pedg Posted 1 May, 2012 Share Posted 1 May, 2012 I think this example for a few weeks back shows we can get on with the national press quite well: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/9201250/Southampton-aiming-to-emulate-Barcelonas-homegrown-succes-as-they-near-Premier-League-return.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 1 May, 2012 Share Posted 1 May, 2012 I really don't get why people care so much. The press are bunch of ****s, an old boys club that's life is coming to an end. The use of the phrase 'National Joke is massively exaggerated. Frankly, I couldn't care less. I don't read 95% of the printed press because they have no real idea what they are talking about. For those footb)) fans who don't know much about football and like to be told what to believe/think. People on here do however much they claim they dont. We've all seen the boners everytime there is a postive article in the papers and the allegations of anti Saints agendas when they says anyone connected with SFC is anything but the greatest person alive. Like it or not the media have an influence, it's stupid and naive to say otherwise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legod Third Coming Posted 1 May, 2012 Share Posted 1 May, 2012 While I don't concur with his approach, I do agree with Turkish that it is important for any business to cultivate a positive relationship with its press. I heard the CEO of a massive hampshire employer tell his communications staff 'why do you care what the press think of us?' This is a bonkers attitude. There will be a day when you want your story presented your way. It might not be today or tomorrow. But the day will come. The above approach is one reason the company concerned cannot get a more positive press no matter how hard its communications executives try... You can't treat anyone with contempt and expect them to respect you. It does not mean you have to accomodate every request, but you do need to cultivate and maintain a really positive channel between you and your customers - and customers can be anyone: shareholders, the league, sponsors and ultimately supporters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank's cousin Posted 1 May, 2012 Share Posted 1 May, 2012 While I don't concur with his approach, I do agree with Turkish that it is important for any business to cultivate a positive relationship with its press. I heard the CEO of a massive hampshire employer tell his communications staff 'why do you care what the press think of us?' This is a bonkers attitude. There will be a day when you want your story presented your way. It might not be today or tomorrow. But the day will come. The above approach is one reason the company concerned cannot get a more positive press no matter how hard its communications executives try... You can't treat anyone with contempt and expect them to respect you. It does not mean you have to accomodate every request, but you do need to cultivate and maintain a really positive channel between you and your customers - and customers can be anyone: shareholders, the league, sponsors and ultimately supporters. Agreed on those points - but there is also teh issue that the media and press in this country can be over intrusive, write what they want anyway, and if given access often take the ****. When you factor in teh NIcola is from Switzerland, where there is no where near the level if press intrusion in personal issues or businesses, and there is a culture of privacy especially where business matters are concerned its no surprise that NC wants to control this - I dont doubt that he will relax things more as interest grows, but expect it to remain a measured process rather than open access - no matter how much it ****es the media off. If the sponsors get the coverage and benefit form any deal that was agreed they wont have too much an issue either - must not fall into the trap that media are trying o convey that without access it will mean bad press - no it will merely mean limited press and possibly some inaccurate moaning and whinging by said media, but you only have to look at who thei rfavourites are anyway to know that its not about what you do, but how you do it - otherewise care to explain all the 'good' press Redknapp gets - legend in his own underpants - like pompeys best fans, is iMHO total ******. I prefer aour calm, more measured approach and if the media do take umbrage, well I am not sure the impact on commercial partners is as big as some are suggesting... most folk know exactly what a bunch of toerags the media are anyway Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 1 May, 2012 Share Posted 1 May, 2012 Agreed on those points - but there is also teh issue that the media and press in this country can be over intrusive, write what they want anyway, and if given access often take the ****. When you factor in teh NIcola is from Switzerland, where there is no where near the level if press intrusion in personal issues or businesses, and there is a culture of privacy especially where business matters are concerned its no surprise that NC wants to control this - I dont doubt that he will