Daily Echo Still Banned

[gaz]

I think the people who brought it up (the papers) are the ones who are more bothered by it. Its in their interest to keep people talking about such a non-issue.

 

Anyway, I'm not bothered. Footy League Show to watch the goals, League 1 Minus 10 for the report.

[NickG]

Petty again from our chairman.

 

All he is doing is hurting the fans who can't afford to go to games or just can't make it every week. I'm not really sure what he thinks he's going to achieve by continuing to do this.

 

so why is it petty? Take it you know the reason.

 

how is it hurting fans?

[aintforever]

 

how is it hurting fans?

 

I think some people might possibly like pictures to go with their match reports.

[georgeweahscousin]

Digital age. Use the internet for match reports.

[aintforever]

Digital age. Use the internet for match reports.

 

What if you are 90 years old and don't have a computer. Or just maybe prefer to read your local paper?

[NickG]

I think some people might possibly like pictures to go with their match reports.

 

there are.

[georgeweahscousin]

What if you are 90 years old and don't have a computer. Or just maybe prefer to read your local paper?

 

That is a very small group of people......

[aintforever]

That is a very small group of people......

 

I think you might be surprised at how many people don't spend their spare time staring at a computer screen, especially among the elderly.

[NickG]

they sit at home, waiting to see a pic of Hammond putting in a tackle (only want it if its taken by echo photographer though)

[Smirking_Saint]

Is this really an issue ??

 

Can't stand the Echo, horrible little paper.

 

I would imagine most people watch the news, footie league show or on the internet now anyways.

[Micky]

I'm absolutely gutted that the Echo are still banned, it impacts masively on my viewing pleasure of said publication.... doooh, ok - it doesn't really...! Couldn't care one iota if there are pictures or not - really, what is the big deal over a picture in the Echo...?

[Smirking_Saint]

 

 

 

[NickG]

don't those moaning even convinced themselves!

[LostBoys]

Who cares about the Echo. They had to run an apology last week as they gave the wrong player ratings. The whole rag needs a huge shake up to stop as least some of the garbage they print.

[JackFrost]

End of the day this ban will only affect some of the elderly and few others who don't own a computer. Apart from a few hardcore fans of retirement age, is there really anyone who is going to be THAT bothered by it?

 

The Echo needs Saints more than Saints needs the Echo and as far as Cortese is concerned, the Echo are far too small-time to worry about and until they get their act together in whichever way they need to they'll be sidelined

[Wes Tender]

End of the day this ban will only affect some of the elderly and few others who don't own a computer. Apart from a few hardcore fans of retirement age, is there really anyone who is going to be THAT bothered by it?

 

The Echo needs Saints more than Saints needs the Echo and as far as Cortese is concerned, the Echo are far too small-time to worry about and until they get their act together in whichever way they need to they'll be sidelined

 

I agree with you entirely. But Docker P seems to think that

But a huge proportion of people over the age of 50 never use it and don't have access.

 

Mind you, he's wrong and might have more of a case if he raised the age figure to 70+ and even then the number of silver surfers is growing fast as grandparents seek to keep in touch with their families.

[Topcat]

The best way to get favourable treatment in the media is to treat them nicely. No guarantee that this will always create positive reports but at least if you do not cause them irritation in doing their job, they are not going to go out of there way to trash you. Cortese just continues to behave as a child that inherited a sweet shop.

 

That this chap with a background as an advisor on where the rich invest, has no grasp of such matters should be of no surprise. He had no experience in running anything prior to the Saints. That is why his external business relationships are so full of disputes and edicts.

 

The real sadness is that he seems incapable of acknowledging his faults and learning from his mistakes. That takes a wise and brave person.

[NickG]

how many people have neither internet nor tv but are avid saints fans buying echo?

 

of those how many buy for reports, interviews, rumours, player ratings?

 

how many would even notice if there was a picture of Hammond tackling someone from a recent game?

 

of those how many would be worried whether an echo photographer or an agency one took that pic?

 

 

Even if Cortesse was in the wrong, it does not matter!!!!

 

BUT the only poster in the industry posting states Cortesse is not in the wrong.

