so this agenda thing.

[stonerblue]

Another day another rag love-in on the beeb site. Every fuckin page has united lead pics and they even shoehorned a 21 yr old Beckham pic in there. I feel sick and it's only 7am.

To be fair we do get two mentions on the gossip bit

Sagna's move may have been against the rules and Toure's not getting a new contract!

In the interest of balance it's only fair for me to point out that this mornings beeb site is once again full of united pics.

 

[Chippy_boy]

For me the clearest indication that there's a planned agenda was the recent articles on City signing up it's best players on long term contracts. Originally this was reported as it happened as each player got signed up, then in Pellers pre-match interview a couple of the hacks pressed him on whether Yaya would be getting a new contract. Pellers swerved the question and straight after the reports in mirror, telegraph, independent, mail and sun on this topic were that Yaya would not to be offered a new contract.

It was a planned and deliberate attempt by a number of papers to destabilise the player by misrepresenting the club and a number of the journo's had got together to do it.....Clear Agenda and collusion by the press and the evidence is on the city site and the papers online sites for all to see.

do you really think they got together before hand and said lets ask pellegrini about yaya and his contract and if he doesn't specifically say hes getting a new one we will print he isn't getting one

you don't know what is said behind closed doors at the club, for all we know they might be laughing their socks off at it all

and if it is an effort to destabilise players and club it clearly isn't working

bias clearly evident but planned agendas just not sure

Nothing said at that conference to create that headline so 2 choices
A.briefed off camera ? Then press run with embargoed info ?
B.press invent headline ? But seems strange they ALL run with it ?
On yaya have stated this view before something changed dramatically over summer from unhappy to " everything is OK now " he's been promised something for sure to change his stance .if we were seen to give a fresh deal so soon it would appear we were an easy touch .but I suspect we have givern him one to be announced last hence his change in attitude

I think his change in attitude is that he's been told he's under contract, we aren't selling him, so he can STFU and get on with his job. Realising he's going nowhere, and after the shit storm he caused preseason, he's thought he'd better keep his head down. Nothing more than that imho.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Nothing said at that conference to create that headline so 2 choices
A.briefed off camera ? Then press run with embargoed info ?
B.press invent headline ? But seems strange they ALL run with it ?

B is exactly what the red-tops do. I've been told by someone at City that after a press conference they have been known to get together and decide how they're going to spin it. I got slagged off on here by Daniel Taylor for saying that but he doesn't work for one of those papers and I wasn't accusing him of being involved in this. That's why they all seem to run the same negative story. So that's why I belive there's an agenda (and Mark Ogden confirmed that) although being anti-City is just a relatively minor part of that, the main part being pandering to rags and Liverpool fans.

 

[City Glory While Others Fade]

Nothing said at that conference to create that headline so 2 choices
A.briefed off camera ? Then press run with embargoed info ?
B.press invent headline ? But seems strange they ALL run with it ?

B is exactly what the red-tops do. I've been told by someone at City that after a press conference they have been known to get together and decide how they're going to spin it. I got slagged off on here by Daniel Taylor for saying that but he doesn't work for one of those papers and I wasn't accusing him of being involved in this. That's why they all seem to run the same negative story. So that's why I belive there's an agenda (and Mark Ogden confirmed that) although being anti-City is just a relatively minor part of that, the main part being pandering to rags and Liverpool fans.

Briefed off camera makes no sense when Pellers was asked twice in his conference and both times he says " wait and see". It's the 4 minutes of that 2nd part of Pellers prematch interview where questions from all sides of the room have clearly been set-up pre arrival....then the posts afterwards from 5-6 papers are a complete fabrication of what was actually said. This was done to upset a player or at least test the waters.

Bias reporting this is not. If the DM want to run the first story everyday on what the turtle leaves in his toilet bowl that's all well and good, if they want to make sure every picture of a player with nited has their sponsor s logo centre page and with City cropped off at the nipple again fair enuff. Never vote for Pellers as MOS after he wins the CL and EPL which I expect he will soon OK.....Making shit up having tried to gang up on Pellers unsuccessfully to try and destabilise a player is out of order...better you don't ask the question and make the shit up than that.

