Illogical Captain!

[lacostelad]

Here's something that I have never been able to get my head around.

Perhaps you can give me your thoughts, please...

Personally, I don't buy tabloids, but I used to work for who were then (News International), and they incorporate the Sun, The News Of The World, and The Sunday Times (that was the title I worked on).

Anyway, over the past few years there has been something of a sad trend for football fans (esp some Hearts fans), to purchase them, read them, then become upset when an opinion columnist dares say something that they find to be 'negative'. Er, why..? If it really upsets you to read something 'negative' about your club in a given newspaper, then don't buy it!

Analogy.

Imagine there was a pub that was two minutes down the road. You went in there, and found the patrons to be vulgar and ignoble. Would you keep going back? I doubt it. My guess is that you would excercise the freedom of choice that you have, elect to go to another watering hole (one were the people were friendlier or some such thing).

I just don't get it.

Why do people buy newspapers who they deem have an 'agenda' against their club, put money into the coffers of that newsgroup, then get themselves upset about the content to the extent of posting links to it on football message boards.

If you don't like what's in it, don't buy it, don't fund it, don't read it.

Or have I missed something - :dunno:

[MyJo]

i cant speak for anyone else but i refuse to buy the daily record because of the amount of s**t they print and the unashamed bias towards the old firm.

I'll pay money for the evening news but thats it.

[Removed]

i cant speak for anyone else but i refuse to buy the daily record because of the amount of s**t they print and the unashamed bias towards the old firm.

I'll pay money for the evening news but thats it.

:agree: I won't even read it if I'm offered it for nothing never mind pay for it. It's a ****my rag and often seems to have an anti Hibs agenda

[lacostelad]

i cant speak for anyone else but i refuse to buy the daily record because of the amount of s**t they print and the unashamed bias towards the old firm.

I'll pay money for the evening news but thats it.

I used to work for the Scotsman publications also, long before they moved into their new building. Back in those days the journalism was better. Over the past few years, I feel that the EEN in particular has become more like a tabloid, both in format and in content, which is a shame.

I still buy the EEN, most days. A lot of Hearts fans think there is an anti Hearts agenda in it. I disagree. I think they call things as they see them. The content reflects the goings on at the club, simple as that, imho. It is absolute paranoia to think that the EEN orchestrate a campaign to undermine Hearts though.

I even vaguely recollect an article I linked from the Guardian.

It happened to mention my 'friend', Vladmir.

A well known member of a well known Hearts forum dismissed the Guardian and the article as being 'anti Hearts'. You could barely make it up, huh...:brickwall

[lacostelad]

:agree: I won't even read it if I'm offered it for nothing never mind pay for it. It's a ****my rag and often seems to have an anti Hibs agenda

In reality they don't.

I know you may perceive it as so, but they don't.

What they do is give an incredible amount of column inches to the Old & Infirm. It is economics that drives this. Those papers, the DR, the *cough* 'Scottish Sun, their core readership are either Celtic or Rangers fans, therefore, they are essentially forced to reflect that in the exposure that they give to clubs.

Having said that much, I have read some VERY negative stuff in those papers aimed at both Rangers and Celtic at various times.

[Removed]

In reality they don't.

I know you may perceive it as so, but they don't.

What they do is give an incredible amount of column inches to the Old & Infirm. It is economics that drives this. Those papers, the DR, the *cough* 'Scottish Sun, their core readership are either Celtic or Rangers fans, therefore, they are essentially forced to reflect that in the exposure that they give to clubs.

Having said that much, I have read some VERY negative stuff in those papers aimed at both Rangers and Celtic at various times.

Well if they don't then Keith Jackson does and he writes for them so same thing in my book

[lacostelad]

Football sportswriters, and ref's for that matter, are easy targets for fans of any club.

Whenever people moan a little too much about them, I always ask, hey, if you feel that strongly, and you think you could do better, then why not train to become a sportswriter or ref yourself.

I think the SFA are crying out for more people to be ref's. It is a thankless task. Usually, when I put that out to people, they don't respond.