 

The like of Andy Porter, hypo, docker p , etc are looking to find a reason to moan about the club when it doesn't exist.

 

Says more about them than Cortesse

[jam]

The Echo know why they are banned. It's a bit ingenuous on their part to say the club have offered no explanation when the club don't have to. It's not the club that have banned them.

 

Technically, Cortese might be carrying out the wishes of Football Dataco, but it's not the club.

 

In the past I've sided with the Echo, and considered their banning by the club as unreasonable and petty.

 

But from what I'm told, they've taken the mickey this time. The photographers were allowed back in, but within a day or so the paper were in breach of their licence by trying to sell pictures they had no rights to.

 

As required by their collective agreement the club informed Football Dataco who imposed the ban.

 

That's my info and if anyone knows definitively differently, then please let us have your story.

 

So in short, Echo photographers (not the Echo itself) are banned due to them breaching their licence. Am I reading this correctly, FM?

 

And if so, it Murray lying when he says:

 

We are disappointed that when the club lifted their complete photographic ban on all other media, including national newspaper and agency photographers, they failed to do so for us.

Edited 9 November, 2010 by jam
another question

[jam]

The best way to get favourable treatment in the media is to treat them nicely. No guarantee that this will always create positive reports but at least if you do not cause them irritation in doing their job, they are not going to go out of there way to trash you. Cortese just continues to behave as a child that inherited a sweet shop.

 

That this chap with a background as an advisor on where the rich invest, has no grasp of such matters should be of no surprise. He had no experience in running anything prior to the Saints. That is why his external business relationships are so full of disputes and edicts.

 

The real sadness is that he seems incapable of acknowledging his faults and learning from his mistakes. That takes a wise and brave person.

 

The fact that the initial photographer 'ban' was lifted, apparently after Cortese had a meeting at News International indicates that this is simply untrue.

[jam]

how many people have neither internet nor tv but are avid saints fans buying echo?

 

of those how many buy for reports, interviews, rumours, player ratings?

 

how many would even notice if there was a picture of Hammond tackling someone from a recent game?

 

of those how many would be worried whether an echo photographer or an agency one took that pic?

 

 

Even if Cortesse was in the wrong, it does not matter!!!!

 

BUT the only poster in the industry posting states Cortesse is not in the wrong.

 

The like of Andy Porter, hypo, docker p , etc are looking to find a reason to moan about the club when it doesn't exist.

 

Says more about them than Cortesse

 

Are digs like this really necessary?

[NickG]

it appears totally unneccessary for them to dig at the club - yes.

[dune]

The Echo know why they are banned. It's a bit ingenuous on their part to say the club have offered no explanation when the club don't have to. It's not the club that have banned them.

 

Technically, Cortese might be carrying out the wishes of Football Dataco, but it's not the club.

 

In the past I've sided with the Echo, and considered their banning by the club as unreasonable and petty.

 

But from what I'm told, they've taken the mickey this time. The photographers were allowed back in, but within a day or so the paper were in breach of their licence by trying to sell pictures they had no rights to.

 

As required by their collective agreement the club informed Football Dataco who imposed the ban.

 

That's my info and if anyone knows definitively differently, then please let us have your story.

 

If this is true then the Echo have no sympathy from me.

[Saint_John]

I wish supporters would stop trying to blame NC for the problem with the Echo, this "war" between the Echo and the Club has been going on for a number of years.

 

For example here is a story I was told from 2001.

Club concerned about inaccurate stories appearing in the Echo;

Meeting arranged between senior people at the Club and the Echo;

Meeting agrees that the Echo will check every story with the Club before printing, and only print the factual correct ones;

In exchange the Club would give the Echo "heads up" about new players/managers so that the Echo could do the background research before being announced.

 

In Oct 2001, the Dark Lord was going to sack Gray/Wadsworth on the Sunday after the WHU game (in fact he wanted to sack them the week before after the Arsenal game and a visit to the training ground where he found the players just sitting around).

Anyhow the Echo was told on the Sunday morning about the sackings and about wGS coming in as per the arrangement (formal announcement was late afternoon/early evening).

