Media thread 2022/23

[cheekybids]

Dear click-baiters (I won't refer to them as journo's) please read the following quote from HH Sheikh Mansour in his letter to fans on the purchase of the club in 2008:

"I should perhaps also explain that despite what you may have read, I have bought the club in a private capacity and as part of my personal business strategy to hold a wide portfolio of business investments. I am a football fan, and I hope that you will soon see that I am now also a Manchester City fan. But I am also a long-term investor and that is probably more important to the club and to you because it means we are here for the long haul and that we will act always in the best interests of the club and all of its stakeholders, but especially you the fans."

Source

Thankfully the only thing he got wrong was Hughes.

 

[SebastianBlue]

Really? I mean really, seriously really? You are genuinely convinced the most negative detractors of City get most of their engagement from Bluemoon users?

People like Delaney?

Absolutely.

Are you familiar with network mathematics?

Bluemoon users tend to be “power” fans, which post beyond Bluemoon, including on major social media platforms like Twitter and Reddit.

The through traffic and impressions via rage-sharing alone will be a substantial portion of the engagement for most negative detractors of City, of which most have independent footprints beyond their employers.

The amplification effect is astounding for many of their articles. They spread like wildfire and those same provocateurs can then cite their engagement metrics to justify freelance/salary support for further work.

Many blues are either ignorant to how “new media” works or exceedingly naive about how their actions support it.

@tolmie's hairdoo could no doubt elaborate further.

 

[halfcenturyup]

People like Delaney?

Absolutely.

Are you familiar with network mathematics?

Bluemoon users tend to be “power” fans, which post beyond Bluemoon, including on major social media platforms like Twitter and Reddit.

The through traffic and impressions via rage-sharing alone will be a substantial portion of the engagement for most negative detractors of City, of which most have independent footprints beyond their employers.

The amplification effect is astounding for many of their articles. They spread like wildfire and those same provocateurs can the. cite their engagement metrics to justify freelance/salary support for further work.

Many blues are either ignorant to how “new media” works or exceedingly naive about how their actions support it.

@tolmie's hairdoo could no doubt elaborate further.

Network mathematics? Never heard if it and don't really want to, before you enlighten us, but I am guessing it's to do with exponentials starting from a few shares with friends, to those friends sharing with their friends and so on. Doesn't work in me . I have no friends.

I am sorry, but you are sounding as increasingly paranoid as the new media people you should be criticising.


Edit: sorry, in retrospect, that sounded rather insulting. That wasn't my intention, but my fat fingers pressed send before I had had the chance to finish my thought so I had to do just a little damage limitation. You are clearly not crazed or paranoid and, although we share some views on some things, on this one I think you are wrong.

I don't think Mansour on Saturday night was worrying about the effects on network mathematics on the income of a few journalists. More likely he was thinking about how he can finally leverage the CL and the treble success to attract more billion dollar investments into CFG. And I am sure they are on their way. If he doesn't care, then I don't.

 

[Coatigan]

Do you know something? Closing this thread was actually a great idea.

Re-opening it makes it easier to ignore, if that's what you want. Keeps articles in the one place rather than popping up on othe threads.

 

[blue b4 the moon]

Sad fucks, if only the Americans would invest rather than creaming money out of the game..... fucking write about that!!

 

[Coatigan]

Mate - he didn’t say posting a link infringes copyright.

He said posting more then a summary paragraph infringes copyright and would be removed - which is 100% accurate.

His point was that posting a link provides the writers of negative articles with the very engagement and clicks they so desperately crave - thereby validating the absolute fucking bilge they keep writing about our club.

And I for one agree with him - giving the parade of morally redundant shills who cynically and habitually misrepresent our club the benefit of the clicks that literally pay their bills only serves to encourage them and their employers to keep churning this shit out.

Its so self defeating to use a City forum to validate and give free promotion to the very people and publications that are so committed to attacking and denigrating our club.

What happens is we post screenshots of headlines, peole google the article, click on it, and the same clicks happen (if that really matters), but with now an additional percentage of google searches registered. I get it is from a good place, but the obsession with not posting links is at best misplaced. Don't post them, don't click them, ignore the lot if it pleases you or you think it makes a difference. Others will though, don't let that upset you more than the articles themselves.

 

[tolmie's hairdoo]

Mate - he didn’t say posting a link infringes copyright.

He said posting more then a summary paragraph infringes copyright and would be removed - which is 100% accurate.