relax things more as interest grows, but expect it to remain a measured process rather than open access - no matter how much it ****es the media off. If the sponsors get the coverage and benefit form any deal that was agreed they wont have too much an issue either - must not fall into the trap that media are trying o convey that without access it will mean bad press - no it will merely mean limited press and possibly some inaccurate moaning and whinging by said media, but you only have to look at who thei rfavourites are anyway to know that its not about what you do, but how you do it - otherewise care to explain all the 'good' press Redknapp gets - legend in his own underpants - like pompeys best fans, is iMHO total ******. I prefer aour calm, more measured approach and if the media do take umbrage, well I am not sure the impact on commercial partners is as big as some are suggesting... most folk know exactly what a bunch of toerags the media are anyway What you mean the calm measured approach of banning all press photographers and banning the echo for printing a story that was already in the public domain? That kind of calm and measured approach? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greenridge Posted 1 May, 2012 Share Posted 1 May, 2012 Let it go, you'll give yourself an ulcer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasoneuelllfanclub Posted 1 May, 2012 Share Posted 1 May, 2012 I am not in the opinion that being buddies with the press gets you anywhere. All it does it allows for stories to get leaked out before they are intended to plus people can become distracted. Take Harry Redknapp for example he is pals with majority of the press and because of this it has had detrimental effect on Spurs results in recents weeks and months as the press have hounded him over the england job. just think he spends a lot of his day travelling from poole to london then finds time for his friends in the media so no wonder spurs have been on the slide. Saints are focussed and use the media when they see fit. We control the media not the other way around which is the way it should be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 1 May, 2012 Share Posted 1 May, 2012 I am not in the opinion that being buddies with the press gets you anywhere. All it does it allows for stories to get leaked out before they are intended to plus people can become distracted. Take Harry Redknapp for example he is pals with majority of the press and because of this it has had detrimental effect on Spurs results in recents weeks and months as the press have hounded him over the england job. just think he spends a lot of his day travelling from poole to london then finds time for his friends in the media so no wonder spurs have been on the slide. Saints are focussed and use the media when they see fit. We control the media not the other way around which is the way it should be. Spot on and a great example of how we control the media and not the other way round is how we backed down over the South Coast Club thing. We run the show you know, that was proof. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BadgerBadger Posted 1 May, 2012 Share Posted 1 May, 2012 I am not in the opinion that being buddies with the press gets you anywhere. All it does it allows for stories to get leaked out before they are intended to plus people can become distracted. Take Harry Redknapp for example he is pals with majority of the press and because of this it has had detrimental effect on Spurs results in recents weeks and months as the press have hounded him over the england job. just think he spends a lot of his day travelling from poole to london then finds time for his friends in the media so no wonder spurs have been on the slide. Saints are focussed and use the media when they see fit. We control the media not the other way around which is the way it should be. clearly and succinctly put Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 1 May, 2012 Share Posted 1 May, 2012 Spot on and a great example of how we control the media and not the other way round is how we backed down over the South Coast Club thing. We run the show you know, that was proof. clearly and succinctly put He's wrong though isn't he. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BadgerBadger Posted 1 May, 2012 Share Posted 1 May, 2012 He's wrong though isn't he. about what Delight? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 1 May, 2012 Share Posted 1 May, 2012 about what Delight? "We control the media not the other way around which is the way it should be." We dont, do we. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibden Purlieu Saint Posted 1 May, 2012 Share Posted 1 May, 2012 People on here do however much they claim they dont. We've all seen the boners everytime there is a postive article in the papers and the allegations of anti Saints agendas when they says anyone connected with SFC is anything but the greatest person alive. Like it or not the media have an influence, it's stupid and naive to say otherwise. I never said they didn't. But frankly, I don't care. I don't read the papers apart from the Indy, so why would I be bothered? What situations may occur? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ottery st mary Posted 1 May, 2012 Share Posted 1 May, 2012 I have nothing but contempt for most of the journalists that I have met and worked with.... Shower of shiiiiite the lot of them.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibden Purlieu Saint Posted 1 May, 2012 Share Posted 1 May, 2012 Spot on and a great example of how we control the media and not the other way round is how we backed down over the South Coast Club thing. We run the show you know, that was proof. Oh no, someone was calling us 'South Coast Club'? What a nightmare. In what ways does this actually affect the club/company? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank's cousin Posted 1 May, 2012 Share Posted 1 May, 2012 Oh no, someone was calling us 'South Coast Club'? What a nightmare. In what ways does this actually affect the club/company? Well - you never know, could be the reason for the success of the last 3 years and promotion to teh prem... maybe a siege mentality, 'South Caost Club' against teh media world... If it means we finish second next season - let the media hate us I say:lol: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 1 May, 2012 Share Posted 1 May, 2012 I never said they didn't. But frankly, I don't care. I don't read the papers apart from the Indy, so why would I be bothered? What situations may occur? Such an insular naive view. It doesn't effect me so therefore i dont care. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 1 May, 2012 Share Posted 1 May, 2012 Well - you never know, could be the reason for the success of the last 3 years and promotion to teh prem... maybe a siege mentality, 'South Caost Club' against teh media world... If it means we finish second next season - let the media hate us I say:lol: Yes, that's it. It was absoutely the only reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank's cousin Posted 1 May, 2012 Share Posted 1 May, 2012 Yes, that's it. It was absoutely the only reason. ...(Face Palm).... wooosh..... :lol: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Kraken Posted 1 May, 2012 Share Posted 1 May, 2012 Oh no, someone was calling us 'South Coast Club'? What a nightmare. In what ways does this actually affect the club/company? Well, I'd suggest in the long term it would have a detrimental effect to any club/company. Especially so when it comes to attracting sponsors and advertisers. What do you think is more appealing to a potential sponsor looking to advertise the kit? a) The sponsors name appearing in photographs on the back pages of every single national newspaper, and various regional papers. or b) Those same national and regional papers either not using any photographs or going to ridiculous extremes such as using mocked up cartoons and subbuteo action shots to convey the action. Yep, option b is definitely the image that a forward thinking company looking for worldwide exposure and revenues should aspire to, isn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 1 May, 2012 Share Posted 1 May, 2012 ...(Face Palm).... wooosh..... :lol: Not really, just like every post you've ever made it wasn't funny or remotely interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank's cousin Posted 1 May, 2012 Share Posted 1 May, 2012 Well, I'd suggest in the long term it would have a detrimental effect to any club/company. Especially so when it comes to attracting sponsors and advertisers. What do you think is more appealing to a potential sponsor looking to advertise the kit? a) The sponsors name appearing in photographs on the back pages of every single national newspaper, and various regional papers. or b) Those same national and regional papers either not using any photographs or going to ridiculous extremes such as using mocked up cartoons and subbuteo action shots to convey the action. Yep, option b is definitely the image that a forward thinking company looking for worldwide exposure and revenues should aspire to, isn't it? But that issue has ben resolved - I dont think a club having a stricter media policy than some is a bad thing... I think the point DPS was making is that to date the only impact of the current policy has been to annoy journos - it has not impacted on our success or commercial development as far as I know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank's cousin Posted 1 May, 2012 Share Posted 1 May, 2012 Not really, just like every post you've ever made it wasn't funny or remotely interesting. oh the irony (Face Palm again) .....wooosh.....:lol: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Topcat Posted 1 May, 2012 Share Posted 1 May, 2012 On Talksport this morning Richard Keays said that getting someone from Saints to talk to the media was very difficult. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Kraken Posted 1 May, 2012 Share Posted 1 May, 2012 But that issue has ben resolved - I dont think a club having a stricter media policy than some is a bad thing... I think the point DPS was making is that to date the only impact of the current policy has been to annoy journos - it has not impacted on our success or commercial development as far as I know. That issue was just one of a few media-handling mistakes we've seen though. And it is massively important to protect and project a positive club image, especially so in the Premier League (the world's most watched football league). We had the whole South Coast Club incident, and yes this was resolved by the chairman admitting he made a big mistake by apologising in person to the nation's best selling newspaper. We also have the issue of the local paper being banned from the ground, a ridiculous scenario which should never have happened. People can argue all they like that "the Echo needs SFC more than SFC needs the Echo", but the fact that the club and local paper can't find a way to properly work together is a worrying trait. We have the imbecile Jordan Sibley spouting off on twitter and denigrating other clubs, thus gaining negative national attention. Yes, its was Pompey, and yes is was perhaps a valid point, but it showed complete ignorance and unprofessionalism for a club spokesman to become embroiled in such an unnecessary public spat. A strict media policy is not a bad thing. A reluctance or unwillingness to play the media to your own benefit is a bad thing. I don't know why so many people think that p*ssing off journalists is a good thing. Its not a terrible thing either, but it reflects an unprofessional side on the club, and that in itself can cause problems in terms of maximising revenues and exposure. And its just so unnecesaary. Almost all other clubs have a competent enough spokesman or press officer who can work with local and national media to serve the ebenefit of all parties. We, on the other hand, have a chairman who claims he can't stand working with the press, and employees under him that act with that approach seemingly as a guide to their jobs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickG Posted 1 May, 2012 Share Posted 1 May, 2012 Couldn't care less... Does it make any difference to what happens on the pitch??? pretty much correct. games sold out, team doing superbly. Press need cortesse a lot more than he needs them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 1 May, 2012 Share Posted 1 May, 2012 But that issue has ben resolved - I dont think a club having a stricter media policy than some is a bad thing... I think the point DPS was making is that to date the only impact of the current policy has been to annoy journos - it has not impacted on our success or commercial development as far as I know. By Cortese backtracking and going cap in hand to the media. Hardly corrolates with the brash "we dont give a f*ck about the media, we control the media" etc statements we've seen on this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 1 May, 2012 Share Posted 1 May, 2012 oh the irony (Face Palm again) .....wooosh.....:lol: Yet you always reply with essay. :lol::lol::lol: (face palm) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibden Purlieu Saint Posted 1 May, 2012 Share Posted 1 May, 2012 Such an insular naive view. It doesn't effect me so therefore i dont care. I notice a lack of issues... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 1 May, 2012 Share Posted 1 May, 2012 I notice a lack of issues... BEcause Cortese back down, how can this be true when we've been told on this thread that we control the media? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibden Purlieu Saint Posted 1 May, 2012 Share Posted 1 May, 2012 Well, I'd suggest in the long term it would have a detrimental effect to any club/company. Especially so when it comes to attracting sponsors and advertisers. What do you think is more appealing to a potential sponsor looking to advertise the kit? a) The sponsors name appearing in photographs on the back pages of every single national newspaper, and various regional papers. or b) Those same national and regional papers either not using any photographs or going to ridiculous extremes such as using mocked up cartoons and subbuteo action shots to convey the action. Yep, option b is definitely the image that a forward thinking company looking for worldwide exposure and revenues should aspire to, isn't it? You don't think that having cartoons every day in a paper would get us recognition, actually worldwide recognition. It would go viral and would actually be a good thing, getting us recognition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibden Purlieu Saint Posted 1 May, 2012 Share Posted 1 May, 2012 BEcause Cortese back down, how can this be true when we've been told on this thread that we control the media? Why don't you leave the arguing to Kraken? He is actually answering our questions with well thought out posts, instead of answering our questions to you with further irrelevent questions (like the above - I wasn't arguing that point, and you know it). You just don't seem to have the intellect to do this properly, and frankly, I feel a little bit embarrassed for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasoneuelllfanclub Posted 1 May, 2012 Share Posted 1 May, 2012 At the end of the day most clubs will use the Media to their advantage and vice versa. Difference being saints dont let the Media in openly so the press have their nose put out of joint and start spitting their dummy out. You only need the Media if you are desperate and/or have an ulterior motive. Turkish seems to always go against popular opinion yet has little substance to back up his argument. Fact is we have been successful since Cortesi took charge and the media coverage has pretty much been football related and majority of it has been positive so his stance on Media inclusion/exclusion appears to be working. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Kraken Posted 1 May, 2012 Share Posted 1 May, 2012 You don't think that having cartoons every day in a paper would get us recognition, actually worldwide recognition. It would go viral and would actually be a good thing, getting us recognition. Yes it would get us recognition as a tinpot unprofessional outfit. It seems a few people here think that's an image we should aspire to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 1 May, 2012 Share Posted 1 May, 2012 Why don't you leave the arguing to Kraken? He is actually answering our questions with well thought out posts, instead of answering our questions to you with further irrelevent questions (like the above - I wasn't arguing that point, and you know it). You just don't seem to have the intellect to do this properly, and frankly, I feel a little bit embarrassed for you. Well that's good then because i feel embarassed for you that you are so naive you think a major football club doesn't need a good relationship with the media because you personally dont read the sunday papers. Tsk and you say i dont have intellect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Kraken Posted 1 May, 2012 Share Posted 1 May, 2012 Why don't you leave the arguing to Kraken? He is actually answering our questions with well thought out posts, instead of answering our questions to you with further irrelevent questions (like the above - I wasn't arguing that point, and you know it). You just don't seem to have the intellect to do this properly, and frankly, I feel a little bit embarrassed for you. Turkish actually makes a very good point here. You can't in one breath say that the club's approach is spot on as we control the media without recognising that that very approach saw our chairman having to publically apologise and backtrack on a completely flawed media strategy. And, even if there are disagreements on how much negative effect there has been through our whole "closed-shop" approach, its surely irrefutable that the club have made a fair few media blunders that both reflected poorly on the club and were wholly unnecessary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibden Purlieu Saint Posted 1 May, 2012 Share Posted 1 May, 2012 Yes it would get us recognition as a tinpot unprofessional outfit. It seems a few people here think that's an image we should aspire to. I disagree, because it is the papers who are making this choice. It makes them look tin pot and unprofessional. It makes us look like we are trying to maximise our revenue streams, which frankly, looks professional. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 1 May, 2012 Share Posted 1 May, 2012 At the end of the day most clubs will use the Media to their advantage and vice versa. Difference being saints dont let the Media in openly so the press have their nose put out of joint and start spitting their dummy out. You only need the Media if you are desperate and/or have an ulterior motive. Turkish seems to always go against popular opinion yet has little substance to back up his argument. Fact is we have been successful since Cortesi took charge and the media coverage has pretty much been football related and majority of it has been positive so his stance on Media inclusion/exclusion appears to be working. All i am saying is that we need a good relationship with the media. We seem to have spectacularly fallen out with the echo for no real reason. We were a laughing stock a couple of season ago due tot he press ban and "South coast club" thing. There will be a lot more focus on us in the premier league, national journalists will be here all the time. It'd be very helpful if they were onside as like it or not a lot of people, fans, players and sponsors are influenced by what the read. The suggestion that we "dont give a f*ck, it's not important because i dont read the papers" and "we control the media" is quite honestly ridiculous and stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibden Purlieu Saint Posted 1 May, 2012 Share Posted 1 May, 2012 Well that's good then because i feel embarassed for you that you are so naive you think a major football club doesn't need a good relationship with the media because you personally dont read the sunday papers. Tsk and you say i dont have intellect. Please capitalise you're 'I's. Give me an example of a football club that has had a bad relationship with the press, and tell me how this has affected them. Give your arguments some evidence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank's cousin Posted 1 May, 2012 Share Posted 1 May, 2012 That issue was just one of a few media-handling mistakes we've seen though. And it is massively important to protect and project a positive club image, especially so in the Premier League (the world's most watched football league). We had the whole South Coast Club incident, and yes this was resolved by the chairman admitting he made a big mistake by apologising in person to the nation's best selling newspaper. We also have the issue of the local paper being banned from the ground, a ridiculous scenario which should never have happened. People can argue all they like that "the Echo needs SFC more than SFC needs the Echo", but the fact that the club and local paper can't find a way to properly work together is a worrying trait. We have the imbecile Jordan Sibley spouting off on twitter and denigrating other clubs, thus gaining negative national attention. Yes, its was Pompey, and yes is was perhaps a valid point, but it showed complete ignorance and unprofessionalism for a club spokesman to become embroiled in such an unnecessary public spat. A strict media policy is not a bad thing. A reluctance or unwillingness to play the media to your own benefit is a bad thing. I don't know why so many people think that p*ssing off journalists is a good thing. Its not a terrible thing either, but it reflects an unprofessional side on the club, and that in itself can cause problems in terms of maximising revenues and exposure. And its just so unnecesaary. Almost all other clubs have a competent enough spokesman or press officer who can work with local and national media to serve the ebenefit of all parties. We, on the other hand, have a chairman who claims he can't stand working with the press, and employees under him that act with that approach seemingly as a guide to their jobs. Fair points, and well put. I accept that we have not been a shining example to date, but i mitigation, I dont think we can ignore the cultural thing - NC will have been aware that media interest in the UK is far greater than he will have been used to, and that it can often be intrusive and at times, just makes up what it wants anyway - the reporting of sensitive information or speculation about players and transfers is often not in the interests of the club and we have seen countless stroies where we have got angry that the speculation can unsettle palyers etc - look at the Walcott, Oxo stuff etc. I apprecate that we need to develop an improved policy that is both professional and appropriate, but I would not be surprized if this is still more restrictive than teh journos would like, and I dont believe that is as bad a thing as some make out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibden Purlieu Saint Posted 1 May, 2012 Share Posted 1 May, 2012 Turkish actually makes a very good point here. You can't in one breath say that the club's approach is spot on as we control the media without recognising that that very approach saw our chairman having to publically apologise and backtrack on a completely flawed media strategy. And, even if there are disagreements on how much negative effect there has been through our whole "closed-shop" approach, its surely irrefutable that the club have made a fair few media blunders that both reflected poorly on the club and were wholly unnecessary. I never said this!!! Which is why it is not a good point in the debate we're having. Reflected badly on the club to who?? I think we were right to stand up to the Echo, and I was proud of that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Kraken Posted 1 May, 2012 Share Posted 1 May, 2012 I disagree, because it is the papers who are making this choice. It makes them look tin pot and unprofessional. It makes us look like we are trying to maximise our revenue streams, which frankly, looks professional. Reflecting an image of trying to maximise revenue streams doesn't in itself reflect an image of professionalism. QPR gaines a lot of negative press for their massively extreme hiking of ticket prices (an issue which their new owners gained some positive PR for when they came in and instantly reduced prices). I honestly can't for one second agree with your assertion that the South Coast club thing reflected well on us as a club. It just didn't, it made the chairman (and the club by association) look petty, greedy and naive. It wasn't a bold step, it was an ill-advised and poorly thought out move. Which is why it was no surprise when NC realised what a significant mistake it was and took the necessary steps to rectify his error. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibden Purlieu Saint Posted 1 May, 2012 Share Posted 1 May, 2012 All i am saying is that we need a good relationship with the media. We seem to have spectacularly fallen out with the echo for no real reason. We were a laughing stock a couple of season ago due tot he press ban and "South coast club" thing. There will be a lot more focus on us in the premier league, national journalists will be here all the time. It'd be very helpful if they were onside as like it or not a lot of people, fans, players and sponsors are influenced by what the read. The suggestion that we "dont give a f*ck, it's not important because i dont read the papers" and "we control the media" is quite honestly ridiculous and stupid. Laughing stock with who?????? A lot of people weren't aware of it, and didn't care even if they did. You seem to think everyone worries about this kind of thing? It was like the global fall out of when Gillingham Chairman Paul Scally fell out with the Medway News. I remember going to China that summer, and everyone who I saw there was bringing it up, it was mental. Oh no, that's right, they didn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Kraken Posted 1 May, 2012 Share Posted 1 May, 2012 I never said this!!! Which is why it is not a good point in the debate we're having. Reflected badly on the club to who?? I think we were right to stand up to the Echo, and I was proud of that. OK, firstly it was a rhetorical analogy to some of the comments on this thread rather than a direct quote attributed to you. But I obviously stand by the sentiment, there are plenty defending the decision and claiming that we control the media while neglecting to notice that we really haven't done that. As for being proud of the stand against the Echo; why are you proud? What did the Echo do so badly wrong? They printed information that was already in the public domain; they reported the news!! And they did it in an medium that gave positive attention and exposure to the club. Shutting them out and continuing to do so for that is massively petty IMO; you may be proud of it, I find it petty and a little bit shameful behaviour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 1 May, 2012 Share Posted 1 May, 2012 Laughing stock with who?????? A lot of people weren't aware of it, and didn't care even if they did. You seem to think everyone worries about this kind of thing? It was like the global fall out of when Gillingham Chairman Paul Scally fell out with the Medway News. I remember going to China that summer, and everyone who I saw there was bringing it up, it was mental. Oh no, that's right, they didn't. Cortese clearly cared otherwise he wouldn't have backtracked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibden Purlieu Saint Posted 1 May, 2012 Share Posted 1 May, 2012 OK, firstly it was a rhetorical analogy to some of the comments on this thread rather than a direct quote attributed to you. But I obviously stand by the sentiment, there are plenty defending the decision and claiming that we control the media while neglecting to notice that we really haven't done that. As for being proud of the stand against the Echo; why are you proud? What did the Echo do so badly wrong? They printed information that was already in the public domain; they reported the news!! And they did it in an medium that gave positive attention and exposure to the club. Shutting them out and continuing to do so for that is massively petty IMO; you may be proud of it, I find it petty and a little bit shameful behaviour. Well then we just have different opinions on the matter, and we'll have to agree to disagree then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Kraken Posted 1 May, 2012 Share Posted 1 May, 2012 Well then we just have different opinions on the matter, and we'll have to agree to disagree then. Sure; but what are you proud of the club for in shutting out the local paper? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibden Purlieu Saint Posted 1 May, 2012 Share Posted 1 May, 2012 Cortese clearly cared otherwise he wouldn't have backtracked. I don't agree, I think Cortese would have continued with this stand. Since the disagreement, the Sun have been extremely positive about us as a club, we have had a larger coverage than we had previously. I feel that Cortese said he would retract the photographer issue for a larger and more positive media spotlight on the club, and it has worked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibden Purlieu Saint Posted 1 May, 2012 Share Posted 1 May, 2012 Sure; but what are you proud of the club for in shutting out the local paper? The Echo is tat, edited by a Pompey fan, sensationalising and accentuating any negative stories that they can. I believe that for a local paper there should only be bias towards the club, not against it. Secondly, considering what Cortese was trying to do with the training ground etc, and the considerable investment etc, I feel it would have been a good thing to do, showing complete synergy with the club, if they had waited for the club to announce it, and then reported their story on the same day with the official pictures/plans etc, like the deal the club mooted. They didn't, so they should have to deal with the consequences. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrant Posted 1 May, 2012 Share Posted 1 May, 2012 The Echo is tat, edited by a Pompey fan, sensationalising and accentuating any negative stories that they can. I believe that for a local paper there should only be bias towards the club, not against it. Are you Eddie Mitchell? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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