 

[bernabias home shirt]

Just finished watching MOTD, and in the "back pages" section at the end every newspaper they showed was pretty scathing about United, and Lineker was taking the piss a bit too. They're clearly not unconditionally sycophantic about the rags. There would've been uproar with some on here if it was City.

Everyones taking the piss out of them,t.v,papers,radio
But according to some on here that never happens.............

 

[prestonibbo_mcfc]

Ha, not sure that's positive proof of an agenda. It is strange though. Having seen Pellegrini's press conference, he alludes more to Toure getting a new contract than not.

Maybe they were briefed off tape that there were no plans to extend his contract, which would make sense as he is 31 and has three years left on his current deal. Hart, Milner and Dzeko are more pressing issues in terms of contracts.

Why would Pellers swerve the question on camera and then have them briefed after, that's not the way he operates.

They definitely misquote Pellers and it's not just 1 or 2 papers either...I believe it was done to upset Yaya and expect more of this over the coming months...it's all in the 2nd part of Pellers pre-match interview and there asking about cake gate and Yaya then a couple slip in the sneaky question. I don't mind the bias reporting, that is understandable if a paper has sponsorship and wants to report more on one club than the other. The mis representation of the facts is another thing, an agenda which is not acceptable!!

Exactly, if there is not collusion amongst the media how can a number of papers simultaneously misinterpret a very clear swerving of the issue from Pellers into one that states we will not be offering him a new contract?

Because one hack will right a piece on t'internet then the other lazy bastards will plagiarise it.

 

[gocity]

Just finished watching MOTD, and in the "back pages" section at the end every newspaper they showed was pretty scathing about United, and Lineker was taking the piss a bit too. They're clearly not unconditionally sycophantic about the rags. There would've been uproar with some on here if it was City.

Everyones taking the piss out of them,t.v,papers,radio
But according to some on here that never happens.............

They were first on motd though as per usual

 

[cibaman]

do you really think they got together before hand and said lets ask pellegrini about yaya and his contract and if he doesn't specifically say hes getting a new one we will print he isn't getting one

you don't know what is said behind closed doors at the club, for all we know they might be laughing their socks off at it all

and if it is an effort to destabilise players and club it clearly isn't working

bias clearly evident but planned agendas just not sure

Nothing said at that conference to create that headline so 2 choices
A.briefed off camera ? Then press run with embargoed info ?
B.press invent headline ? But seems strange they ALL run with it ?
On yaya have stated this view before something changed dramatically over summer from unhappy to " everything is OK now " he's been promised something for sure to change his stance .if we were seen to give a fresh deal so soon it would appear we were an easy touch .but I suspect we have givern him one to be announced last hence his change in attitude

I think his change in attitude is that he's been told he's under contract, we aren't selling him, so he can STFU and get on with his job. Realising he's going nowhere, and after the shit storm he caused preseason, he's thought he'd better keep his head down. Nothing more than that imho.

The way I read the articles, I think the press are prepared to give City credit for not giving Yaya a new contract. For not rewarding him in the same way that Liverpool and United rewarded Suarez and Rooney last year. But they will not do that unless City confirm that he isnt getting a new deal. They'd look stupid if they praised us for taking a firm line only for it to be announced a couple of weeks later that he had signed an upgraded deal. But clearly the club and Pellegrini dont want to publicly announce that we're not giving him a new contract. Why would they? It would be perceived by Yaya and his agent as public humiliation just as we have kissed and made up. Hence the subtle messages

 

