Media thread 2022/23

[LongsightM13]

TalkSport had one of the authors of the report on and completely disagreed with the premise that the redevelopment of the area was in any way wrong. They did allow him to spout his nonsense on sports washing but even then the author sounded like he was wearing his tinfoil hat.

Was it any surprise that he was from ‘Manchester’?

Any idea what show this was on?

 

[cheekybids]

I won't post the link to the rag, but one today has a pic on the back page, of Grealish diving into a pool, with the by line, ''Grealish Is A Diver!'' a bit of fun yeah, however at the same time ...

Subliminal message.

 

[canyerdogputoutafire]

Any idea what show this was on?

Around mid-day Friday
It was Sam Matterface and Mickey Gray standing in for know nowt Jordan.

 

[Gingers Dad]

TalkSport had one of the authors of the report on and completely disagreed with the premise that the redevelopment of the area was in any way wrong. They did allow him to spout his nonsense on sports washing but even then the author sounded like he was wearing his tinfoil hat.

Was it any surprise that he was from ‘Manchester’?

Why are they talking about the redevelopment of East Manchester on Talksport?

 

[old get]

Why are they talking about the redevelopment of East Manchester on Talksport?

Been away but has anyone touched on the imminent departure of Vicky Kloss to.......spend time with her family.

 

[waspish]

Why are they talking about the redevelopment of East Manchester on Talksport?

Because we know who owns them they have loads of listeners so get the propaganda out there more! Keep the drip drip drip of negative narrative of everything Man City!

 

[bobbyowenquiff]

They also seem to have written their report from the point of view that there is a preferred option and then benchmarked the deals against that preferred option. So, in that context, the conclusions they have come up with are no surprise. To be fair, some of their conclusions make sense, as well.

Unfortunately for academics, (insofar as they exist in Sheffield), the real world is a complicated place and their have been some good posts on here which point out many factors that should also have been taken into account in their analysis.

Also, their subjective conclusions on the reputation of the UAE, and its effect on Manchester in the future, are one-sided and lacking in finesse. They should have left that to the internationally renowned (presumably) international relations faculty at the UoS.

Blinkered crackpot out.

The central claims in the report that the land was sold off cheaply are false though because they retrospectively apply values on the land when (prior to regeneration) it was worthless and no one wanted to buy it. The study only looks at the housing deal which is a small element of a huge long-term strategic plan for East Manchester. The claims made are absurd because they have excluded all the financial benefits provided from the project.

 

[Gray]

Could you imagine that area if City had not comitted to moving into the Commonwealth Games stadium?

The mind boggles as to how it would look today.

 

[manchester blue]

I was a bit bored so emailed the BBC about how they can justify the expense of sending Stone thousands of miles to cover friendlies yet the same company cannot even give its readers a score from City games, let alone a report.

This must be the response they send when they don’t have a sensible answer.
———————————-
Thank you for getting in touch.

Feedback is really important to us because it helps us improve our programmes and services. So thanks for taking the time to share your thoughts.

We have reported your concerns to programme makers and senior managers across the BBC.

Because the BBC is a public service, we must ensure our response to complaints is proportionate. We investigate issues further if the BBC’s editorial guidelines or regulatory standards might have been broken. This relates to things such as:

• The seriousness of the issue

• The potential to mislead and if there is an issue of harm to the complainant

• The nature of audience response and possible damage to trust and confidence in the BBC

If we receive large numbers of complaints about an issue, we may make our response available online.

In this instance we won’t be investigating the issue in more detail but we would like to assure you that we value your feedback and have shared it with the right people at the BBC.

It’s very much appreciated.

 

[hertsblue]

I was a bit bored so emailed the BBC about how they can justify the expense of sending Stone thousands of miles to cover friendlies yet the same company cannot even give its readers a score from City games, let alone a report.

This must be the response they send when they don’t have a sensible answer.
———————————-
Thank you for getting in touch.

Feedback is really important to us because it helps us improve our programmes and services. So thanks for taking the time to share your thoughts.

We have reported your concerns to programme makers and senior managers across the BBC.