 

A couple of days later the Echo prints a story without checking with the Club about the sackings of Gray/Wadsworth "costing the club £2M" (the real figures were 400-500k).

The Dark Lord is fuming with the Echo and when they next phone up to check a story (I believe something to do with a rumour about wGS signing a player), the Dark Lord shouts "I'm not talking to that f***ing little sh**" and the phone is slammed down.

 

IMO it doesn't matter who is in charge at Saints, the problem lies with the Echo.

 

p.s. IMO the Dark Lord gots his own back on the Echo at a later date; we should all remember the story about Pahars work permit (Permit refused; Appeal 2 weeks later; Work Permit granted; Story leaked to Echo that permit has been refused; Echo print story; 2 hours later Club deny story saying his permit has been granted).

[John B]

how many people have neither internet nor tv but are avid saints fans buying echo?

 

of those how many buy for reports, interviews, rumours, player ratings?

 

how many would even notice if there was a picture of Hammond tackling someone from a recent game?

 

of those how many would be worried whether an echo photographer or an agency one took that pic?

 

 

Even if Cortesse was in the wrong, it does not matter!!!!

 

BUT the only poster in the industry posting states Cortesse is not in the wrong.

 

The like of Andy Porter, hypo, docker p , etc are looking to find a reason to moan about the club when it doesn't exist.

 

Says more about them than Cortesse

 

Or perhaps they are more percetive than you

[NickG]

Or perhaps they are more percetive than you

 

tell me then, how so?

[georgeweahscousin]

I see that their staff are on strike?

 

Looks like they have bigger fish to fry........

[Clifford Nelson]

It seems like many posters thinks it doesn't matter 'because the Echo is rubbish' or something similar. This is not really about the quality of the paper at all, but about the freedom of the press. Let's remember that the start of the spat between the Echo and the club was that the paper was printing something which, whilst embargoed, was already in the public domain.

 

It shouldn't be beyond a club executive and a newspaper editor to put the past behind them.

 

Nobody needs to like; buy; read; or appreciate the Echo, but it is surprising that so few want to uphold their right to print. Haven't we had enough freedoms eroded already?

[Wes Tender]

The best way to get favourable treatment in the media is to treat them nicely. No guarantee that this will always create positive reports but at least if you do not cause them irritation in doing their job, they are not going to go out of there way to trash you. Cortese just continues to behave as a child that inherited a sweet shop.

 

That this chap with a background as an advisor on where the rich invest, has no grasp of such matters should be of no surprise. He had no experience in running anything prior to the Saints. That is why his external business relationships are so full of disputes and edicts.

 

The real sadness is that he seems incapable of acknowledging his faults and learning from his mistakes. That takes a wise and brave person.

 

You're naive if you believe for one moment that if you treat the media nicely they'll treat you nicely back. All they're interested in is selling their rag and if a sensational story comes up about Saints, it isn't going to be held back or treated with kid gloves just because the club and the Echo are cosy together.

 

And I see that you are like some others on here who are only too ready to apportion the blame onto the shoulders of our Chief Executive and none onto Ian Murray's. As the saying goes, it takes two to tango, but as far as you're concerned, everything must be the fault of our CEO.

 

You say that Cortese has experience as an advisor to where the rich should invest and then you say that he has no experience of running anything. Which is it? Isn't his experience of financial matters of any benefit to the club?

 

Equally one can state that Murray has no experience outside of Journalism and would be no more qualified to run a football club than Cortese, although Cortese would be more qualified at least to advise on the financial aspects of running that rag the Echo. Murray ought to be good at the PR aspects, although one wouldn't think it if he is capable of p*ssing off those who can aid the sales of his rag.

[leftback]

BRUNO TONIOLLI !!

 

da da da da da da daaaaaaaaa da da da da da

 

fabulous darling

[trousers]

BRUNO TONIOLLI !!

 

da da da da da da daaaaaaaaa da da da da da

 

fabulous darling

 

Only one 'l' in Toniolli (sic)

[Wes Tender]

It seems like many posters thinks it doesn't matter 'because the Echo is rubbish' or something similar. This is not really about the quality of the paper at all, but about the freedom of the press. Let's remember that the start of the spat between the Echo and the club was that the paper was printing something which, whilst embargoed, was already in the public domain.