[Removed]

Football sportswriters, and ref's for that matter, are easy targets for fans of any club.

Whenever people moan a little too much about them, I always ask, hey, if you feel that strongly, and you think you could do better, then why not train to become a sportswriter or ref yourself.

I think the SFA are crying out for more people to be ref's. It is a thankless task. Usually, when I put that out to people, they don't respond.

I couldn't be a reporter or a ref because I would be biased, for Hibs, so I would never ever make the grade. That's why I will never agree with all the pish spouted about refs not being influenced by their own allegiances or experiences. If you are that interested in football to become a ref or a football reporter/pundit then you must have followed football as you were growing up and have a team in the top division. Don't believe anyone who says otherwise.

And anyway, I am doing what you said in your OP, I think they have an agenda so I don't buy it or read it.

[lacostelad]

I couldn't be a reporter or a ref because I would be biased, for Hibs, so I would never ever make the grade. That's why I will never agree with all the pish spouted about refs not being influenced by their own allegiances or experiences. If you are that interested in football to become a ref or a football reporter/pundit then you must have followed football as you were growing up and have a team in the top division. Don't believe anyone who says otherwise.

And anyway, I am doing what you said in your OP, I think they have an agenda so I don't buy it or read it.

I hear what you are saying, but there is no way around that, is there?

Most ref's and football writers do probably grow up with an allegiance to one club or another. It's a given. But other than recruit from people who have no interest in football at all, I cannot see a solution. Not unless you wanted to do something radical such as recruit rugby officials, and develop them into football officials, or some such thing - :dunno:

[shaun.lawson]

i cant speak for anyone else but i refuse to buy the daily record because of the amount of s**t they print and the unashamed bias towards the old firm.



How can you say that about the Daily Record? It is without doubt my favourite publication. Soft, strong... and thoroughly absorbent.

[The_Sauz]

How can you say that about the Daily Record? It is without doubt my favourite publication. Soft, strong... and thoroughly absorbent.
If it's not going near my eye's then it is sure as hell not going near my :asshole:


:greengrin

[shamo9]

In reality they don't.

I know you may perceive it as so, but they don't.

What they do is give an incredible amount of column inches to the Old & Infirm. It is economics that drives this. Those papers, the DR, the *cough* 'Scottish Sun, their core readership are either Celtic or Rangers fans, therefore, they are essentially forced to reflect that in the exposure that they give to clubs.

Having said that much, I have read some VERY negative stuff in those papers aimed at both Rangers and Celtic at various times.

That's not necessarily true in regards to the Daily Record. We do have some history with them. John Collins had a very public spat over some of their articles on Hibs and even refused to be interviewed by them. I'd be surprised if they weren't even just a little less favorable to Hibs as a result.

Were they not the ones who tried to paint our very own 'Russian Hibs Fan' as a Celtic man in disguise?

[CentreLine]

Here's something that I have never been able to get my head around.

Perhaps you can give me your thoughts, please...

Personally, I don't buy tabloids, but I used to work for who were then (News International), and they incorporate the Sun, The News Of The World, and The Sunday Times (that was the title I worked on).

Anyway, over the past few years there has been something of a sad trend for football fans (esp some Hearts fans), to purchase them, read them, then become upset when an opinion columnist dares say something that they find to be 'negative'. Er, why..? If it really upsets you to read something 'negative' about your club in a given newspaper, then don't buy it!

Analogy.

Imagine there was a pub that was two minutes down the road. You went in there, and found the patrons to be vulgar and ignoble. Would you keep going back? I doubt it. My guess is that you would excercise the freedom of choice that you have, elect to go to another watering hole (one were the people were friendlier or some such thing).
I just don't get it.

Why do people buy newspapers who they deem have an 'agenda' against their club, put money into the coffers of that newsgroup, then get themselves upset about the content to the extent of posting links to it on football message boards.

If you don't like what's in it, don't buy it, don't fund it, don't read it.

