The Sun "newspaper"

[bobbyowenquiff]

Er, constantly and relentlessly.

So, in this huge about turn, to be clear, you now saying you agree with the following:



Presumably you've sobered up then.

I've not quoted Chris once to either agree or disagree. Infact the only post of ours either of us has quoted the othe was in humour on the previous page. So there is and never will be some 'huge about turn', so take your head for a wobble and accept these are my views on the matter, and those are Chris's. X

So, to be clear, do you or do you not agree with the sentence below:

The point is, brand image matters. You don't get rust from one drop of rain falling on your bike, you get it from it raining all the time. Every click on a negative article about city is like another drop of rain. The effect is cumulative, and it's damaging. Every major commercial organisation in the world knows this. That's why we should worry about it.

Chris is spot-on with this. The club must do everything it can to protect its brand. Negative publicity makes no difference to us because we are die-hard fans but it does impact on the new customers we need to attract to grow.

So when the tabloids trash us we can't ignore it. We can do our bit as fans with forums like this and also by making our views known to the broader media. The MUEN was rattled by the criticism it got after its seat-circling exercise. Look at Newcastle's tarnished image. How hard is it to attract players there with Ashley in charge.

It is not just about money for all players..credibility and image is important. City must take a proactive approach to correct every negative story which appears. One example which is topical is about Ya Ya's wages. He does not earn £250,000 a week and never did. This was denied by the club at the time but the lie has stuck and is still being repeated today.

The worst culprits are The Sun and the Mirror. They slaughter Pellegrini (and before him Mancini) and Wenger but give an easy ride to Moyes and "the toxic one." City have a large fanbase and if all of us boycotted these products it would have a huge impact on them. Those of a certain age will remember that what finally got rid of Swales was the threat by fans to boycott Greenall's beer (They were major shareholders at the time).

 

[nmc]

Re: The Sun "newspaper"

Boycott Greenhall's beer - the sacrifices we made!

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Re: The Sun

Boycott Greenhall's beer - the sacrifices we made!

I've boycotted it for my entire adult life.

As a point of principle, like.

 

[bobbyowenquiff]

Re: The Sun

Boycott Greenhall's beer - the sacrifices we made!

You couldn't get the posh bottled stuff in those days!

 

[Marvin]

I've not quoted Chris once to either agree or disagree. Infact the only post of ours either of us has quoted the othe was in humour on the previous page. So there is and never will be some 'huge about turn', so take your head for a wobble and accept these are my views on the matter, and those are Chris's. X

So, to be clear, do you or do you not agree with the sentence below:

The point is, brand image matters. You don't get rust from one drop of rain falling on your bike, you get it from it raining all the time. Every click on a negative article about city is like another drop of rain. The effect is cumulative, and it's damaging. Every major commercial organisation in the world knows this. That's why we should worry about it.

Chris is spot-on with this. The club must do everything it can to protect its brand. Negative publicity makes no difference to us because we are die-hard fans but it does impact on the new customers we need to attract to grow.

So when the tabloids trash us we can't ignore it. We can do our bit as fans with forums like this and also by making our views known to the broader media. The MUEN was rattled by the criticism it got after its seat-circling exercise. Look at Newcastle's tarnished image. How hard is it to attract players there with Ashley in charge.

It is not just about money for all players..credibility and image is important. City must take a proactive approach to correct every negative story which appears. One example which is topical is about Ya Ya's wages. He does not earn £250,000 a week and never did. This was denied by the club at the time but the lie has stuck and is still being repeated today.

The worst culprits are The Sun and the Mirror. They slaughter Pellegrini (and before him Mancini) and Wenger but give an easy ride to Moyes and "the toxic one." City have a large fanbase and if all of us boycotted these products it would have a huge impact on them. Those of a certain age will remember that what finally got rid of Swales was the threat by fans to boycott Greenall's beer (They were major shareholders at the time).

Doesn't matter how many PR staff you employ, or what tactics they employ. City are seen as Northern upstarts and it still pays the media to bash us. Worth noting that the anti-City angle is an owner / editorial decision and not one taken by the journalists.

It's the inevitable consequence of Arab money, a sleeping giant and a punctured Man Utd. Oh Dear! What have we done?