His point was that posting a link provides the writers of negative articles with the very engagement and clicks they so desperately crave - thereby validating the absolute fucking bilge they keep writing about our club.

And I for one agree with him - giving the parade of morally redundant shills who cynically and habitually misrepresent our club the benefit of the clicks that literally pay their bills only serves to encourage them and their employers to keep churning this shit out.

Its so self defeating to use a City forum to validate and give free promotion to the very people and publications that are so committed to attacking and denigrating our club.

It's worse than that. I know for a fact that desks and TalkSport are very thankful for these threads to gauge responses and moods.

That's on top of their analytic tools.

 

[Coatigan]

With respect - your simple fact is nothing of the sort.

What @SebastianBlue was suggesting was that if you want to reference an article, you can quote the headline and a summary paragraph whilst still making your point - without giving the fucking pond life that are committed to slandering our club at every turn the very thing they so desperately desire.

If you really want to go and read the full article from there - knock yourself out - but the solution he’s proposing saves using a City website to validate the very people and publications who use their platforms to constantly misrepresent and attack our Club.

Starve then of clicks - you starve them of oxygen.

They must fucking love this place, all the free hits they get off us!

Very often, the headline and summary can be different to the body of the article. Someone in the industry explained that previously, as the editors choosing not the writers. If more people out there read the full thing (of some of the articles, not all), the headlines maybe wouldn't stick as much.

Either way, people will most likely either read the whole thing or not, regardless of whether there is a link to it or not, so it is a bit of a niche argument.

 

[tolmie's hairdoo]

Really? I mean really, seriously really? You are genuinely convinced the most negative detractors of City get most of their engagement from Bluemoon users?

I don't need convincing, I know.

10am every morning conference. Data and theme teams asking what is hitting the mark and how to build further narrative.

City fans are doing their jobs for them.

Make them accountable, sure, but don't make them relevant.

United sell newspapers, it's certainly not because they play brilliant football.

I've walked away from this shit. 30 years working in an industry which is now dictated by algorithms and people sat reading forums and Twitter.

City fans being socially conditioned to think everyone hates us, based on the lazy tropes and bitterness of self-important spunk bubbles.

 

[Coatigan]

People like Delaney?

Absolutely.

Are you familiar with network mathematics?

Bluemoon users tend to be “power” fans, which post beyond Bluemoon, including on major social media platforms like Twitter and Reddit.

The through traffic and impressions via rage-sharing alone will be a substantial portion of the engagement for most negative detractors of City, of which most have independent footprints beyond their employers.

The amplification effect is astounding for many of their articles. They spread like wildfire and those same provocateurs can then cite their engagement metrics to justify freelance/salary support for further work.

Many blues are either ignorant to how “new media” works or exceedingly naive about how their actions support it.

@tolmie's hairdoo could no doubt elaborate further.

Then you will be aware of the mathematics of it, and that you are effectively arguing about how much of a difference recycling your plastic bottle made to the environment in which factories across the country pollute at a rate you can't even quantify.

 

[BerkshireBlue]

…you’ve completely misread the post.

I said do not post links to negative articles as it only provides the engagement (the link being embedded is tracked , as is the click through for impressions, and the users origin for views). The very debate on here gives the articles more exposure as well, and leads to further sharing which provides engagement.

I also shared what is acceptable for screenshot sharing under forum rules, which are in place to prevent copyright claims. These are the same rules that prohibit posting of entire articles (copy-and-paste).

I have thought this through. Many on here bemoaning the negative coverage of City have not, as they only help feed the beast by posting direct links to the bile.

And you can have a perfectly meaningful debate based on the screenshot of the headline and the summary paragraph (either the first paragraph, or the summary right below the headline which often accompanies these articles). If you feel so inclined, you can even summarise the article in your post if you think it is worthwhile to discussion.

People can find the media with a simple search using the headlines if they absolutely want to throw another t-bone to the monster, it takes literally seconds via google.

But sharing a direct link on here just leads to engagement, more sharing, engagement, more sharing, and so on, just incentivising more negative articles.

I completely agree with you here. What is the point of posting negative articles. The hacks have nothing to say, never have and never will. Who cares what they write as its the scribblings of a jealous imbecile with no cohesion and on top of that it's also a boring read. It's like posting a comment off RWAK or some other shit red top forum. I stopped reading their nonsense a few years back and I don't miss it

 

[petrusha]

What strikes me is that they can write absolute shite and not care about it. And the so-called quality papers are even worse, if anything. I could have produced a better analysis of the CAS proceedings when I was a 10-year-old than Sam Wallace did in the Telegraph on Saturday. But I'm sure his piece got plenty of engagement and he's very happy with it.

