Turkish Posted 1 May, 2012 Share Posted 1 May, 2012 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. Cortese back tracked, it's a fact. He got it wrong. Do you think we'd have got all the media attention from the Sun if we were still in league one and hadn't just got back to back promotions? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Kraken 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. 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. You seem quite entrenched in your view, so as you say, better to agree to disagree. For what its worth, I don't think you portray an accurate picture of the Echo. Even in spite of being shut out of the ground the Echo has almost always strived to frame the football club in a positive light. Despite getting no accreditation they have reported favourably on the games and provided some very welcome exposure. I don't deny that the training ground episode was handled badly; but it was handled badly by both sides. And, once the news was out in the public domain, I consider it was more than fair game for the paper to report on it. Many Saints fans were aware of the plans and had seen them online before the Echo went to print, so it wasn't as if they gazumped the club in a massive pre-reveal. And continuing to ban the paper over that issue is a small minded approach, and creates completely unnecessary friction between two parties who should be able to work very close together. Its arguable how much effect it has on the club with the setup as it is now; but one thing is definite: no-one benefits from the current arrangement as it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greenridge Posted 1 May, 2012 Share Posted 1 May, 2012 . but one thing is definite: no-one benefits from the current arrangement as it is. Do you believe there is still an anti-SFC view from the media as we stand? All I have seen in recent weeks both pre and post promotion success has been very positive writings in the local rags, the dailies, broadsheets and red-tops? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibden Purlieu Saint Posted 1 May, 2012 Share Posted 1 May, 2012 Cortese back tracked, it's a fact. He got it wrong. Do you think we'd have got all the media attention from the Sun if we were still in league one and hadn't just got back to back promotions? This was when we were in League 1... It's a fact is it. Where is this 'fact' from? I assume you were in the meeting with them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
up and away Posted 1 May, 2012 Share Posted 1 May, 2012 I have just watched the recordings of the BBC's St Marys party and can only descibe it as the best publicity Saints have ever received. Along with countless other articles throughout the season of how Saints are doing things the right way. I have never seen such positive press previously! The only dissent I can remember was from a Guardian journalist wanting to do a glowing peice on Saints, but demanding full access and spouting bile when denied. It would not surprise me if that was not the same Paul Hayward. I really do not understand the point a couple of muppets on here are trying to forward, our relations with the press at present are about the best I have ever seen them. So just where is this imagined problem? Don't even bother with the Echo or the photo ban. That's long gone with the Echo, still self indignant whilst grabbing everything from the Saints website to rehash asap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintBobby Posted 1 May, 2012 Share Posted 1 May, 2012 We're going to come under much, much greater scrutiny in the Premier League. The club's approach to communications in the last couple of years has been pretty much the only area of Southampton's operations I've been worried about. It seems slapdash, haphazard and amateur. There will be negative consequences if there isn't a more constructive, engaging approach next season. Anything that "goes wrong" - player gets into a fight; player in court; player in "romp" with girl who isn't his missus etc - will come under much more scrutiny. These things being reported with the maximum amount of negativity will not be helpful - it can disrupt players' lives, mess with their pyschology/morale etc. The media will be much pushier on trying to discover the truth about injuries/lay-offs. It's probably not credible to keep insisting "no comment" - journalists will seek any info they can get and will offer cash for it if need be. Jordan Sibley's mobile continually going to voicemail might just about amount to a media strategy in League One. Not in the Premier League. I really hope the club seeks to appoint someone to overhaul and professionalise its communciations - just media but with fans too. I don't claim to have much first hand experiecne of Jordan Sibley, but I think there's some reasonably good evidence to suggest the task is probably beyond him (although he might be a good numebr two/number three). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint86 Posted 1 May, 2012 Share Posted 1 May, 2012 I totally disagree about these comments. We can do what we like with the media. the bond between Cortese, Nigel and the players will not change, it is all kept behind closed doors and handled properly. If the press print anything bad they are disasociated from the club,the end. Long may it remain so. Do you think that Tadanri lee, Sharp or Guly read the papers to decide if they come here? Football is a very closed word and our football and ethics to the talking for us. Our standards also make us stand out which is what has started to be noticed, not least by pundits on the BBC. So again, I repeat, **** the media, they do not matter. They don't affect our clubs running at all, and if anything our attitude is refreshing. We WILL be news becuase of our success. If the papers want to be a part of that it is by our rules. They need us, not the other way around. The club has its own websites, forums, fans (youtube) addvocates (Le Tissier, theo, bale and oxlade) and on the pitch we have kicked ass, won a cup and 2 promotions. People like the club, they like visiting the south coast and they like Adkins. So I repeat again, screw the media, we play it Nicolas way and we don't second guess his running of the club becuase if Markus trusted him then we trust him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Duckhunter Posted 1 May, 2012 Share Posted 1 May, 2012 I saw the Programme and thought Hayward was a right tit. The other Journo's , including Martin Samuel (who has had pops at NC before) were praising us and Nigel in particulary. Hayward had a right bee in his bonnet. Even said that Nigel was difficult and gave nothing away. He did come across as very bitter. My mate works for the press and he does get very bitter if anyone doesn't give them a free reign. All he is interested in is someone who is good copy. It's why they love Redknapp, he gives them what they want and panders to them. It's why none of them have mentioned the elephant in the room when it comes to the England job, not guilty he may have been, but that doesn't mean he's not dodgy. The FA were right about Brian Clough , he was a p155 head and was also dodgy around bungs, and they're right about Redknapp, but the press wont write it because he's good copy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BadgerBadger Posted 1 May, 2012 Share Posted 1 May, 2012 We could probably do with some improvements in the press departments, granted but not in the way most are insinuating - sounds like some would get Andy Coulson in - **** 'em if they want to publish so badness about us, rest assured it better be true. Most people see the press for what it is and if things are going well here they'll either print it or not at all, if they don't so what. Not saying we should start an open war with them just disagree that we should be getting all cuddly with them just because we are Priemier League Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Kraken Posted 1 May, 2012 Share Posted 1 May, 2012 Do you believe there is still an anti-SFC view from the media as we stand? All I have seen in recent weeks both pre and post promotion success has been very positive writings in the local rags, the dailies, broadsheets and red-tops? I'll respond to your point. No, I don't think there is an anti-SFC view from the media. That wasn't what i was sayign at all. My point (or the one which you quoted) was that it is totally unnecessary to have such friction between the football club and the local newspaper. There has been for many years, and still should be a close bond between the two, as it should be mutually beneficial arrangement. We know the reasons why the situation is as it is; and there will be arguments made for and against both sides. My point was that, despite where you sit on that divide, having an arrangement where the club and the paper can't work together benefits neither party in comparison to them working closely side by side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greenridge Posted 1 May, 2012 Share Posted 1 May, 2012 My point was that, despite where you sit on that divide, having an arrangement where the club and the paper can't work together benefits neither party in comparison to them working closely side by side. I would concur with that. I commented earlier in the thread that we had 23 pages of coverage in yesterday's Daily Echo so I'm guessing the relationship between the Club and paper are relatively positive at this moment in time. I guess my point is that this whole thread appears to be based on the premise of an on-going problem with the media in general that doesn't seem to be born out with the coverage we have received in recent weeks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Kraken Posted 1 May, 2012 Share Posted 1 May, 2012 I would concur with that. I commented earlier in the thread that we had 23 pages of coverage in yesterday's Daily Echo so I'm guessing the relationship between the Club and paper are relatively positive at this moment in time. I guess my point is that this whole thread appears to be based on the premise of an on-going problem with the media in general that doesn't seem to be born out with the coverage we have received in recent weeks. That's all true. There were some problems with the Echo for a fair while after the Liebherr takeover had gone through. Former players and manager in the paper, usually with a fairly negative angle to portray, particularly around the Pardew sacking. This all seemed to have been put to bed until the training ground incident, and since then as I understand it the Echo have had their St Mary's credentials revoked. As a consquence, they still need to fill copy on Saints (as its clearly what their readership requires) so there is a reliance on a cut and paste from the OS plus editorials with former players and other staff. But otherwise no direct access to the club, which as I've said is I think a big shame, however its been arrived at. Where I've noticed a difference lately in the Echo is not in the previewing or reporting of games. As I've already said, these have been very positive reports (as you'd expect from 2 successive promotions), and certanly in the local paper the club has received extensive