Because the BBC is a public service, we must ensure our response to complaints is proportionate. We investigate issues further if the BBC’s editorial guidelines or regulatory standards might have been broken. This relates to things such as:

• The seriousness of the issue

• The potential to mislead and if there is an issue of harm to the complainant

• The nature of audience response and possible damage to trust and confidence in the BBC

If we receive large numbers of complaints about an issue, we may make our response available online.

In this instance we won’t be investigating the issue in more detail but we would like to assure you that we value your feedback and have shared it with the right people at the BBC.

It’s very much appreciated.

Rag Stone has another pathetic article up now, send your questions on Rags and Villa as they are currently playing a meaningless friendly. Shame he or no one else could be bothered with the Champions friendly the other day. I would be happy for the club to ban Stone from the ground and send Out the chef, kit man etc to do MOTD interviews . They deserve to be treated with utter distain

 

[NeilMcnabTwoFooted]

Probably from Bowden, Hale barns, guardian arse who thinks there are 98 genders.

has to be mate, whilst eating his avocado toast & sporting a che guevara t shirt, probably called taquin n all.

 

[jrb]

Remind me again, as I can't quite remember. What's the connection with the New York Times and the on-going campaign against Sheikh Mansour and City.

 

[East Level 2]

I won't post the link to the rag, but one today has a pic on the back page, of Grealish diving into a pool, with the by line, ''Grealish Is A Diver!'' a bit of fun yeah, however at the same time ...

Well Sterling and Jesus won't be divers any more.

 

[waspish]

Remind me again, as I can't quite remember. What's the connection with the New York Times and the on-going campaign against Sheikh Mansour and City.

All FSG who have big sway in America it’s the American way to cheat dirty tricks! FSG has a record of being corrupt cheating fuckers!!

 

[LongsightM13]

Remind me again, as I can't quite remember. What's the connection with the New York Times and the on-going campaign against Sheikh Mansour and City.

Rory Smith? American owners? Wasnt aware of anything specific though haven’t they also been hostile to a new stadium for NYCFC?

 

[bobbyowenquiff]

Remind me again, as I can't quite remember. What's the connection with the New York Times and the on-going campaign against Sheikh Mansour and City.

Is it Middle East geo-politics? The Fenway Group still has a strong link editorially with the New York Times. At one point the paper used to own a significant chunk of FSG. Certainly the NYT has done its best to scupper CFG's attempts to build a stadium in Manhattan. There is a significant anti-arab lobby in New York City itself. Certainly the New York Times which never gave any space to stories about Manchester City FC has become a vitriolic critic of our owner in recent years. Why would the NYT run a story on a Sheffield University report on Manchester's housing market?

 

[halfcenturyup]

The central claims in the report that the land was sold off cheaply are false though because they retrospectively apply values on the land when (prior to regeneration) it was worthless and no one wanted to buy it. The study only looks at the housing deal which is a small element of a huge long-term strategic plan for East Manchester. The claims made are absurd because they have excluded all the financial benefits provided from the project.

Yes, the wider context should change some of their conclusions considerably I imagine.

I would just add that their conclusions on the lack of a bidding process, and the length of leaseholds (999 years!) are easy to make through the limited lens in which they are looking as are their conclusions on transparency and off-shoring.

Not a hill for me to die on, though, so enough on this from me :)

 

[Gingers Dad]

Could you imagine that area if City had not comitted to moving into the Commonwealth Games stadium?

The mind boggles as to how it would look today.

They weren't even going to build the stadium if there was no use for it after the games

 

[Blue Mist]

Of all the illegal stuff that the USA has done on foreign soil, that would not be in my top ten to worry about.

I am merely pointing out how we, 'the west' love to tell the rest of the world how to live but trample all over international law when it suits.

 

[citymad]

What about those Trump supporting owners who own the rags? They haven’t invested anything in the local area in Trafford, no colleges built, no training facilities that the wider community can use? They have leveraged United with a load of debt and spend their dividends trying to keep their crumbling shopping malls in the states going, non of this going back into Greater Manchester.

spot on mate.