The Sun "newspaper"

[Number 1 is Colin Bell]

Time to shut all the media up by winning trophies starting a week on Sunday!

They just love it when we stumble - almost salivating at the thought!

 

[dom]

ok the papers are a bit twat but some city fans and football fans in general are a bit paranoid with everything ! city was shit tonight if Pellegrini felt that he couldn't do a shit against Barca he could came up early and said CL is not the objectif so why all the talking before the match about attacking pressing and that barca are afraid of coming ... to come up playing that way boring and they still scored !

Google Translate ??

 

[johnnytapia]

All very true. Other winners are those who have never bought that left-wing, bile-filled, infantile, made for the masses horseshit that is the Mirror.
Have a butchers at their back page.

Mirror/Sun/Mail/Express/Metro - each and every one of them shite. The Mail especially so as it masquerades as being somehow "high-brow" when, in fact, it's nothing but ill-informed, statistically inept, plagiarised from Nigel Farage's diary, ultra right-wing bollocks.

So which papers do you read? The ones mentioned must be read avidly, to formulate an opinion on their contents with such malevolence. So which are the dead good papers we all should read to ensure our thought processes are not polluted with reactionary filth?

Why would I need to have read them "avidly"? A mere flick through any one of them, on any given day, would be enough to inform even the simplest of minds. You seem to have conflated an understanding of something with a deep experience of something. My "malevolence" comes from watching a nation of idiots reading and believing the nonsense they're peddled by 99% of the press. A nation of people unable to inform themselves - "The Sun says we should vote for Maggie so, yep, that's what we'll do." A nation that tunes in, "avidly" to "I'm a fucking celebrity", "wanking in ice", etc, etc, whilst all around them kids starve; MPs rifle the public purse and banks take the unadulterated piss out of each and every one of us. But hey, Bruce Forsyth's received his knighthood, the Queen's in fine fettle, so all is well.

Best place for news...Radio 4, BBC News. And, to balance out such "liberal tosh", a bit of Peter Hitchins / Melanie Phillips on Question Time - nowt like a good laugh on a Thursday night.

 

[aguero93:20]

Mirror/Sun/Mail/Express/Metro - each and every one of them shite. The Mail especially so as it masquerades as being somehow "high-brow" when, in fact, it's nothing but ill-informed, statistically inept, plagiarised from Nigel Farage's diary, ultra right-wing bollocks.

So which papers do you read? The ones mentioned must be read avidly, to formulate an opinion on their contents with such malevolence. So which are the dead good papers we all should read to ensure our thought processes are not polluted with reactionary filth?

Why would I need to have read them "avidly"? A mere flick through any one of them, on any given day, would be enough to inform even the simplest of minds. You seem to have conflated an understanding of something with a deep experience of something. My "malevolence" comes from watching a nation of idiots reading and believing the nonsense they're peddled by 99% of the press. A nation of people unable to inform themselves - "The Sun says we should vote for Maggie so, yep, that's what we'll do." A nation that tunes in, "avidly" to "I'm a fucking celebrity", "wanking in ice", etc, etc, whilst all around them kids starve; MPs rifle the public purse and banks take the unadulterated piss out of each and every one of us. But hey, Bruce Forsyth's received his knighthood, the Queen's in fine fettle, so all is well.

Best place for news...Radio 4, BBC News. And, to balance out such "liberal tosh", a bit of Peter Hitchins / Melanie Phillips on Question Time - nowt like a good laugh on a Thursday night.

Hah you think the same way as me, I like you.

 

[The Flash]

ok the papers are a bit twat but some city fans and football fans in general are a bit paranoid with everything ! city was shit tonight if Pellegrini felt that he couldn't do a shit against Barca he could came up early and said CL is not the objectif so why all the talking before the match about attacking pressing and that barca are afraid of coming ... to come up playing that way boring and they still scored !

Google Translate ??

from Gibberish to English.

 

[Shirley]

I'm losing any respect I had for City's media team the more I read headlines like this and witnessing the blatant media bias against the club I support.