 

It shouldn't be beyond a club executive and a newspaper editor to put the past behind them.

 

Nobody needs to like; buy; read; or appreciate the Echo, but it is surprising that so few want to uphold their right to print. Haven't we had enough freedoms eroded already?

 

Who is denying the Echo the right to print whatever they like provided it isn't libellous? It's up to them to gain the story and print it and if they have jeopardised their relationship with the organisation which probably has more column inches in their publication devoted to news connected to it, then that is their fault. Let their journalists find their own stories about the club if they can and if they can't because doors are closed against them, then they can always publish stories in the public domain. But nobody is obstructing the freedom of the press.

[Andy_Porter]

The like of Andy Porter, hypo, docker p , etc are looking to find a reason to moan about the club when it doesn't exist.

 

Says more about them than Cortesse

 

Really?

 

All I said was it was petty from Cortese...

[COMEONYOUREDS]

The Echo know why they are banned. It's a bit ingenuous on their part to say the club have offered no explanation when the club don't have to. It's not the club that have banned them.

 

Technically, Cortese might be carrying out the wishes of Football Dataco, but it's not the club.

 

In the past I've sided with the Echo, and considered their banning by the club as unreasonable and petty.

 

But from what I'm told, they've taken the mickey this time. The photographers were allowed back in, but within a day or so the paper were in breach of their licence by trying to sell pictures they had no rights to.

 

As required by their collective agreement the club informed Football Dataco who imposed the ban.

 

That's my info and if anyone knows definitively differently, then please let us have your story.

 

If this is true then the echo really have nothing to whinge about, and should shut up imo

[Chez]

Really?

 

All I said was it was petty from Cortese...

 

didn't you know that saying anything negative about NC is not allowed on this forum in case he reads it, take offence, quits and the owners sell up?

[NickG]

It seems like many posters thinks it doesn't matter 'because the Echo is rubbish' or something similar. This is not really about the quality of the paper at all, but about the freedom of the press. Let's remember that the start of the spat between the Echo and the club was that the paper was printing something which, whilst embargoed, was already in the public domain.

 

It shouldn't be beyond a club executive and a newspaper editor to put the past behind them.

 

Nobody needs to like; buy; read; or appreciate the Echo, but it is surprising that so few want to uphold their right to print. Haven't we had enough freedoms eroded already?

 

it doesn't matter.

 

http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/sport/saints/news/8622311.Saints_tame_the_Shrews/

 

echo seem to have been free to print story and photo!

[NickG]

Really?

 

All I said was it was petty from Cortese...

 

it is non-issue and if floridamarlin is correct Cortesse hasn't been petty, so why criticise?

[hypochondriac]

it is non-issue and if floridamarlin is correct Cortesse hasn't been petty, so why criticise?

 

Because he was voicing his opinion based on the facts which were available at the time. It's what a forum is for. IF that is the case then the Echo has lied and therefore we could hardly have been expected to know that beforehand.

[Wes Tender]

Because he was voicing his opinion based on the facts which were available at the time. It's what a forum is for. IF that is the case then the Echo has lied and therefore we could hardly have been expected to know that beforehand.

 

And soon we can expect an apology from various posters can we, expressing regret at jumping to wrong conclusions that it must have been all Cortese's fault?

 

And sorry to be pedantic, but if the information on which those comments were based was incorrect, they cannot be facts.

[Redondo Saint]

What if you are 90 years old and don't have a computer. Or just maybe prefer to read your local paper?

 

Your gripe needs to be directed at The Echo - not SFC. Unless you are looking for something to blame on Cortese....

[NickG]

Your gripe needs to be directed at The Echo - not SFC. Unless you are looking for something to blame on Cortese....

 

what on this forum...surely not!

[benjii]

it doesn't matter.

 

http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/sport/saints/news/8622311.Saints_tame_the_Shrews/

 

echo seem to have been free to print story and photo!

