Stuart Brennan. MEN.

[Bill]

I feel like I may be in a minority here, but I'm still not quite sure what has caused such offence in the original article.

There were a few typos which doesn't reflect especially well on them, but it's hardly the most heinous crime and fair play to Brennan for coming on to at least discuss it.

The paranoia about the MEN having any kind of agenda against us is nonsense though. They're obviously outside the circle now in terms of getting scoops, but compared to some of the national press we generally get a positive slant on City. Which is understandable and obvious. Alienating half of their readership would be absurd.

Some seem a bit too sensitive and trot out the lazy cliche of the MUEN, citing occasional headlines as evidence. I'm sure on United forums they probably see a perceived injustice too.

If you're genuinely offended by the "10 goal bonanza" headline then I despair.

Yes,yes,yes,yes,yes ! Common sense prevails at last on a forum that is so anti MEN it deserves a fooking Knighthood in Drivel.Thank you Boss !!!

look at the time of his post. he'll be arseoled.

you and lord Charles can put on your act as long as you like but the fact remains the muen is a rag publication.
mr brennan has to tow the party line poor bugger.

 

[stonerblue]

Just for your information, I wrote the article not the picture captions. I have already made my feelings on the shoddy caption known to the sports editor

If you wrote the article and it carries your name then surely you are responsible for it Stuart?

Running to Peter Spencer to grass up some poor kid in charge of captions who's probably on £6 per hour, shows exactly what sort of a person you are and tells us a great deal about the type of company you work for if that sort of behaviour is considered acceptable. Plus the fact that you've then come out on a public forum to admit that you've tried to get a fellow colleague into trouble is very poor indeed. Disgraceful in fact.

Shite rag loving newspaper that employs shite rag loving journalists.

you obviously know nowt about how news is reported.

 

[squirtyflower]

Just for your information, I wrote the article not the picture captions. I have already made my feelings on the shoddy caption known to the sports editor

If you wrote the article and it carries your name then surely you are responsible for it Stuart?

Running to Peter Spencer to grass up some poor kid in charge of captions who's probably on £6 per hour, shows exactly what sort of a person you are and tells us a great deal about the type of company you work for if that sort of behaviour is considered acceptable. Plus the fact that you've then come out on a public forum to admit that you've tried to get a fellow colleague into trouble is very poor indeed. Disgraceful in fact.

Shite rag loving newspaper that employs shite rag loving journalists.

you obviously know nowt about how news is reported.

And, so it would seem, neither do the MEN

 

[Didsbury Dave]

Don't think he'll be coming back after that last lot of posts

Trying to defend the wholly indefensible, this hack is clearly a bigger clown than even we thought. If anyone out there still thinks the MEN is a half decent newspaper worthy of our support then just re-read this thread and the incredulous comments of Stuart Brennan, one of MEN's finest.

Well done fellow blues.

Don't say "we" and "our" as though you speak for City fans en masse.

You speak for a small number of one-eyed, paranoid forum radicals who don't know the first thing about journalism.

 

[mancunial]

"City triumph to 7 and Utd with good away win as both clubs win."

There you go.

The difference between what I have just written and what is actually printed in the headline is that mine is nothing but the truth, whilst the headline in your paper blurs the truth to make people believe Utd were a key factor in both teams scoring 10, which they weren't.

With my headline there, both sets of fans would have accepted it.

Right, so how many people, do you think, went away from that article with the notion that United scored more than 3, or that City scored less than 7? Unless there are people out there with IQs in single figures, I would suggest there are none.
So what do you think the headline writer's motivation was? Do you think he sat there, at his keyboard - on a Saturday teatime, when sports stories are coming at him from all angles - and chewed a pen, and thought "I wonder how I can make it sound like United actually scored more than they did, or that City didn;t actually score seven after all".
Or do you think it more likely that he wrote a quick piece, slammed a quick, cover-all headline on it, and moved on?
I am 100 per cent sure I know which of those two versions is accurate.

. This and nothing else

 

[cibaman]

Not living in Manchester, I only read the MEN online. And I only link to the City articles so, unless United are playing City, never see articles about them or headlines. The City coverage seems to me to be fine.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

look at the time of his post. he'll be arseoled.

you and lord Charles can put on your act as long as you like but the fact remains the muen is a rag publication.

Do I detect the faint whiff of insubordination in the ranks?

 

[Dr Mick]

This “you know nothing about journalism and how news is reported” stuff is just a nonsense argument and has absolutely no relevance here. I am the reader. It is not my job to understand how the industry works. I do not even wish to understand. As the reader however aren’t I entitled to expect to receive factually correct news presented to me without mistakes? Any article that carries spelling mistakes, particularly of people’s names, (something so easy to check), is just poor and from a newspaper attempting to be taken seriously is just unacceptable. Isn’t it? I don't need to know how journalism works to understand that.

This isn’t however anything to do with a few dodgy typos, taken in isolation, poor as that it. It is the fact that if the MEN can’t get even the basics right, what faith do we have in them getting all the other things right?

They run ridiculous “ten goal bonanza” type headlines and then a United supporting journalist whose had one too many shandies pops up to try and defend his publication's position and who ends up articulating himself so poorly that one poster quite eloquently summarises the reporter's stance with “so it's our fault your paper is shit?”

I don’t speak for anyone other than myself. I certainly don’t speak for anyone on here. Those happy to accept poor, lazy, error-ridden, biased journalism, you go for it, that's your choice.

Whether I understand how journalism works or not is however wholly irrelevant.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

This “you know nothing about journalism and how news is reported” stuff is just a nonsense argument and has absolutely no relevance here. I am the reader. It is not my job to understand how the industry works. I do not even wish to understand. As the reader however aren’t I entitled to expect to receive factually correct news presented to me without mistakes? Any article that carries spelling mistakes, particularly of people’s names, (something so easy to check), is just poor and from a newspaper attempting to be taken seriously is just unacceptable. Isn’t it? I don't need to know how journalism works to understand that.

This isn’t however anything to do with a few dodgy typos, taken in isolation, poor as that it. It is the fact that if the MEN can’t get even the basics right, what faith do we have in them getting all the other things right?

They run ridiculous “ten goal bonanza” type headlines and then a United supporting journalist whose had one too many shandies pops up to try and defend his publication's position and who ends up articulating himself so poorly that one poster quite eloquently summarises the reporter's stance with “so it's our fault your paper is shit?”

I don’t speak for anyone other than myself. I certainly don’t speak for anyone on here. Those happy to accept poor, lazy, error-ridden, biased journalism, you go for it, that's your choice.

Whether I understand how journalism works or not is however wholly irrelevant.

I agree with the thrust of what you're saying there. It annoys the fuck out of me when people go all esoteric on a particular subject claiming that others just don't "get it".

As an aside, are you a real doctor or are you an imposter like Doctors Who, Dre, Fox and Evil?

 

[steviemc]

Whether I understand how journalism works or not is however wholly irrelevant.

...it's certainly relevant if you're going to use the workings of his job, and the reporting of issues to his colleagues as a basis for personal attack.