 

[bobbyowenquiff]

So, to be clear, do you or do you not agree with the sentence below:

The point is, brand image matters. You don't get rust from one drop of rain falling on your bike, you get it from it raining all the time. Every click on a negative article about city is like another drop of rain. The effect is cumulative, and it's damaging. Every major commercial organisation in the world knows this. That's why we should worry about it.

Chris is spot-on with this. The club must do everything it can to protect its brand. Negative publicity makes no difference to us because we are die-hard fans but it does impact on the new customers we need to attract to grow.

So when the tabloids trash us we can't ignore it. We can do our bit as fans with forums like this and also by making our views known to the broader media. The MUEN was rattled by the criticism it got after its seat-circling exercise. Look at Newcastle's tarnished image. How hard is it to attract players there with Ashley in charge.

It is not just about money for all players..credibility and image is important. City must take a proactive approach to correct every negative story which appears. One example which is topical is about Ya Ya's wages. He does not earn £250,000 a week and never did. This was denied by the club at the time but the lie has stuck and is still being repeated today.

The worst culprits are The Sun and the Mirror. They slaughter Pellegrini (and before him Mancini) and Wenger but give an easy ride to Moyes and "the toxic one." City have a large fanbase and if all of us boycotted these products it would have a huge impact on them. Those of a certain age will remember that what finally got rid of Swales was the threat by fans to boycott Greenall's beer (They were major shareholders at the time).

Doesn't matter how many PR staff you employ, or what tactics they employ. City are seen as Northern upstarts and it still pays the media to bash us. Worth noting that the anti-City angle is an owner / editorial decision and not one taken by the journalists.

It's the inevitable consequence of Arab money, a sleeping giant and a punctured Man Utd. Oh Dear! What have we done?

I am sure you are right that it is an Editorial position for some papers to attack City (especially the Mail, Sun). However we can't just concede the whole territory to them. Other papers and media outlets can be influenced to be more supportive of City. We are in it for the long game. Believe it or not some journalists are outside the pack and are independent-minded (think Martin Samuel) It is not just about PR staff. The whole club, fans, players, staff need to adopt a proactive approach. Every interview Vincent Kompany does is gold for us for example. It is possible to turn things round, especially if we keep winning on the pitch. I repeat (to use a Manuel phrase)...we can't ignore negative publicity.

 

[Marvin]

Chris is spot-on with this. The club must do everything it can to protect its brand. Negative publicity makes no difference to us because we are die-hard fans but it does impact on the new customers we need to attract to grow.

So when the tabloids trash us we can't ignore it. We can do our bit as fans with forums like this and also by making our views known to the broader media. The MUEN was rattled by the criticism it got after its seat-circling exercise. Look at Newcastle's tarnished image. How hard is it to attract players there with Ashley in charge.

It is not just about money for all players..credibility and image is important. City must take a proactive approach to correct every negative story which appears. One example which is topical is about Ya Ya's wages. He does not earn £250,000 a week and never did. This was denied by the club at the time but the lie has stuck and is still being repeated today.

The worst culprits are The Sun and the Mirror. They slaughter Pellegrini (and before him Mancini) and Wenger but give an easy ride to Moyes and "the toxic one." City have a large fanbase and if all of us boycotted these products it would have a huge impact on them. Those of a certain age will remember that what finally got rid of Swales was the threat by fans to boycott Greenall's beer (They were major shareholders at the time).

Doesn't matter how many PR staff you employ, or what tactics they employ. City are seen as Northern upstarts and it still pays the media to bash us. Worth noting that the anti-City angle is an owner / editorial decision and not one taken by the journalists.

It's the inevitable consequence of Arab money, a sleeping giant and a punctured Man Utd. Oh Dear! What have we done?

I am sure you are right that it is an Editorial position for some papers to attack City (especially the Mail, Sun). However we can't just concede the whole territory to them. Other papers and media outlets can be influenced to be more supportive of City. We are in it for the long game. Believe it or not some journalists are outside the pack and are independent-minded (think Martin Samuel) It is not just about PR staff. The whole club, fans, players, staff need to adopt a proactive approach. Every interview Vincent Kompany does is gold for us for example. It is possible to turn things round, especially if we keep winning on the pitch. I repeat (to use a Manuel phrase)...we can't ignore negative publicity.