 

and they even saw fit to include the most predictable and witless headline imaginable.

[saint_mears]

Oh and another petty action by cortese is of course stopping the echo using the club crest.

[Wes Tender]

Oh and another petty action by cortese is of course stopping the echo using the club crest.

 

I'm surprised you didn't have the forethought to start another thread on it, Smears. Missed a great opportunity to establish your credentials as whinger-in-chief when it comes to criticising our CEO. But you do win the Irony Prize for being petty enough to accuse Cortese of being petty over this non-event. So you're promoted to Chief Petty Officer Smears.

[Thedelldays]

My friend works fro the echo and he said their ban was lifted?

 

i see hypo and friends have ignored this

[Topcat]

You say that Cortese has experience as an advisor to where the rich should invest and then you say that he has no experience of running anything. Which is it? Isn't his experience of financial matters of any benefit to the club?

He has experience of how cash should be invested such as in Property vs Shares. He had no experience in managing people or in handling relations with the media. Regarding the Echo vs Saints issue, Cortese is the one who keeps picking fights with people. He has form.

[Wes Tender]

He has experience of how cash should be invested such as in Property vs Shares. He had no experience in managing people or in handling relations with the media. Regarding the Echo vs Saints issue, Cortese is the one who keeps picking fights with people. He has form.

 

So you know for a fact that he had no experience in managing people or handling relations with the media, do you? Kindly give us chapter and verse of the evidence that will convince us that you know what you are talking about. He appears to be a very private individual, so I would be surprised if anybody on here knew much about his former life before he came here. He has had interviews with some of the more serious newspapers who find him charming, but that rather contradicts your assumptions.

 

I suspect that in his former roles working for the Sports sections of the various Banking Institutions with which he has been involved, he probably had several staff under him. Latterly, when he had been in charge of the financial affairs of Billionaires, you reckon that he didn't have the personal relationship skills to deal with those customers adequately do you?

 

Regarding the Saints V Echo issue, my information was that the thing started because the Echo had breached an agreement to hold fire on an article about the new training facilities and therefore Ian Murray made himself and his rag persona non grata at the Club. Instead of apologising and trying to mend fences, Murray has pursued a petty vendetta against Cortese, who doesn't suffer fools gladly and good for him.

 

But it has already seemingly been established that the basis for this thread is not correct anyway, so those who revel in slagging off our CEO will have to wait until they can clutch at some other straws to satisfy their craving for a good bleat.

[JackFrost]

Daily Echo staff striking over pensions and pay. I wonder if any photographers are involved. . .

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-11722588

[Smirking_Saint]

Daily Echo staff striking over pensions and pay. I wonder if any photographers are involved. . .

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-11722588

 

We will all hear from topcat and smears soon regards the fact that this is all Cortese's fault.

[Big Bad Bob]

So you know for a fact that he had no experience in managing people or handling relations with the media, do you? Kindly give us chapter and verse of the evidence that will convince us that you know what you are talking about. He appears to be a very private individual, so I would be surprised if anybody on here knew much about his former life before he came here. He has had interviews with some of the more serious newspapers who find him charming, but that rather contradicts your assumptions.

 

I suspect that in his former roles working for the Sports sections of the various Banking Institutions with which he has been involved, he probably had several staff under him. Latterly, when he had been in charge of the financial affairs of Billionaires, you reckon that he didn't have the personal relationship skills to deal with those customers adequately do you?

 

Regarding the Saints V Echo issue, my information was that the thing started because the Echo had breached an agreement to hold fire on an article about the new training facilities and therefore Ian Murray made himself and his rag persona non grata at the Club. Instead of apologising and trying to mend fences, Murray has pursued a petty vendetta against Cortese, who doesn't suffer fools gladly and good for him.

 

But it has already seemingly been established that the basis for this thread is not correct anyway, so those who revel in slagging off our CEO will have to wait until they can clutch at some other straws to satisfy their craving for a good bleat.

 

It'll all fall on deaf ears I'm afraid Wes, I've had the same arguments with Benny before but he doesn't listen. I think Office Dibble's whistle has broken his ear drums...