most of his articles are as fair, balanced & as positive as some other clubs get from our friends from the WhatsApp group

 

[feedmpenzaandhewillscore]

The Media thought "if they told lies about us, belittled every bit of hard work and success we had and created a vacuum of hate full of untrust and bordering racism, we'd just go away".

Now we're at the point where they think "if we just ignore them, they'll go away"...

Reality is going to sting like 'gravel rash' in a hot shower when they awake to find us still here.

It should and would be funny.....if it wasn't so embarrassingly childish, they're grown men and women after all.

Anyhow, 20 years ago we'd have chopped our left legs off to be in this position, so don't let a few petulant pricks ruin it, just enjoy this ride and furthermore enjoy your Sunday, with the family.

Especially you Ric.... ;^)

Keep smiling Blues.

Exactly, enjoy the ride. I don’t need to go on the BBC, Daily Mail, The Guardian or Sky sports website to read some article written by someone no more qualified to have an opinion on football than anyone else for validation that City are doing alright. We can see it with our own eyes.

 

[cheekybids]

The Media thought "if they told lies about us, belittled every bit of hard work and success we had and created a vacuum of hate full of untrust and bordering racism, we'd just go away".

Now we're at the point where they think "if we just ignore them, they'll go away"...

Reality is going to sting like 'gravel rash' in a hot shower when they awake to find us still here.

It should and would be funny.....if it wasn't so embarrassingly childish, they're grown men and women after all.

Anyhow, 20 years ago we'd have chopped our left legs off to be in this position, so don't let a few petulant pricks ruin it, just enjoy this ride and furthermore enjoy your Sunday, with the family.

Especially you Ric.... ;^)

Keep smiling Blues.

It looks like they started with the laugh then fighting & realised they hadn’t ignored us…..

I’m certain the win will be next ;)

 

[Maly]

The season hasn't even started and we are discussing bias. The reality appears to be that we will be unfairly/under reported until one of the following happens.

1. The analytics tell them it is no longer good business to denigrate or ignore us.

2. Editorial positions change towards us as a result of different personnel or strategies.tied to the above.

3. The club gets aggressive or litigious, though this will only resolve egregious errors not general bias.

4. Something else I've missed.

In the absence of these things happening this thread has evolved mostly into a mechanism for us to blow off steam, catalogue our grievances. This is a legitimate reason for a thread but I wonder if there is merit in splitting it into more than one thread?

At the moment we have the occasional other media discussion in with lots of posts pointing out that Delaney or Harris etc aren't playing with a full deck, or commentary on the BBC/Stone all of which we've known for quite some time and probably won't change anytime soon.

Not saying this isn't legitimate commentary/opinion just wonder if it's time to split this out in some way, shape or form? I do recognise that an 'agenda' thread runs the risk of feeding the narrative that we are paranoid but maybe it can be framed in different terms?

I’ve thought the same as positive articles can get lost amongst the negative ones.

If it was separated into a negative thread & a balanced or positive media thread, I’m pretty sure you’d see all the same clowns in the negative thread & we would never see any of said ‘journalists’ articles in the positive thread

Would show ‘clear & obvious’ pretty well I’d imagine

 

[Blue Mist]

Do you want the same coverage united get?

I always found it nauseating.

Why? I am desperate to know what DeGea had for breakfast or that Shaw makes paper roses out of napkins.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Which would rather City be? Media darlings yet in a seemingly permanent crisis that could yet get a lot worse, like our neighbours?
Or chasing our third consecutive PL title, and a fifth in six years, but the subject of often hostile media?

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

I’m not really defending the BBC, or implying that we get the same coverage as United. Just pointing out something that is completely, verifiably not true.

What was not true, that when I posted the article wasn't there? It wasn't.

I also don't think the article on our first friendly ever appeared on their main page. I would have seen it. But it appears that you agree that the coverage they give to City is pitiful and they are biased towards utd especially.

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

I wan

Do you want the same coverage united get?

I always found it nauseating.

I want balanced reporting from something I we pay for. If that means less crap about them in the process then great.