A bugbear of mine is that our detractors keep labelling Abu Dhabi a nation state. It isn't, and my view is that anyone who's so thick that they can't get to grips with such a simple concept forfeits the right to have their views taken seriously on more complex aspects of the topic. But these people really couldn't give a toss about truth, accuracy or other similarly bothersome concepts.

 

[Roy Munson]

I don't need convincing, I know.

10am every morning conference. Data and theme teams asking what is hitting the mark and how to build further narrative.

City fans are doing their jobs for them.

Make them accountable, sure, but don't make them relevant.

United sell newspapers, it's certainly not because they play brilliant football.

I've walked away from this shit. 30 years working in an industry which is now dictated by algorithms and people sat reading forums and Twitter.

City fans being socially conditioned to think everyone hates us, based on the lazy tropes and bitterness of self-important spunk bubbles.

Bingo.

I've sat in more of these than I can remember.

And, to my shame, I've helped create a few of the algorithms used across the industry.

Great you got out, fella. My soul was lost long ago. :-(

 

[The perfect fumble]

Really? I mean really, seriously really? You are genuinely convinced the most negative detractors of City get most of their engagement from Bluemoon users?

He really does, which rather undermines his argument. Regardless of how super mega, massive we all know Bluemoon is, the truth is the traffic driven from this thread to the offending articles will be minuscule. Whereas forcing folk to screen shot headlines and post chunks of articles and sometimes quoting the whole bloody thing verbatim, threatens to infringe the copyright he states he's out to protect.

His argument is driven by emotion rather than logic, he so hates the idea that we might contribute, even in a negligible way, to the finances of these haters, that he fails to understand that what he recommends effectively kills the thread.

 

[Centurions]

I find it odd that you registered in February, have only 52 posts, and more than 20% of them are just posting links to takedown pieces of City.

There's more than just the one poster who stinks to high heaven in this thread. They usually have quite a few posts in 'Off Topic' in order to get the post count up as well.

Shit stirrers.

 

[kippaxwarrior]

Jon Kay on BBC breakfast this morning

"Do we need to keep talking about Man City today". Sally Sally had a little giggle at that one

Think it was said jest(you can never be sure though) but would he ever make that comment if it was Liverpool or the rags? I think not

 

[r.soleofsalford]

It's behind a Paywall...

Fuck off back to Rawk or Redcafe

 

[Centurions]

What strikes me is that they can write absolute shite and not care about it. And the so-called quality papers are even worse, if anything. I could have produced a better analysis of the CAS proceedings when I was a 10-year-old than Sam Wallace did in the Telegraph on Saturday. But I'm sure his piece got plenty of engagement and he's very happy with it.

A bugbear of mine is that our detractors keep labelling Abu Dhabi a nation state. It isn't, and my view is that anyone who's so thick that they can't get to grips with such a simple concept forfeits the right to have their views taken seriously on more complex aspects of the topic. But these people really couldn't give a toss about truth, accuracy or other similarly bothersome concepts.

I noticed that quite a few of the recently quoted articles refer to us as state owned but also mention our owner as the Sheikh in the same article, make your minds up FFS.

I doubt it's possible with the software used but banning hyperlinks within this thread would help with keeping the interactions down.

 

[halfcenturyup]

I don't need convincing, I know.

10am every morning conference. Data and theme teams asking what is hitting the mark and how to build further narrative.

City fans are doing their jobs for them.

Make them accountable, sure, but don't make them relevant.

United sell newspapers, it's certainly not because they play brilliant football.

I've walked away from this shit. 30 years working in an industry which is now dictated by algorithms and people sat reading forums and Twitter.

City fans being socially conditioned to think everyone hates us, based on the lazy tropes and bitterness of self-important spunk bubbles.

Yes I understand how it works (in principle, not being in the industry), I was questioning this statement:

"I am genuinely convinced the most negative detractors of City get most of their engagement (thus exposure and revenue) from Bluemoon and Bluemoon users on Twitter, Reddit, etc."

Whatever the methodology, I find it hard to believe that statement is true in any way, shape or form.

 

[Trevor Morley's Tache]

I noticed Duncan Castles came out of the woodwork on Twitter pretty much straight after the final whistle on Saturday with a lengthy piece about tainted trophies. Clearly had it pre-written, and it must have crippled him to press send.