[Dribble]

do you really think they got together before hand and said lets ask pellegrini about yaya and his contract and if he doesn't specifically say hes getting a new one we will print he isn't getting one

you don't know what is said behind closed doors at the club, for all we know they might be laughing their socks off at it all

and if it is an effort to destabilise players and club it clearly isn't working

bias clearly evident but planned agendas just not sure

Nothing said at that conference to create that headline so 2 choices
A.briefed off camera ? Then press run with embargoed info ?
B.press invent headline ? But seems strange they ALL run with it ?
On yaya have stated this view before something changed dramatically over summer from unhappy to " everything is OK now " he's been promised something for sure to change his stance .if we were seen to give a fresh deal so soon it would appear we were an easy touch .but I suspect we have givern him one to be announced last hence his change in attitude

I think his change in attitude is that he's been told he's under contract, we aren't selling him, so he can STFU and get on with his job. Realising he's going nowhere, and after the shit storm he caused preseason, he's thought he'd better keep his head down. Nothing more than that imho.

This

He's made a complete **** of himself and has been globally derided as an utter ball bag which was all of his own making, leaving us in a complete position of strength. Why would we want to improve his contract anyway? He's 32 next birthday and signed an improved 12 month deal last summer which still has 3 years to run.

 

[mrtwiceaseason]

Nothing said at that conference to create that headline so 2 choices
A.briefed off camera ? Then press run with embargoed info ?
B.press invent headline ? But seems strange they ALL run with it ?
On yaya have stated this view before something changed dramatically over summer from unhappy to " everything is OK now " he's been promised something for sure to change his stance .if we were seen to give a fresh deal so soon it would appear we were an easy touch .but I suspect we have givern him one to be announced last hence his change in attitude

I think his change in attitude is that he's been told he's under contract, we aren't selling him, so he can STFU and get on with his job. Realising he's going nowhere, and after the shit storm he caused preseason, he's thought he'd better keep his head down. Nothing more than that imho.

This

He's made a complete c**t of himself and has been globally derided as an utter ball bag which was all of his own making, leaving us in a complete position of strength. Why would we want to improve his contract anyway? He's 32 next birthday and signed an improved 12 month deal last summer which still has 3 years to run.

To a lesser extent you could argue we had nn need to give fresh deals to kompany.Silva or kun THIS summer

 

[nijinsky's fetlocks]

The press are always looking for the sensational story. Suggesting Toure hasn't been offered a new contract sells more papers/gets more clicks than reporting the signed deals for Silva, Kompany and Aguero. We may not like it, but it's the way it's always been and always will be. It's not a sinister agenda against City.

And there, in a nutshell, we have it.
Lazy tabloid hacks looking for an 'angle' sells copy, regardless of whether the story is accurate, or in some cases even there.
The media have done this since time began, and not only in the area of sport - they make stuff up about celebrities too, because it's what tabloid readers want to read - the Sun didn't become the biggest selling daily newspaper in Britain by catering for bright folk who want to read something resembling the truth.
As to this debate, I think it's going round in circles, and therefore utterly pointless - those who want to believe in an agenda will continue to do so, and those who don't won't - it's as simple as that, so agreeing to disagree just saves both sides wasting their time.
So for me, I'm out of here now, and I'll leave you to it, and from here on in I'll just dip in occasionally for the odd belly laugh when someone posts that Mister Maker was wearing a red jacket on CBeebies that morning, so he must be a rag.
Have fun folks.

 

[rushts]

The press are always looking for the sensational story. Suggesting Toure hasn't been offered a new contract sells more papers/gets more clicks than reporting the signed deals for Silva, Kompany and Aguero. We may not like it, but it's the way it's always been and always will be. It's not a sinister agenda against City.

And there, in a nutshell, we have it.
Lazy tabloid hacks looking for an 'angle' sells copy, regardless of whether the story is accurate, or in some cases even there.
The media have done this since time began, and not only in the area of sport - they make stuff up about celebrities too, because it's what tabloid readers want to read - the Sun didn't become the biggest selling daily newspaper in Britain by catering for bright folk who want to read something resembling the truth.
As to this debate, I think it's going round in circles, and therefore utterly pointless - those who want to believe in an agenda will continue to do so, and those who don't won't - it's as simple as that, so agreeing to disagree just saves both sides wasting their time.
So for me, I'm out of here now, and I'll leave you to it, and from here on in I'll just dip in occasionally for the odd belly laugh when someone posts that Mister Maker was wearing a red jacket on CBeebies that morning, so he must be a rag.
Have fun folks.

