Stuart Brennan. MEN.

[squirtyflower]

You clearly lack the understanding of how influential the media can be, frightening really from a journalist.

Many people probably did, people with little interest in football. Do you know how many people there are out there claiming to be Utd "fans" who couldn't name the man who Alex Ferguson followed? These are the types of morons who bow to lazy journalism, social networking sites are filled with these imbeciles posting articles with similar drivel. Drivel I know and any true football fan would know was made up bollocks but they peddle it.

There is a deep sense of negativity in this country towards City and a lot of it is due to how the media portray us. They highlight our spending whether we win or lose but forget to mention Utd's first team has been slightly cheaper for the last few years, they label our owners as "the Arabs" highlighting their ethnicity in a negative light, this has been going on for a while Stuart.

I have have spoken to people who have very little understanding of football and they have said "I prefer Utd to City because they do it the right way", they haven't a fucking clue and it's the gutter press feeding this bullshit.

"Whoever controls the media, controls the mind" couldn't be more true, well true for the majority of idiots in society who cannot think for themselves. I am not blaming you personally, I think you are positive towards City mostly but have a good look at some of your colleagues because they certainly are different.

And I suggest you never ever let someone with no interest in football write an article about the clubs your main readers support because that was fucking disastrous.

I thought this was the post of the thread

it is indeed, but will fall on deaf ears just as it has in the past

 

[PaleBlue]

It's simple really - the Blues stop buying it, and the Reds from out of town won't even have the chance to buy it, and eventually it'll fold.

Tick tock.

 

[BertTrautmann'sParachute]

I'm with the Doctor on this.

Understanding how something works has no bearing on one's right or capacity to make value judgements on it.

I don't need to understand the theory of flight to appreciate that if a plane falls out of the sky then it's not doing it's job properly. I don't need to understand the brewing process to have a worthwhile opinion on whether a pint of beer is not to my tastes.

It's intellectual snobbery for people to hide behind the cloak of their profession to pontificate that anyone who disagrees with what they produce simply doesn't understand the processes involved, especially if that other person is a paying customer.

Agree with this, GDM. To stretch the analogy a little, if you're not a politician (or don't work at the Houses of Parliament/Town Hall) I guess you shouldn't really talk about political machinations. Scary.

 

[carlos tevez is a blue]

"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.

That's the best put down I've seen on here. Kudos.

 

[steviemc]

"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.

That's the best put down I've seen on here. Kudos.

I thought that was good to be fair, but after that it just ended up a sort of journo pissing contest.

 

[Eccles Blue]

The only person I knew who bought the MEN was my brother (a red in theory but more into Salford Reds) who always said you've got to support a local paper but even he has stopped buying it recently because he says it has become rubbish. The typos, the lack of balance in articles, the poor writing are all contributing to the demise of a once excellent newspaper.


Stuart Brennan can come on here defending them all he likes but, as he has a journalistic background one assumes, I bet even he has no defence for some of the things that are happening.

 

[Marvin]

You clearly lack the understanding of how influential the media can be, frightening really from a journalist.

Many people probably did, people with little interest in football. Do you know how many people there are out there claiming to be Utd "fans" who couldn't name the man who Alex Ferguson followed? These are the types of morons who bow to lazy journalism, social networking sites are filled with these imbeciles posting articles with similar drivel. Drivel I know and any true football fan would know was made up bollocks but they peddle it.

There is a deep sense of negativity in this country towards City and a lot of it is due to how the media portray us. They highlight our spending whether we win or lose but forget to mention Utd's first team has been slightly cheaper for the last few years, they label our owners as "the Arabs" highlighting their ethnicity in a negative light, this has been going on for a while Stuart.

I have have spoken to people who have very little understanding of football and they have said "I prefer Utd to City because they do it the right way", they haven't a fucking clue and it's the gutter press feeding this bullshit.

"Whoever controls the media, controls the mind" couldn't be more true, well true for the majority of idiots in society who cannot think for themselves. I am not blaming you personally, I think you are positive towards City mostly but have a good look at some of your colleagues because they certainly are different.

And I suggest you never ever let someone with no interest in football write an article about the clubs your main readers support because that was fucking disastrous.

I thought this was the post of the thread

But why expect a gutter press to be anything but a gutter press. They know what their commercial interests are, and football journalism is subordinate to advertisement revenue which depends on circulation figures which in turn depends on pandering to the prejudices of your typical armchair Man Utd fan.

You will get copy and paste articles written by non-staffers and churned out to meet the deadlines because that's the nature of the business. How often do you read some breaking news, and then over the next 48 hours the exact same formulation of words appears all over the Internet and media. You wont change it by decrying individual journalists. It's the profit motive and even so called quality papers which will place a lot of value on their content, like the Guardian Football (the best out there in my opinion) also do it all the time.

 

[Anonymous]

"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.

That's the best put down I've seen on here. Kudos.

It's not even the best put down on this thread. ErikBrooksGhost's was better.

 

[steviemc]

And where does the personal attack come from? My comments where addressed directly to him, there was no personal attack.

Well I could agree with you, but then we'd both be wrong.

No personal attack. Its not my style. I'm sufficiently articulate to get my point across without the need to resort to such methods.

Anyway instead of trying to turn this onto me, how about addressing my previous comment regarding the claims that my assumed lack of knowledge of journalism and the newspaper industry detracts from the weight of my argument. I don't know the first thing about supermarkets and retail either but I know selling horse meat packaged as beef is wrong.

I really do not understand how me not knowing how journalism works makes it okay for the MEN to publish such rubbish.

I agree with you on this - that claim was made by SB, not me.

 

[Bill]

if you have to walk the streets around deansgate giving your product away it smacks of that product being shit. any product.

ask for two and you'll get two, you know, buy none and get one free.