They don't seem to defend the club, nor have I seen any implications against these twats who write absolute gutter headlines against this football club.

if I had my way all these twats would be banned from City, giving exclusives to journo's who are willing to atleast show some balanced views rather than this shit.

I don't want to see every newspaper/radio/tv station all groveling about City. I do however want to see a balanced view, both outlining the negative and positive, not just this constant unbalanced negative shit.

I've said it from day one of the takeover, you can call it bias or an agenda or what ever, it is coming from fergie and his rag troops. They know exactly what they are doing, damaging the brand City and the owners are trying to create.

 

[Pigeonho]

I'm losing any respect I had for City's media team the more I read headlines like this and witnessing the blatant media bias against the club I support.

They don't seem to defend the club, nor have I seen any implications against these twats who write absolute gutter headlines against this football club.

if I had my way all these twats would be banned from City, giving exclusives to journo's who are willing to atleast show some balanced views rather than this shit.

I don't want to see every newspaper/radio/tv station all groveling about City. I do however want to see a balanced view, both outlining the negative and positive, not just this constant unbalanced negative shit.

I've said it from day one of the takeover, you can call it bias or an agenda or what ever, it is coming from fergie and his rag troops. They know exactly what they are doing, damaging the brand City and the owners are trying to create.

Not doing a very good job of it, I must say.

 

[Sigh]

I'm losing any respect I had for City's media team the more I read headlines like this and witnessing the blatant media bias against the club I support.

They don't seem to defend the club, nor have I seen any implications against these twats who write absolute gutter headlines against this football club.

if I had my way all these twats would be banned from City, giving exclusives to journo's who are willing to atleast show some balanced views rather than this shit.

I don't want to see every newspaper/radio/tv station all groveling about City. I do however want to see a balanced view, both outlining the negative and positive, not just this constant unbalanced negative shit.

I've said it from day one of the takeover, you can call it bias or an agenda or what ever, it is coming from fergie and his rag troops. They know exactly what they are doing, damaging the brand City and the owners are trying to create.

Not doing a very good job of it, I must say.

I thought there was no agenda?

Where would we be without you keeping us on the straight and narrow? You've taken on a tough gig policing / trolling the entire forum, and sitting above the common herd, gavel in hand. Your arm must be fair worn out with all the "next casing" you do. It's a vocation I suppose, something you've been called to for the common good? There are those who think you don't believe half of what you write, but you do believe in your own superiority and discernment and the necessity of reminding everyone several times a day just how gullible, how unreasonable, how plain fucking stupid they are. You might not violate the letter of the CoC but you sure as hell wipe your arse on the spirit.

 

[Shirley]

I'm losing any respect I had for City's media team the more I read headlines like this and witnessing the blatant media bias against the club I support.

They don't seem to defend the club, nor have I seen any implications against these twats who write absolute gutter headlines against this football club.

if I had my way all these twats would be banned from City, giving exclusives to journo's who are willing to atleast show some balanced views rather than this shit.

I don't want to see every newspaper/radio/tv station all groveling about City. I do however want to see a balanced view, both outlining the negative and positive, not just this constant unbalanced negative shit.

I've said it from day one of the takeover, you can call it bias or an agenda or what ever, it is coming from fergie and his rag troops. They know exactly what they are doing, damaging the brand City and the owners are trying to create.

Not doing a very good job of it, I must say.

You have over 27,000 posts on Bluemoon, may I suggest you spend some time reading the world media instead of jumping all over here like a fcukin know it all.
If you don't think they are damaging the brand then you need to travel the rest of the world to see the same old crap repeated and repeated and believed by the people who are reading it.
Not everyone in the world are so highly educated as you.

 

[Pigeonho]

I've said it from day one of the takeover, you can call it bias or an agenda or what ever, it is coming from fergie and his rag troops. They know exactly what they are doing, damaging the brand City and the owners are trying to create.

Not doing a very good job of it, I must say.

I thought there was no agenda?

Where would we be without you keeping us on the straight and narrow? You've taken on a tough gig policing / trolling the entire forum, and sitting above the common herd, gavel in hand. Your arm must be fair worn out with all the "next casing" you do. It's a vocation I suppose, something you've been called to for the common good? There are those who think you don't believe half of what you write, but you do believe in your own superiority and discernment and the necessity of reminding everyone several times a day just how gullible, how unreasonable, how plain fucking stupid they are. You might not violate the letter of the CoC but you sure as hell wipe your arse on the spirit.

The spirit? Of what? The spirit of bluemoon? Fucking lol.

 

[Phil1]

Not doing a very good job of it, I must say.

I thought there was no agenda?

Where would we be without you keeping us on the straight and narrow? You've taken on a tough gig policing / trolling the entire forum, and sitting above the common herd, gavel in hand. Your arm must be fair worn out with all the "next casing" you do. It's a vocation I suppose, something you've been called to for the common good? There are those who think you don't believe half of what you write, but you do believe in your own superiority and discernment and the necessity of reminding everyone several times a day just how gullible, how unreasonable, how plain fucking stupid they are. You might not violate the letter of the CoC but you sure as hell wipe your arse on the spirit.

The spirit? Of what? The spirit of bluemoon? Fucking lol.

You're an avid Sun reader aren't you Pidge? :-)

 

[Pigeonho]

I've said it from day one of the takeover, you can call it bias or an agenda or what ever, it is coming from fergie and his rag troops. They know exactly what they are doing, damaging the brand City and the owners are trying to create.

Not doing a very good job of it, I must say.

You have over 27,000 posts on Bluemoon, may I suggest you spend some time reading the world media instead of jumping all over here like a fcukin know it all.
If you don't think they are damaging the brand then you need to travel the rest of the world to see the same old crap repeated and repeated and believed by the people who are reading it.
Not everyone in the world are so highly educated as you.

The people who are reading it? Like who? You see all I see are sponsors and investors galore trying to be a part of the 'brand'. His last few years it seems every other month a new partnership is announced, major partnerships too I might add. Did they not bother reading X journalists latest rant, or Hansens latest out down on motd? Or, as I suspect, did they just get on board because what some **** in the paper says matters not one little bit? Nobody needs to be highly educated to see that if there is an agenda, not many are taking notice of it other than a band of depressives on the internet.

 

[moomba]

Re: The Sun "newspaper"

Not doing a very good job of it, I must say.

You have over 27,000 posts on Bluemoon, may I suggest you spend some time reading the world media instead of jumping all over here like a fcukin know it all.
If you don't think they are damaging the brand then you need to travel the rest of the world to see the same old crap repeated and repeated and believed by the people who are reading it.
Not everyone in the world are so highly educated as you.

The people who are reading it? Like who? You see all I see are sponsors and investors galore trying to be a part of the 'brand'. His last few years it seems every other month a new partnership is announced, major partnerships too I might add. Did they not bother reading X journalists latest rant, or Hansens latest out down on motd? Or, as I suspect, did they just get on board because what some **** in the paper says matters not one little bit? Nobody needs to be highly educated to see that if there is an agenda, not many are taking notice of it other than a band of depressives on the internet.

Maybe if we had better press we could ask more for those sponsorships. If I owned a large business I'd think twice about sponsoring an entity that regularly gets bad press.

And if it was worth it I'd pay more to sponsor an entity that gets good press than bad.

 

[Pigeonho]

Re: The Sun

You have over 27,000 posts on Bluemoon, may I suggest you spend some time reading the world media instead of jumping all over here like a fcukin know it all.
If you don't think they are damaging the brand then you need to travel the rest of the world to see the same old crap repeated and repeated and believed by the people who are reading it.
Not everyone in the world are so highly educated as you.

The people who are reading it? Like who? You see all I see are sponsors and investors galore trying to be a part of the 'brand'. His last few years it seems every other month a new partnership is announced, major partnerships too I might add. Did they not bother reading X journalists latest rant, or Hansens latest out down on motd? Or, as I suspect, did they just get on board because what some **** in the paper says matters not one little bit? Nobody needs to be highly educated to see that if there is an agenda, not many are taking notice of it other than a band of depressives on the internet.

Maybe if we had better press we could ask more for those sponsorships. If I owned a large business I'd think twice about sponsoring an entity that regularly gets bad press.

And if it was worth it I'd pay more to sponsor an entity that gets good press than bad.

Hats something you can't prove either way, whereas all we have to do is see the many deals that have come about and see that there can't really be that many readers of the Sun out there in the boardrooms. I will add, too, that if some CEO of a company said 'hmm, not too sure about coming on board with your lot, Mr Khaldoon, as the Mirror said something negative about you', it wouldn't surprise me if our powerbrokers left that meeting in absolute hysterics.

 

[moomba]

Re: The Sun

Hats something you can't prove either way, whereas all we have to do is see the many deals that have come about and see that there can't really be that many readers of the Sun out there in the boardrooms. I will add, too, that if some CEO of a company said 'hmm, not too sure about coming on board with your lot, Mr Khaldoon, as the Mirror said something negative about you', it wouldn't surprise me if our powerbrokers left that meeting in absolute hysterics.

It's not something that you can prove either way, but it's pretty much common sense.

And while I don't think any organisation is going to bother about one negative article, they will look at constant negative press and adjust their values of sponsorship deals accordingly. Again, common sense.

I wonder why you think PR departments exist, if not to enhance and protect the value of their organisation or client.

 

[Pigeonho]

Re: The Sun

Hats something you can't prove either way, whereas all we have to do is see the many deals that have come about and see that there can't really be that many readers of the Sun out there in the boardrooms. I will add, too, that if some CEO of a company said 'hmm, not too sure about coming on board with your lot, Mr Khaldoon, as the Mirror said something negative about you', it wouldn't surprise me if our powerbrokers left that meeting in absolute hysterics.

It's not something that you can prove either way, but it's pretty much common sense.

And while I don't think any organisation is going to bother about one negative article, they will look at constant negative press and adjust their values of sponsorship deals accordingly. Again, common sense.

I wonder why you think PR departments exist, if not to enhance and protect the value of their organisation or client.

Until we see a whole host of reports of potential clients having not wanting to have negotiated deals with us, a now multi million pound outfit ran by ultimate professionals in their respective fields, based on some reports by sports journalists in the UK red tops, I'll continue to believe that if there is an agenda, not many in those positions are taking one blind bit of notice of it. If we see the boss of a major company say 'I thought about it, but having watched Sunday supplement I thought better of it', and he is followed by more major bosses citing the sun, mirror and paddy Barclay as the reasons for not wanting a slice of he City pie, I'll think again about my belief.
The CEO's of Nike, LG, BT Sports etc etc etc seem to not give a fuck.

Edit. That before we even get onto players who have joined, despite the agenda.

 

[moomba]

Re: The Sun

Until we see a whole host of reports of potential clients having not wanting to have negotiated deals with us, a now multi million pound outfit ran by ultimate professionals in their respective fields, based on some reports by sports journalists in the UK red tops, I'll continue to believe that if there is an agenda, not many in those positions are taking one blind bit of notice of it. If we see the boss of a major company say 'I thought about it, but having watched Sunday supplement I thought better of it', and he is followed by more major bosses citing the sun, mirror and paddy Barclay as the reasons for not wanting a slice of he City pie, I'll think again about my belief.
The CEO's of Nike, LG, BT Sports etc etc etc seem to not give a fuck.

I suspect even if every CEO came out with a statement that none is ever likely to, that it wouldn't change your mind.

What do you think the purpose of PR is? Why do companies such as City spend fortunes on PR departments if it has no impact on their commercial attractiveness?

 

[Bluesiam]

1) City don't write those headlines
2) The tabloids raison d'etre is to make money, so you aren't going to get balanced journalism, you are going to get opinionated rant designed to pander to the lowest common denominator

Marvin, I'm far more aware of this which is why I would ban this Gutterpress from City as in my view we don't need them as much as they need us.

Social Media in my view has eradicated the need of our press when we have the ability to release a picture out there and instantly gets seen by millions via Instagram.

Sign a new player? let the whole world know with a youtube video of the player walking into the stadium.

Still don't get your comment blaming City's media team for the headlines.

Doesn't metter what action City were to take, they are still motivated by £££ which comes from pandering to the jealousies of the Utd and Liverpool fans. I wouldn't want City to ban journalists even if they are not worthy of the name

Why descend to their level? City are developing a track record of showing class in every department. Time will prove this to be the right approach.

Does it actually matter what the Sun prints?

 

[Pigeonho]

Re: The Sun

Until we see a whole host of reports of potential clients having not wanting to have negotiated deals with us, a now multi million pound outfit ran by ultimate professionals in their respective fields, based on some reports by sports journalists in the UK red tops, I'll continue to believe that if there is an agenda, not many in those positions are taking one blind bit of notice of it. If we see the boss of a major company say 'I thought about it, but having watched Sunday supplement I thought better of it', and he is followed by more major bosses citing the sun, mirror and paddy Barclay as the reasons for not wanting a slice of he City pie, I'll think again about my belief.
The CEO's of Nike, LG, BT Sports etc etc etc seem to not give a fuck.

I suspect even if every CEO came out with a statement that none is ever likely to, that it wouldn't change your mind.

What do you think the purpose of PR is? Why do companies such as City spend fortunes on PR departments if it has no impact on their commercial attractiveness?

Course it would, as it would prove that the articles are having an effect. As for PR, well what do you think our PR lot do? From what we read on here it's not very much, maybe though that is because they know that all it is is just the red tops being cocks. Do you think Jamie Oliver sat with our PR lot and said 'sow, these fackin articles I fackin reds, they true or what you cants? My fackin burgers are mustard mate and I ain't gonna be fryin for sam two bit campany who every cant lorrrfs at'. Or did he think, 'fack me, man city want my stuff? Diamond mate, fackin diamond'. I would go with the latter, purely based on the fact that we are who everyone is talking about and who everyone wants to be associated with, be it players, major companies, tv chefs or major people in the back room levels of football. All that is not being threatened at all by some shite in the paper. The proof is all around the club.

 

[Chippy_boy]

Re: The Sun

Hats something you can't prove either way, whereas all we have to do is see the many deals that have come about and see that there can't really be that many readers of the Sun out there in the boardrooms. I will add, too, that if some CEO of a company said 'hmm, not too sure about coming on board with your lot, Mr Khaldoon, as the Mirror said something negative about you', it wouldn't surprise me if our powerbrokers left that meeting in absolute hysterics.

It's not something that you can prove either way, but it's pretty much common sense.

And while I don't think any organisation is going to bother about one negative article, they will look at constant negative press and adjust their values of sponsorship deals accordingly. Again, common sense.

I wonder why you think PR departments exist, if not to enhance and protect the value of their organisation or client.

Until we see a whole host of reports of potential clients having not wanting to have negotiated deals with us, a now multi million pound outfit ran by ultimate professionals in their respective fields, based on some reports by sports journalists in the UK red tops, I'll continue to believe that if there is an agenda, not many in those positions are taking one blind bit of notice of it. If we see the boss of a major company say 'I thought about it, but having watched Sunday supplement I thought better of it', and he is followed by more major bosses citing the sun, mirror and paddy Barclay as the reasons for not wanting a slice of he City pie, I'll think again about my belief.
The CEO's of Nike, LG, BT Sports etc etc etc seem to not give a fuck.

Edit. That before we even get onto players who have joined, despite the agenda.

Bit of a daft argument Pidge. What about the ones that didn't join and the sponsors who didn't sign up? Who knows if Isco's decision was hanging in the balance, but because we were not slightly higher profile and slightly more highly regarded in Spain, his marginal decision came down in favour of joining Real and not us.

You seem to have no idea how important a business' brand is and how much money and effort top companies put into promoting and protecting it. Or if you do understand it, then you think that for some inexplicable reason, none of it applies to us. That football is some kind of special case where PR doesn't matter like it does for Shell, or Esso or Unilever or BAT. Ok for them to spend billions on marketing and PR, but CIty doesn't need to bother because it makes no difference.

Frankly its a bizarre stance you seem to be taking.