Matthew Le Tissier Posted 11 December, 2009 Posted 11 December, 2009 As noted in a previous post the Echo use this site for most of there info and story's they run on the club I thought it may be beneficial to them if we ran a topic where people can give them some feedback the paper.
Third Division South Days Posted 11 December, 2009 Posted 11 December, 2009 The Echo is a mess of a paper. Just one example - Normal to have sports on the back 4 or 5 pages but what idiot thinks its a good idea to have the TV and Radio guide in the middle of that section?
thorpie the sinner Posted 11 December, 2009 Posted 11 December, 2009 Why didn't the Echo just wait! They think everyone has to dance to their tune and quite frankly, it is bo@$ocks!!!!!!!!
christineb Posted 11 December, 2009 Posted 11 December, 2009 Ian Murray really should get off of his high horse. The Echo is a poor paper which seems to operate on the basis of not letting the truth get in the way of what it considers to be a good story. Although the facts about the redevelopment were already in the public domain why could he not accept that the club wanted to do a press conference about this major investment and wait a day before printing the story? I think his last paragraph is very telling and is unlikely to win him many friends. The man is a tool and if he thinks that he can compete with Nicola Cortese then he is totally deluded as well. By writing this column in the Echo he has shown himself to be a very petty person and has only succeeded in putting this matter into the public domain when it could and should have been resolved privately. His ego is almost as big as he who cannot be named.
ottery st mary Posted 11 December, 2009 Posted 11 December, 2009 Is Mr Lowe now running the Echo newspaper or maybe there are two of them..old sorts in the world. COYRs 3 points this weekend.
saint_mears Posted 11 December, 2009 Posted 11 December, 2009 Did ian murray use to work for the sun newspaper ?
Joensuu Posted 11 December, 2009 Posted 11 December, 2009 Died a death when the internet replaced it. Who anyone buys the Echo is beyond me.
Master Bates Posted 11 December, 2009 Posted 11 December, 2009 Died a death when the internet replaced it. Who anyone buys the Echo is beyond me. I buy it for the local news (about 5-8 pages of), family announcements, public notices and the sport.
Um Bongo Posted 11 December, 2009 Posted 11 December, 2009 Like any other paper, load of ****e. As mentioned, get their stories off of here and usually not the first to break any news.
The9 Posted 11 December, 2009 Posted 11 December, 2009 Dear Daily Echo, I think you should give Dan Kerins a raise. He is awesome. Regards, A. Reader.
Minty Posted 11 December, 2009 Posted 11 December, 2009 Dear Daily Echo, I think you should give Dan Kerins a raise. He is awesome. Regards, A. Reader. lol! He'll only blow it on Guiness.
Master Bates Posted 11 December, 2009 Posted 11 December, 2009 Dear Echo, If you are reporting about house break ins etc please make sure you match up the Road/Close/Avenue/Street with the correct district. Sullivan Road is in Sholing, not Bitterne. Lydgate Green is in Thornhill, not Weston etc etc Regards, MB
OldNick Posted 11 December, 2009 Posted 11 December, 2009 Well Im not going to kick them. I enjoy reading the Pink and will be disappointed when and if it stops. The Echo provides a lot of good reading for people who are homebound or not able to go online. The internet is not the be all and end all and so the Echo is still important. As for falling out with the local football club...well that is madness.
OldNick Posted 11 December, 2009 Posted 11 December, 2009 Dear Echo, If you are reporting about house break ins etc please make sure you match up the Road/Close/Avenue/Street with the correct district. Sullivan Road is in Sholing, not Bitterne. Lydgate Green is in Thornhill, not Weston etc etc Regards, MB I hope insurance companies get their info from that as your premiums will be less ifr they put the offences in the wrong area Lol
for_heaven's_Saint Posted 11 December, 2009 Posted 11 December, 2009 I always find it amazing how the Echo can run the same story so many times; they seem to just retype an article multiple times and usually it's hardly news worthy anyway. Articles consistantly have spelling mistakes within them and it's quite clear they're often not proof read. The comments about Lowe in the last article were absolutely pathetic, and i suggest that they issue an apology not only to Mr Cortese but also to the fans. As someone else mentioned earlier, if it wasn't for the Swiss buyout you'd be reporting on Eastleigh at best.
$$$ Posted 11 December, 2009 Posted 11 December, 2009 1) Stop the embedded videos on webpages playing automatically. If I want to watch a video, I’m perfectly capable of pressing play. 2) Stop special needs types appearing on these videos. Seriously, where do you find some of these people? People that can speak clearly and don’t look like a gun is pointing at them out of shot would be a start. 3) Allow people to post comments without registering like the old days...
Matthew Le God Posted 11 December, 2009 Posted 11 December, 2009 (edited) The Echo clearly got the story from here. It was in the public domain 7 days before this forum found it on the New Forest Council website. If the Echo had any "real" contacts or investigative journalists it would have picked up on these plans that were made public in November rather than December when it actually ran a story it was asked not to. All news outlets that reported it on the same day as someone on this forum posted only gave a brief description in a small article that didn't give much away. The Echo should have waited as asked by the club and deserve what has happened. I'd imagine a huge % of the Echo readership largely buy it for Saints news and with this in mind it seems stupid the Echo would do something against the hand that feeds it when it asks a reasonable request. The article in todays Echo describing the course of events is likely to only make things worse. If this is a long running feud then the very existence of the paper could come under threat. The internet is already killing newspapers but being banned from covering certain aspects of its main "reader puller" could be the last straw. Edited 11 December, 2009 by Matthew Le God
for_heaven's_Saint Posted 11 December, 2009 Posted 11 December, 2009 1) Stop the embedded videos on webpages playing automatically. If I want to watch a video, I’m perfectly capable of pressing play. 2) Stop special needs types appearing on these videos. Seriously, where do you find some of these people? People that can speak clearly and don’t look like a gun is pointing at them out of shot would be a start. 3) Allow people to post comments without registering like the old days... Lol. They are awful aren't they? I've always assumed they must be work experience kids. Also, is it standard journalist practice to include the person's name in the title of the story about them? For example instead of at title of 'Man killed in car crash' then 'John Smith was driving on the M27...' in the first paragraph, the Echo will often write 'John Smith killed in Car Crash', which to me seems very abrupt and unprofessional.
Matthew Le God Posted 11 December, 2009 Posted 11 December, 2009 Lol. They are awful aren't they? I've always assumed they must be work experience kids. Can't be work experience kids all year round like they seem to be. Work experience is for year 10 pupils for one or maybe two weeks in the summer term.
saint peach Posted 11 December, 2009 Posted 11 December, 2009 Can't be work experience kids all year round like they seem to be. Work experience is for year 10 pupils for one or maybe two weeks in the summer term. Not true.
Rory Posted 11 December, 2009 Posted 11 December, 2009 The Echo clearly got the story from here. It was in the public domain 7 days before this forum found it on the New Forest Council website. If the Echo had any "real" contacts or investigative journalists it would have picked up on these plans that were made public in November rather than December when it actually ran a story it was asked not to. All news outlets that reported it on the same day as someone on this forum posted only gave a brief description in a small article that didn't give much away. The Echo should have waited as asked by the club and deserve what has happened. I'd imagine a huge % of the Echo readership largely buy it for Saints news and with this in mind it seems stupid the Echo would do something against the hand that feeds it when it asks a reasonable request. The article in todays Echo describing the course of events is likely to only make things worse. If this is a long running feud then the very existence of the paper could come under threat. The internet is already killing newspapers but being banned from covering certain aspects of its main "reader puller" could be the last straw. You have absolutely NO idea.
hutch Posted 11 December, 2009 Posted 11 December, 2009 Never been the same since it stopped being the Southern Evening Echo.
Matthew Le God Posted 11 December, 2009 Posted 11 December, 2009 You have absolutely NO idea. Care to open that into anything other than a petty insult that actually adds to the debate?
slickmick Posted 11 December, 2009 Posted 11 December, 2009 Just heard on Wave FM someone from the Echo (didn't catch name) putting their side of the story across. This guy was a muppett of the highest order. His comments along the lines of 'hey these things happen with journalists' and the bit about how even Rupert Lowe never stooped to this level before left me gobsmacked at this blokes arrogance. Can't blame Cortese for being peed off with these idiots.
saint peach Posted 11 December, 2009 Posted 11 December, 2009 Care to open that into anything other than a petty insult that actually adds to the debate? It's not petty. It's not even an insult. It's an opinion by a fellow forum member, equally as viable as yours.
Matthew Le God Posted 11 December, 2009 Posted 11 December, 2009 It really is shocking that the Echo is using the "even someone as bad a Rupert Lowe never did this" argument. So they expected the club to forget all this and let them into the ground and training ground when the Echo destroyed confidence between the two, just because Rupert never banned them?
stevegrant Posted 11 December, 2009 Posted 11 December, 2009 It really is shocking that the Echo is using the "even someone as bad a Rupert Lowe never did this" argument. So they expected the club to forget all this and let them into the ground and training ground when the Echo destroyed confidence between the two, just because Rupert never banned them? How have the Echo "destroyed confidence between the two"?! We don't know for sure where the Echo got the info about the planning application, but I would suspect it didn't come from the club - they were probably planning on telling the echo on Tuesday so they were briefed ready for the Wednesday press conference, but didn't bank on people being able to use the internet and finding the plans sooner. A fan at NFDC was probably the first to alert someone to the plans which has then spread onto the forums. The Echo picked up on it - as they should - and wanted to report on it. I don't see what the big deal is, it's a positive story for both the club and the Marchwood area. The only thing I can think of is that Cortese's pride has been dented a bit as he wanted to be the one to pull off the dustsheet from the Lego model.
Minty Posted 11 December, 2009 Posted 11 December, 2009 I don't see what the big deal is, it's a positive story Indeed, and I think we're in danger of losing this fact. The story here is the continuing investment in Southampton Football Club by the new owner and his staff. If that gets overshadowed by this then it would rather sad IMO.
Hatch Posted 11 December, 2009 Posted 11 December, 2009 Must be a slow news day down on the South Coast today.
greg_hill Posted 11 December, 2009 Posted 11 December, 2009 I'm not sure what the answer is for The Echo. I don't want them to go bust as they have been around for a long time and represent part of the area's history. But it's clear from reading these comments that most do not feel The Echo has any kind of allegiance to Saints or the area. I've always felt the paper is trying to continue on as if the Internet had never happened. Wake up guys, you need to adapt, build up your reputation gain and do something worthwhile. The problem is, you need investment to do that.
Matthew Le God Posted 11 December, 2009 Posted 11 December, 2009 (edited) How have the Echo "destroyed confidence between the two"?! We don't know for sure where the Echo got the info about the planning application, but I would suspect it didn't come from the club - they were probably planning on telling the echo on Tuesday so they were briefed ready for the Wednesday press conference, but didn't bank on people being able to use the internet and finding the plans sooner. A fan at NFDC was probably the first to alert someone to the plans which has then spread onto the forums. The Echo picked up on it - as they should - and wanted to report on it. I don't see what the big deal is, it's a positive story for both the club and the Marchwood area. The only thing I can think of is that Cortese's pride has been dented a bit as he wanted to be the one to pull off the dustsheet from the Lego model. The plans were first publicly available on the New Forest District council website on the 19th November 2009. From the 19th Nov to the 7th December no-one in the media printed or said anything about them. They were noticed by Master Bates and posted on this forum on the 7th December. The next day (8th December) they were in the Echo. The Echo broke confidence because the club asked reasonably to delay a full story for a day yet the Echo went ahead. It was hardly going to be an exclusive for the Echo as news had broken on a small scale on the 7th December. Thus it wouldn't matter if the Echo waited a day. A large % of the Echo's readership and Saints fans that don't read this forum they would have been unaware of the planned developments and the club would have liked Nicole Cortese at the press conference to be the one that made them aware of it. Edited 11 December, 2009 by Matthew Le God
stevegrant Posted 11 December, 2009 Posted 11 December, 2009 I'm not sure what the answer is for The Echo. I don't want them to go bust as they have been around for a long time and represent part of the area's history. But it's clear from reading these comments that most do not feel The Echo has any kind of allegiance to Saints or the area. I've always felt the paper is trying to continue on as if the Internet had never happened. Wake up guys, you need to adapt, build up your reputation gain and do something worthwhile. The problem is, you need investment to do that. But they got the information for the story in question from the internet... :confused: Given the amount of content they have on their website these days, I don't think there's much value in suggesting they're ignoring web content and web-based news. That's why they're able to get articles on the website before they appear in print.
Fan The Flames Posted 11 December, 2009 Posted 11 December, 2009 Care to open that into anything other than a petty insult that actually adds to the debate? I thought it was plain, you don't know anything that your are claiming as fact to indeed be fact. You are doing exactly what you are stating you dislike about the Echo, you are publishing stories with out doing any research. The last time it came up about the Echo nicking stories from here, the Echo explained why it wasn't true.
stevegrant Posted 11 December, 2009 Posted 11 December, 2009 The plans were first publicly available on the New Forest District council website on the 19th November 2009. From the 19th Nov to the 7th December no-one in the media printed or said anything about them. They were noticed by Master Bates and posted on this forum on the 7th December. The next day (8th December) they were in the Echo. So what? Oh noes, the Echo doesn't have the resources to be hitting F5 on the New Forest District Council's planning department website just on the off-chance that Saints might have put in an application for Staplewood redevelopment. The Echo broke confidence because the club asked reasonably to delay a full story for a day yet the Echo went ahead. The club asked to delay a story that had already been released elsewhere! An utterly pointless request. It was hardly going to be an exclusive for the Echo as news had broken on a small scale on the 7th December. See above. However to a large % of the Echo's readership and Saints fans that don't read this forum they would have been unaware of the planned developments. I would bet significant money that a hell of a lot of the Echo's readership would have seen it on Sky Sports News on Monday, or would at least have heard from somebody who had seen it.
Matthew Le God Posted 11 December, 2009 Posted 11 December, 2009 I thought it was plain, you don't know anything that your are claiming as fact to indeed be fact. You are doing exactly what you are stating you dislike about the Echo, you are publishing stories with out doing any research. The last time it came up about the Echo nicking stories from here, the Echo explained why it wasn't true. The plans were first publicly available on the New Forest District council website on the 19th November 2009. From the 19th Nov to the 7th December no-one in the media printed or said anything about them. They were noticed by Master Bates and posted on this forum on the 7th December. The next day (8th December) they were in the Echo. Coincidence?
saint peach Posted 11 December, 2009 Posted 11 December, 2009 The plans were first publicly available on the New Forest District council website on the 19th November 2009. From the 19th Nov to the 7th December no-one in the media printed or said anything about them. They were noticed by Master Bates and posted on this forum on the 7th December. The next day (8th December) they were in the Echo. The Echo broke confidence because the club asked reasonably to delay a full story for a day yet the Echo went ahead. It was hardly going to be an exclusive for the Echo as news had broken on a small scale on the 7th December. Thus it wouldn't matter if the Echo waited a day. A large % of the Echo's readership and Saints fans that don't read this forum they would have been unaware of the planned developments and the club would have liked Nicole Cortese at the press conference to be the one that made them aware of it. But, as I mentioned earlier, many people would then complain that the Echo hadn't reported it earlier. It was a lose lose situation for the Echo.
slickmick Posted 11 December, 2009 Posted 11 December, 2009 Just out of interest, why didn't the club hold a press conference about their proposed plans before they were submited to the council ? I do wonder if a press conference would have been called for Wednesday if the story hadn't leaked by Sky Sports.
stevegrant Posted 11 December, 2009 Posted 11 December, 2009 The plans were first publicly available on the New Forest District council website on the 19th November 2009. From the 19th Nov to the 7th December no-one in the media printed or said anything about them. They were noticed by Master Bates and posted on this forum on the 7th December. The next day (8th December) they were in the Echo. Coincidence? Wrong again. MB lifted the link from somewhere else, he didn't "notice" them. Repeating the same fiction over and over again doesn't eventually make it become fact.
Scummer Posted 11 December, 2009 Posted 11 December, 2009 Is it a coincidence that several of the people backing the Echo on this are mates with an Echo journalist?
saint peach Posted 11 December, 2009 Posted 11 December, 2009 Is it a coincidence that several of the people backing the Echo on this are mates with an Echo journalist? Probably not. Just means they have a better understanding of the media and therefore a more rounded view of the situation.
Matthew Le God Posted 11 December, 2009 Posted 11 December, 2009 But, as I mentioned earlier, many people would then complain that the Echo hadn't reported it earlier. It was a lose lose situation for the Echo. They have lost more by breaking the story against the wishes of the club then they would have done for saving face by running the story and destroying ties with the club! Would have been better for them if they just waited 24 hours and kept a good relationship with the club they rely having a good relationship with to sell newspapers.
onthemarch Posted 11 December, 2009 Posted 11 December, 2009 The Daily Echo is one of the worst newspapers ever written - and people would be far better off reading something like The Times, Guardian or Independent - in the process gaining a grasp of the real issues facing the world and the UK. All local news can be sourced online - and the Echo would not be missed in the sports world. I got a free copy of the Echo last time I caught a Greyhound bus and the standard of journalism was terrible. An article about drug use in Southampton used every cliche possible - and could have been written by a 10 year old. Times change - there is no need for the Echo in Southampton - bye bye Echo - up the Saints.
Minty Posted 11 December, 2009 Posted 11 December, 2009 Is it a coincidence that several of the people backing the Echo on this are mates with an Echo journalist? Yes. Knowing someone who works there doesn't mean you're gonna defend the paper as a while. As I said, I've worked for the Echo myself and they edited my work so it read differently to how it was intended and got me into some hassle... but in this instance I'm just calling it as I see it. In fact most people seem to be fairly middle-of-the-road as far as I can see, in that we don't know exactly what was said between NC and the Echo, but that ideally, the two should've had a dialogue about how to proceed. If there was agreement between the two then I can understand the Club's actions, but equally I understand the Echo's need to publish things once they are available. And once again, I think the whole thing is getting blown massively out of proportion, especially given that the basis for this whole spat was a POSITIVE story in the first place. For the record, Matt Le God, the plans were published on the NFDC website on November 25th.
Fan The Flames Posted 11 December, 2009 Posted 11 December, 2009 The plans were first publicly available on the New Forest District council website on the 19th November 2009. From the 19th Nov to the 7th December no-one in the media printed or said anything about them. They were noticed by Master Bates and posted on this forum on the 7th December. The next day (8th December) they were in the Echo. Coincidence? You don't know if anything else happened along that timeline. For instance the club could have brief the Echo weeks ago and asked them to sit on it until the press conference and then the story broke on the internet and the echo then published. I'm not saying this happened, I'm saying you don't know for a fact your version of events is actually fact.
saint peach Posted 11 December, 2009 Posted 11 December, 2009 They have lost more by breaking the story against the wishes of the club then they would have done for saving face by running the story and destroying ties with the club! Would have been better for them if they just waited 24 hours and kept a good relationship with the club they rely having a good relationship with to sell newspapers. Maybe in hindsight it would have been. But the thing is they were reporting a story - that's their job. They were publishing a story in the public's interest. They are not there to pander to the club but to inform fans of developments of their local team.
Matthew Le God Posted 11 December, 2009 Posted 11 December, 2009 I'm saying you don't know for a fact your version of events is actually fact. Everything I just said in that bit you quoted is fact. Which bits aren't? The plans were first publicly available on the New Forest District council website on the 19th November 2009.True From the 19th Nov to the 7th December no-one in the media printed or said anything about them.True They were noticed by Master Bates and posted on this forum on the 7th December.True The next day (8th December) they were in the Echo.True
Scummer Posted 11 December, 2009 Posted 11 December, 2009 Yes. Knowing someone who works there doesn't mean you're gonna defend the paper as a while. Sorry, I was being a bit cheeky. It's quite noticeable though. As it happens, I've written for the Portsmouth Evening News before. It didn't leave me with a great impression of local papers.
Minty Posted 11 December, 2009 Posted 11 December, 2009 Everything I just said in that bit you quoted is fact. Which bits aren't? Erm... they were published on Nov 25th.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now