Fuck Mr Maker, Mr Tumble is a blue,he loves city.

 

[George Hannah]

The press are always looking for the sensational story. Suggesting Toure hasn't been offered a new contract sells more papers/gets more clicks than reporting the signed deals for Silva, Kompany and Aguero. We may not like it, but it's the way it's always been and always will be. It's not a sinister agenda against City.

The salient point is that there are more lies, smears and negative reports about us than the others and some escape the media effluent almost entirely. A deliberate, well discussed and totally intentional agenda which is very sinister and very obvious.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

The salient point is that there are more lies, smears and negative reports about us than the others and some escape the media effluent almost entirely.

This is indisputably true, although less markedly the case than, say, four years ago.

 

[BlueAnorak]

The press are always looking for the sensational story. Suggesting Toure hasn't been offered a new contract sells more papers/gets more clicks than reporting the signed deals for Silva, Kompany and Aguero. We may not like it, but it's the way it's always been and always will be. It's not a sinister agenda against City.

The salient point is that there are more lies, smears and negative reports about us than the others and some escape the media effluent almost entirely. A deliberate, well discussed and totally intentional agenda which is very sinister and very obvious.

I don't think the Agenda is particularly sinister. The fact that our owner is an Arab (although it has a slight effect) is very small beer.No the agenda boils down to the following facts:
- Most journalists support Utd, Liverpool, an old Sky 4 club or a London club.
- Most so called North Western / Manchester football correspondents actually support United.
- They hate the fact that our club has uzerped their clubs.
- Journalists are sheep. They will go with someone else's idea rather than think for themselves.
- They get together before and after City press conferences to decide how to spin things. Hence the common angle on reporting the contract renewals (i.e 31 year old YaYa - currently on year 2 of a 5 year contract - hasn't got one, Hart hasn't been contacted).
- Modern papers need clicks to give them advertising revenue. Mobilising the Utd and Liverpool hoards is the way to generate clicks (so spin every City story negatively and more of them will join in to approve the negative spin).

It isn't rocket engineering, hey it isn't even the extremely simple rocket science.

 

[Eccles Blue]

Nothing said at that conference to create that headline so 2 choices
A.briefed off camera ? Then press run with embargoed info ?
B.press invent headline ? But seems strange they ALL run with it ?
On yaya have stated this view before something changed dramatically over summer from unhappy to " everything is OK now " he's been promised something for sure to change his stance .if we were seen to give a fresh deal so soon it would appear we were an easy touch .but I suspect we have givern him one to be announced last hence his change in attitude

I think his change in attitude is that he's been told he's under contract, we aren't selling him, so he can STFU and get on with his job. Realising he's going nowhere, and after the shit storm he caused preseason, he's thought he'd better keep his head down. Nothing more than that imho.

The way I read the articles, I think the press are prepared to give City credit for not giving Yaya a new contract. For not rewarding him in the same way that Liverpool and United rewarded Suarez and Rooney last year. But they will not do that unless City confirm that he isnt getting a new deal. They'd look stupid if they praised us for taking a firm line only for it to be announced a couple of weeks later that he had signed an upgraded deal. But clearly the club and Pellegrini dont want to publicly announce that we're not giving him a new contract. Why would they? It would be perceived by Yaya and his agent as public humiliation just as we have kissed and made up. Hence the subtle messages

That was how I saw it as well, they were not going to reward him for being disrespectful to both the club and the fans. I felt sorry for Toure over his brother, that was a terrible time, but his agent started putting the feelers out before that happened. I've never been as great an admirer of Toure as a lot of fans because as far as I am concerned football is a team game and one man does not make a team. But the club have handled it all beautifully, in my opinion.