Martin Blackburn, the Sun Journalist who reported on the City v Barca game thought Demichelis had a good game, and he was annoyed with the headline. The problem is not at the football writer's level, but at the owner's and editorial level who are looking for a way of selling their paper. You can't influence that other than by sustained success.

 

[cibaman]

t was always going to take at least 10 years from the takeover for the media to completely accept City. Many journalists made comments about the club in the 2 or 3 years after the takeover that they're still trying to distance themselves from. Or still trying to justify.

Its rather like the Pellegrini threads. People take entrenched positions and then waste years of their lives trying to prove they were right.

 

[bobbyowenquiff]

Doesn't matter how many PR staff you employ, or what tactics they employ. City are seen as Northern upstarts and it still pays the media to bash us. Worth noting that the anti-City angle is an owner / editorial decision and not one taken by the journalists.

It's the inevitable consequence of Arab money, a sleeping giant and a punctured Man Utd. Oh Dear! What have we done?

I am sure you are right that it is an Editorial position for some papers to attack City (especially the Mail, Sun). However we can't just concede the whole territory to them. Other papers and media outlets can be influenced to be more supportive of City. We are in it for the long game. Believe it or not some journalists are outside the pack and are independent-minded (think Martin Samuel) It is not just about PR staff. The whole club, fans, players, staff need to adopt a proactive approach. Every interview Vincent Kompany does is gold for us for example. It is possible to turn things round, especially if we keep winning on the pitch. I repeat (to use a Manuel phrase)...we can't ignore negative publicity.

Martin Blackburn, the Sun Journalist who reported on the City v Barca game thought Demichelis had a good game, and he was annoyed with the headline. The problem is not at the football writer's level, but at the owner's and editorial level who are looking for a way of selling their paper. You can't influence that other than by sustained success.

Agreed. It will turn in our favour when City are big enough to be commercially important to Sky TV and papers like The Sun, but in the meantime everything we can do to support our image (brand) will help us get there quicker. I'm off to the match now to do my bit!

 

[Plays By Sense Of Smell]

I've not quoted Chris once to either agree or disagree. Infact the only post of ours either of us has quoted the othe was in humour on the previous page. So there is and never will be some 'huge about turn', so take your head for a wobble and accept these are my views on the matter, and those are Chris's. X

So, to be clear, do you or do you not agree with the sentence below:

The point is, brand image matters. You don't get rust from one drop of rain falling on your bike, you get it from it raining all the time. Every click on a negative article about city is like another drop of rain. The effect is cumulative, and it's damaging. Every major commercial organisation in the world knows this. That's why we should worry about it.

Chris is spot-on with this. The club must do everything it can to protect its brand. Negative publicity makes no difference to us because we are die-hard fans but it does impact on the new customers we need to attract to grow.

So when the tabloids trash us we can't ignore it. We can do our bit as fans with forums like this and also by making our views known to the broader media. The MUEN was rattled by the criticism it got after its seat-circling exercise. Look at Newcastle's tarnished image. How hard is it to attract players there with Ashley in charge.

It is not just about money for all players..credibility and image is important. City must take a proactive approach to correct every negative story which appears. One example which is topical is about Ya Ya's wages. He does not earn £250,000 a week and never did. This was denied by the club at the time but the lie has stuck and is still being repeated today.

The worst culprits are The Sun and the Mirror. They slaughter Pellegrini (and before him Mancini) and Wenger but give an easy ride to Moyes and "the toxic one." City have a large fanbase and if all of us boycotted these products it would have a huge impact on them. Those of a certain age will remember that what finally got rid of Swales was the threat by fans to boycott Greenall's beer (They were major shareholders at the time).

Though I just ignore half of the stuff just to be able to deal with it, I agree with the principle about the drip drip and it's effect on the average joe (and thus why it should be actively dealt with from time to time).

I also agree about the power of getting significant groups together to effect change - you don't need everyone on board, just enough to make a noticeable difference and keep the momentum going until the critical mass/tipping point is achieved.

I've been doing this to as many rag sponsors as I can for as long as I can remember. I still won't buy sharp, voda phone, etc on principle - but also never fail to fake the time to explain why to anyone present - doing my bit to add to the dripped message that associating yourself with the rags is likely to make more people actively despise and avoid your product than the number of fans who may purchase because of it.