Or have I missed something - :dunno:

Given what you are finding at Tynecastle and message boards associated with hahahearts perhaps it is time for you and the other reasonable fans to follow your own advice? I think it is time you exercised your freedom of choice and moved your allegiance to Hibernian Football Club.:agree:

[Rivers Cuomo]

I think it has sometihng to do with KHAAAAAAAAAAAAAN!!!!

[Danderhall Hibs]

A few Hearts fans I work beside claim that every single paper has an agenda against them. No matter the story, how true it is it's anti-HoMFC. :agree:

I think it's partly down to the Vlad brain-washing treatment - Charlie Mann handing out bananas to his old mates a couple of years back etc.

How did the BBC ever give him his job back??!

[ELHibee]

One of my relations is a sports journalist and he has over the years fallen out with various managers and chairmen, supporters groups etc. Basically if you print something they don't agree with you are in the firing line.

He also claims that the so called bias towards the old firm is a reflection of the circulation demographics.

[lacostelad]

That's not necessarily true in regards to the Daily Record. We do have some history with them. John Collins had a very public spat over some of their articles on Hibs and even refused to be interviewed by them. I'd be surprised if they weren't even just a little less favorable to Hibs as a result.

Were they not the ones who tried to paint our very own 'Russian Hibs Fan' as a Celtic man in disguise?

Can you give me an example of which articles re Collins you specifically refer to please?

Generally, I am not a fan of clubs refusing to engage with the press and media. It is petulant. Perhaps the article(s) that you refer to had some merit in them? Even if deemed not to do so, I still think that a club should be big enough to rise above it, and speak to the press anyway. So called 'negative' articles are often a v subjective thing.

Romanov, for example, he brought many of the problems on himself, by being so childish and unprofessional as to do things like leave bananas for media representatives when they attended Tynecastle. Some Hearts fans thought that was hilarious. I didn't laugh much then, and even in retrospect, I don't think it was appropriate behaviour for a club owner.

JMHO of course.


LL

PS - What is this you mention about the 'Russian Hibs fan'..? :dunno:

[lacostelad]

Given what you are finding at Tynecastle and message boards associated with hahahearts perhaps it is time for you and the other reasonable fans to follow your own advice? I think it is time you exercised your freedom of choice and moved your allegiance to Hibernian Football Club.:agree:

Ha! There is about as much chance of that as my voting Conservative at the next election.

:bye:

[The_Todd]

Pfft. As Egon Spengler would say "print is dead".

I pick and choose the news I recieve from a variety of online sources - thanks to the wonders of RSS feeds and Newsnow.

[lacostelad]

A few Hearts fans I work beside claim that every single paper has an agenda against them. No matter the story, how true it is it's anti-HoMFC. :agree:

I think it's partly down to the Vlad brain-washing treatment - Charlie Mann handing out bananas to his old mates a couple of years back etc.

How did the BBC ever give him his job back??!


I would concur with what you write here, DH. Romanov cleverly worked the Hearts fans in the past. Too many of them sucked it up. I recall one fan saying on a forum (I won't name him, as he does not post here AFAIK, and therefore, that would not be protocol), that because of this 'anti Hearts' agenda, he would only take his news from the official club site.

Of course, we all know that the official Hearts site always tell the truth, don't they - :wink:

[Danderhall Hibs]

Can you give me an example of which articles re Collins you specifically refer to please?

Generally, I am not a fan of clubs refusing to engage with the press and media. It is petulant. Perhaps the article(s) that you refer to had some merit in them? Even if deemed not to do so, I still think that a club should be big enough to rise above it, and speak to the press anyway. So called 'negative' articles are often a v subjective thing.

Romanov, for example, he brought many of the problems on himself, by being so childish and unprofessional as to do things like leave bananas for media representatives when they attended Tynecastle. Some Hearts fans thought that was hilarious. I didn't laugh much then, and even in retrospect, I don't think it was appropriate behaviour for a club owner.

JMHO of course.