As for the agenda, I just think it is poor journalism, actually I don't think it is journalism in the way that I remember journalists. These days they don't appear to have an original thought, they are too busy putting their own, invariably negative, spin on most things, including football. I rarely read newspapers, except online and even then only when people have pointed me in the direction!!

 

[blue dallas]

The press are always looking for the sensational story. Suggesting Toure hasn't been offered a new contract sells more papers/gets more clicks than reporting the signed deals for Silva, Kompany and Aguero. We may not like it, but it's the way it's always been and always will be. It's not a sinister agenda against City.

The salient point is that there are more lies, smears and negative reports about us than the others and some escape the media effluent almost entirely. A deliberate, well discussed and totally intentional agenda which is very sinister and very obvious.

I don't think the Agenda is particularly sinister. The fact that our owner is an Arab (although it has a slight effect) is very small beer.No the agenda boils down to the following facts:
- Most journalists support Utd, Liverpool, an old Sky 4 club or a London club.
- Most so called North Western / Manchester football correspondents actually support United.
- They hate the fact that our club has uzerped their clubs.
- Journalists are sheep. They will go with someone else's idea rather than think for themselves.
- They get together before and after City press conferences to decide how to spin things. Hence the common angle on reporting the contract renewals (i.e 31 year old YaYa - currently on year 2 of a 5 year contract - hasn't got one, Hart hasn't been contacted).
- Modern papers need clicks to give them advertising revenue. Mobilising the Utd and Liverpool hoards is the way to generate clicks (so spin every City story negatively and more of them will join in to approve the negative spin).

It isn't rocket engineering, hey it isn't even the extremely simple rocket science.

Spot on

 

[Deleted member 58678]

The salient point is that there are more lies, smears and negative reports about us than the others and some escape the media effluent almost entirely.

This is indisputably true, although less markedly the case than, say, four years ago.

We have nothing anywhere near the level of The Daily Arsenal on talkSPORT or the BT Sport adverts over the Summer showing Arsenal getting hammered by Liverpool and Chelsea for 5 and 6 and players getting sent off.

We just get little digs about us here or there.

This thread would be 2000 pages long if we'd just had the Summer of adverts that Arsenal have had. And we'd have a deprecate "The Daily City" thread if talkSPORT or anyone else ran something like that about us.

 

[tonea2003]

The press are always looking for the sensational story. Suggesting Toure hasn't been offered a new contract sells more papers/gets more clicks than reporting the signed deals for Silva, Kompany and Aguero. We may not like it, but it's the way it's always been and always will be. It's not a sinister agenda against City.

The salient point is that there are more lies, smears and negative reports about us than the others and some escape the media effluent almost entirely. A deliberate, well discussed and totally intentional agenda which is very sinister and very obvious.

the sad thing you are deadly serious, just like some other threads where you fail the bring anything resembling tangible evidence to the table.

 

[SWP's back]

For me the clearest indication that there's a planned agenda was the recent articles on City signing up it's best players on long term contracts. Originally this was reported as it happened as each player got signed up, then in Pellers pre-match interview a couple of the hacks pressed him on whether Yaya would be getting a new contract. Pellers swerved the question and straight after the reports in mirror, telegraph, independent, mail and sun on this topic were that Yaya would not to be offered a new contract.

It was a planned and deliberate attempt by a number of papers to destabilise the player by misrepresenting the club and a number of the journo's had got together to do it.....Clear Agenda and collusion by the press and the evidence is on the city site and the papers online sites for all to see.

do you really think they got together before hand and said lets ask pellegrini about yaya and his contract and if he doesn't specifically say hes getting a new one we will print he isn't getting one

you don't know what is said behind closed doors at the club, for all we know they might be laughing their socks off at it all

and if it is an effort to destabilise players and club it clearly isn't working

bias clearly evident but planned agendas just not sure

Do I think members of the Manchester press pack (who are all mates and drink together) could have decided on the agenda for their stories beforehand between them? Of course, yes.