and positive reporting. But there are some minor areas where I think improvements could have been made, to the benfit of the paper and the club. Firstly: season tickets. In seasons past the paper would be awash with announcements on season tickets, pricing etc. There seems to be much, much less of that now (which is of course in line with what quite a few people deem to be a strange lack of direct promotion of ST sales by the club itself). Secondly: the promotion of club events other than league & cup matches. Point in case is the Markus Liebherr memorial game last summer; this was only promoted in the Echo one day before the game, the previous days editions carried no promotion of the event (and I noted at the time that this was strange to see such a lack of advertising outside of the OS). In the end I think only around 7,000 people attended, which is very poor especially when compared to previous Ted Bates trophy games. As there was an entire family day surrounding the game(s) that day, I think a big trick was missed by not garnering some free advertising and splashing the news all over the back of the local paper to attract a much bigger crowd. As I say, just minor issues when compared to the bigger picture. But being as its an entirely unnecessary spat in the first place its a shame that both club and newspaper are being disadvantaged because of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legod Third Coming Posted 1 May, 2012 Share Posted 1 May, 2012 No-one controls the media but media barons - Murdoch and... er.. Murdoch. The reason you need a positive relationship with the media is this... Mirror journo discovers that wife of famous singer is drug using and having one or more multiple affairs - he prepares to write his story.... Editor rings the PR representative of said singer. Let's, for argument's sake, call him Matthew Frued. "Matthew", says editor, "Tomorrow morning we will break a story on your singer client's wife.. here are the details... Do you have a comment?" The following day an exclusive appears not from a journo breaking a story BUT from said singer in his words explaining his despair with the situation - most likely protecting him, his wife and children in the process, as best he can... A positive relationship with the press means that they trust you. It's funny how few sports writers analyse Harry Redknapp's faults or financial affairs... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FreemantleSaint Posted 1 May, 2012 Share Posted 1 May, 2012 What a tit Paul Hayward is. So he thinks our first priority on reaching the premiership is not to improve our squad by buying new players and/or improving the skills of the players we've got, it's to have better press relations. Yeah, our press relations have really been weighing heavily on our minds this week... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintBobby Posted 2 May, 2012 Share Posted 2 May, 2012 Having just watched the live post-match BBC coverage of the Coventry game and the Football League Show, it struck me how terrible our media management was. Obv, at the time I wasn't much bothered. And I wasnt much bothered when I watched the stuff half-cut on Saturday night. But seeing it again, Adkins has a live camera in his face at the final whistle and simply doesnt want it there. I imagine that the rather odd remarks that led some to belive he might not be Saints manager for too much longer were also made under similar pressure and with no press office present. It's a good example of how not managing the media well can cause stress for the spokesman (in this case, Adkins) or confusion in your intended story (n this case, a semi-rumour, referred to by the BBC, that Adkins might go). It's not very important in comparison to actually winning 4-0, but it is the sort of thing a half-competent £20K pa press officer wouldn't let happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wiggles31 Posted 2 May, 2012 Share Posted 2 May, 2012 Think about it. Do you really need it explaining why negative, bad or even no press is detrimental to a business? How can you say that with the success we've had since C Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 2 May, 2012 Share Posted 2 May, 2012 the media are showing themselves to be spoilt kids because they didn't get their way re the England job, todays Sun headline taking the mick out of Hodgsons speech impediment was pathetic. i have always defended the Sun as it it is fun, but the editor to allow that !!!!!!! As for Saints, the club is very professional IMO no leaks and so the media dont like it. They need the stories to sell their papers. Nc will stir them up but not because he is wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustMike Posted 2 May, 2012 Share Posted 2 May, 2012 Don't see anything wrong with his comments, we aren't very media friendly. They all seemed friendly after our promotion, even the echo! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank's cousin Posted 2 May, 2012 Share Posted 2 May, 2012 They all seemed friendly after our promotion, even the echo! Of course it has to be give and take, and yes the better the realtionship, the more likely coverage will be favourable - but... we also need to get our priorities right. The last 3 years has been about focus - no distraction and whilst it works both ways, NC took a stance that the club would control the situation as it saw fit. Many folk had noses put out of joint including some in the media, BUT, its worked -and thats where we gain the advantage - Given the way we have played, the success we have had, the way teh club is run, the media would just make themselves look a right bunch of tits if they were constantly slagging us... people would just ignore it and say its sour grapes... the Echo, good relationship or not, could not exactly wright bad things when we just got promoted - the readship, advertisers etc would be put off - which is another point.... no matter how good a relationship you have the media, nothing will come ahead of sales figures - if there is a story that they know will sell more copies they will print it regardless of how good your relationship is... if it back fires because readers think its boll ox then thats the risk, but they always seem prepared to do that to get a scoop. Its really only when there is some shiedt to stir that a better relationship is necessary, not when things are good - the results, the performance and the way the cub is run speak for themselves.... is it any surprize that we have not had a any negative stories form the old guard of late? Even Lauries piece on teh BBC was 100% positive about the club... when times are good, no one is inteested in mud slinging stories. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sfc4prem Posted 2 May, 2012 Share Posted 2 May, 2012 Having just watched the live post-match BBC coverage of the Coventry game and the Football League Show, it struck me how terrible our media management was. Obv, at the time I wasn't much bothered. And I wasnt much bothered when I watched the stuff half-cut on Saturday night. But seeing it again, Adkins has a live camera in his face at the final whistle and simply doesnt want it there. I imagine that the rather odd remarks that led some to belive he might not be Saints manager for too much longer were also made under similar pressure and with no press office present. It's a good example of how not managing the media well can cause stress for the spokesman (in this case, Adkins) or confusion in your intended story (n this case, a semi-rumour, referred to by the BBC, that Adkins might go). It's not very important in comparison to actually winning 4-0, but it is the sort of thing a half-competent £20K pa press officer wouldn't let happen. You have to be taking the ****.... Of course he didn't f*cking want a camera in his face for f*cks sake. He wanted to be with his team celebrating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sour Mash Posted 2 May, 2012 Share Posted 2 May, 2012 Anyone that thinks the Echo is "anti-Saints" is an absolute cretin. Furthermore, it's a much better paper than a lot of local ones, trust me, we could do a lot worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy_D Posted 2 May, 2012 Share Posted 2 May, 2012 You have to be taking the ****.... Of course he didn't f*cking want a camera in his face for f*cks sake. He wanted to be with his team celebrating. This. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wade Garrett Posted 2 May, 2012 Share Posted 2 May, 2012 I am really p*ssed off with self-important sports journalists. Watch the Sunday Supplement on Sky, with the exception of Winter and Barclay, they are clueless. Alf Ramsey wouldn't have given them the time of day, nor would Cloughie. I hope Woy doesn't either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilf Posted 2 May, 2012 Share Posted 2 May, 2012 Anyone that thinks the Echo is "anti-Saints" is an absolute cretin. Furthermore, it's a much better paper than a lot of local ones, trust me, we could do a lot worse. I don't know about lots of local papers but the coverage of Saints in the Echo is very very poor compared with the comprehensive coverage given to Norwich City in the Eastern Daily Press and Eastern Evening news, both of which are also far better local newspapers in non-football respects as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilf Posted 2 May, 2012 Share Posted 2 May, 2012 we will have the nations top sports journos some weeks, who are used to/expect to have their bellies rubbed when they come Yuk ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kpturner Posted 2 May, 2012 Share Posted 2 May, 2012 You have to be taking the ****.... Of course he didn't f*cking want a camera in his face for f*cks sake. He wanted to be with his team celebrating. Isn't that exactly what he was saying? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibden Purlieu Saint Posted 3 May, 2012 Share Posted 3 May, 2012 Anyone that thinks the Echo is "anti-Saints" is an absolute cretin. Furthermore, it's a much better paper than a lot of local ones, trust me, we could do a lot worse. Lol, you're so wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djharvey Posted 3 May, 2012 Share Posted 3 May, 2012 At the end of the day my comment on the club/local media relationship is "Must do better". This is to both parties! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 3 May, 2012 Share Posted 3 May, 2012 At the end of the day my comment on the club/local media relationship is "Must do better". This is to both parties! Thanks for that!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dune Posted 3 May, 2012 Share Posted 3 May, 2012 the media are showing themselves to be spoilt kids because they didn't get their way re the England job, todays Sun headline taking the mick out of Hodgsons speech impediment was pathetic. i have always defended the Sun as it it is fun, but the editor to allow that !!!!!!! As for Saints, the club is very professional IMO no leaks and so the media dont like it. They need the stories to sell their papers. Nc will stir them up but not because he is wrong. I saw the front page and thought how pathetic it was. 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