LL

PS - What is this you mention about the 'Russian Hibs fan'..? :dunno:

The "Kevin Thomson" articles, the Simon Brown exclusive they printed after he left - JC said it was pish, Jackson was threatening to sue but as far as I'm aware he's not got round to it yet. There was a weekly story after the revolt about how bad it was at ER - no sources were ever revealed of course. Generally because the stories were made up.

[lacostelad]

One of my relations is a sports journalist and he has over the years fallen out with various managers and chairmen, supporters groups etc. Basically if you print something they don't agree with you are in the firing line.

He also claims that the so called bias towards the old firm is a reflection of the circulation demographics.

Your relation is correct. And I do not agree with the tactic of not engaging with the press merely due to the fact that a given person has written something that the club do not agree with. It would be like a fans forum ostracising a fan simply for posting something that the forum admin did not 'like'. I am pretty sure that both Celtic and definitely Rangers have, at various times, refused to engage with a particular newspaper, due to something being printed that they did not 'like'. Childish.

When I worked for News International, a reporter once ran a story about the son of a major car dealership. Said dealership then cancelled all their advertising with that newspaper. As I said in my OP, while I may not especially like how the tabloids go about their business at times, I feel even more strongly about the freedom of the press. Once we concede the freedom of the press, we are on a rocky road.

There are exceptions, of course.

I well remember Hillsborough, and how the Sun stooped to an all time low, by printing a story on how Liverpool fans were stealing the wallets of their fellow supporters who were lying dead on the pitch. There was not a shred of evidence to substantiate their allegation, and therefore, the Liverpool fans and club were correct to respond in the manner in which they did.

[lacostelad]

The "Kevin Thomson" articles, the Simon Brown exclusive they printed after he left - JC said it was pish, Jackson was threatening to sue but as far as I'm aware he's not got round to it yet. There was a weekly story after the revolt about how bad it was at ER - no sources were ever revealed of course. Generally because the stories were made up.

DH, I cannot recount the articles that you refer to. However, if they were that bad, and if they were libel, then Collins should have indeed sued. Perhaps the fact that he didn't says something..?

:dunno:

[EH6 Hibby]

The incident where Collins refused to allow the Daily Record into Easter Road came after a Derby match where the Record had a headline saying "We should have been 4-0 up at half time" From what I remember Collins said nothing of the sort, he had said that both teams had chances, but if Hibs had taken theirs then they could have been 4-0 up at half time. I think he contacted the Daily Record about this and they refused to rectify their mistake, so when it came to the press conference that week, Collins refused to allow their reporter in! :dunno:

[Danderhall Hibs]

DH, I cannot recount the articles that you refer to. However, if they were that bad, and if they were libel, then Collins should have indeed sued. Perhaps the fact that he didn't says something..?

:dunno:

Jackson was going to sue Collins after Collins said Jackson made stuff up. Jackson retaliated on the real radio phone-in and threatened Collins with libel action.

The fact that he's not done anything certainly says something.

Edit: I searched the Daily Record website but the story's no longer available.

[Onceinawhile]

Jackson was going to sue Collins after Collins said Jackson made stuff up. Jackson retaliated on the real radio phone-in and threatened Collins with libel action.

The fact that he's not done anything certainly says something.

Edit: I searched the Daily Record website but the story's no longer available.

i believe JC possibly questioned if keith jackshun was on david murray's payroll?!

[Tomsk]

DH, I cannot recount the articles that you refer to. However, if they were that bad, and if they were libel, then Collins should have indeed sued. Perhaps the fact that he didn't says something..?

:dunno:

As Danderhall clearly states it was not Collins who threatened to sue Jackson, it was Jackson who threatened to sue Collins. So, you're away up the wrong tree. May I suggest you read what is put in front of you -- it might help.

[lacostelad]

Yup. Okay. Thanks.

Does anyone miss the 'Pink'..?

It was never a money spinner for the Scotsman group, and it was a hassle for newsagents up and down the nation, since it would inevitably arrive late, and he would be stuck there, in his shop, with impatient fans all around them, but I have good memories, as a kid, of the excitement of going to get my copy.

I guess the internet has meant that this is one old school thing that will never return.

Sadly.

:boo hoo: