MOTD - Media Bias Against City

[Mase]

I'm not going to post any more on this thread, as I don't want to wander between here and Blue Moon.
But the fact someone posted Neil Leigh's article proves my point.
Why did no-one post my article with Vincent Kompany? (it was my interview that had him laying into journalists, and I gave it to the City website).
Why did no-one post my match report from last night's paper, which strongly defended City?
Then, as soon as something with a negative City vibe comes along, it gets pounced on as proof.

Is it because some people are not trying to find out if there actually is balance, but rather trying to prove their opinion, that the MEN is unbalanced and anti-City?

Brilliant. Don't let the door hit you on your way out.

[mcfc1632]

Sorry - Alex / Coca - this is an example of where you are just handling this plain wrongly (of course IMO)

You are positioning this in a totally naive way – as if you could just draw a line in the sand last week and say lets keep a tally from here.

This is like saying during the 20th century lets assess the contribution of Germany to European democracy – starting from 1950 – I am being deliberately OTT and a bit stupid there but – it makes the point IMO.

Even that article you quote Alex – FOR FUCKS SAKE!!!!!! Written on the 14th May – do you think that even a MuEN journo would not have to write something positive????? Trust me had that been roles reversed it would have been a gushing and drooling well beyond what was written about CITY

Alex – you are missing the point – I would respectfully suggest (learning from Mancio’ humility here)

We have had fucking decades of shite from this paper – and even now the balance is not even. If there was to be any imbalance in a local paper you would expect to be in the favour of the champions – from the centre of Manchester – but oh no.

Sorry – as much as I have respected all your posts in the past – this is a mis-guided thread.

I am very disappointed that you could post a ‘somewhat flattering article’ posted the day after the momentous event of the 13th seemingly as a counter to an article issued this week.

It is even more of a fucking disgrace that the MuEN print this article in late October 2012 – only a couple of days after Vincent Komapny – the captain of the EPL champions Manchester City – a local club to the MuEN came out and stated in spades that such comments are disgustingly ill-informed.

It would be bad enough to post this shit before Vinnie’s comments – but after!!!!! Clear demonstration of the culture of that paper

Alex , I would suggest that you leave SB to answer the questions as requested rather than answer for him/the MuEN. I have always respected your posts – probably without exception – but please find your own balance in seeking to be even-handed between being a CITY fan and being an MuEN choirboy

Edited to recognise that SB has commented – but SB – the ‘I will not post anymore in this thread does not wash. This is not about you – this is about the paper and your colleague demonstrated the ingrained culture amply – and by now dodging out you will not at all persuade a lot of us that there is indeed any culture change – MuEN has been ‘hard hitting’ towards Ferguson and united????? – in my best scouse accent – MY FUCKING ARSE

[bluej]

Ignoring any idea of bias, that article is just pointless. I mean, what does it even say?

[zuricity]

I'm not going to post any more on this thread, as I don't want to wander between here and Blue Moon.
But the fact someone posted Neil Leigh's article proves my point.
Why did no-one post my article with Vincent Kompany? (it was my interview that had him laying into journalists, and I gave it to the City website).
Why did no-one post my match report from last night's paper, which strongly defended City?
Then, as soon as something with a negative City vibe comes along, it gets pounced on as proof.

Is it because some people are not trying to find out if there actually is balance, but rather trying to prove their opinion, that the MEN is unbalanced and anti-City?

Stuart, your match report was posted (and applauded) at the bottom of the previous page. The Kompany article has its own thread, although only with links to the OS and no mention of you or the MEN.

Don't expect him to research it! He's been given some crumbs from the club by Vincent being allowed to eloquently state his case. It is hardly investigative journalism is it?

Furthermore, where is that dislike button on MEN articles and comments ? Get on with it Mr. Brennan

[Ted Hughes]

I'm not going to post any more on this thread, as I don't want to wander between here and Blue Moon.
But the fact someone posted Neil Leigh's article proves my point.
Why did no-one post my article with Vincent Kompany? (it was my interview that had him laying into journalists, and I gave it to the City website).
Why did no-one post my match report from last night's paper, which strongly defended City?
Then, as soon as something with a negative City vibe comes along, it gets pounced on as proof.

Is it because some people are not trying to find out if there actually is balance, but rather trying to prove their opinion, that the MEN is unbalanced and anti-City?

You are now doing exactly what you are accusing us of doing.

We have commented on both those stories but don't generally jump on every article about City positive or negative & use it as an example anyway (Martin Samuel called us a laughing stock last week, but the points he made were fair & without an agenda). It's the blatant shit stirrers who we tend to pull (like your boss Spencer on Talksport yet again) & if you can possibly defend that piece by Neil Leigh as being any kind of decent, worhwhile journalism, & not recognise it for what it is, you should be writing for the Sunday Sport.

Come off it Stuart, you are better than that.

[norfstander]

I just find them a clueless bunch of idiots generally, i'm not sure they're particularly anti-City. They do lazily mock Mario regularly, and of course being the top dogs they don't mind seeing us get beat, but Hansen regularly mocks United as well, and they all get together and chuckle whenever Arsenal are imploding every few months.

I've stopped listening to them now. If i watch it live, i potter off and do other things when the action stops. If i watch it later, i just fast-forward straight through all the waffling.

They're tedious, know-nothing simpletons, to a man.

[Beefymcfc]

I'm not going to post any more on this thread, as I don't want to wander between here and Blue Moon.
But the fact someone posted Neil Leigh's article proves my point.
Why did no-one post my article with Vincent Kompany? (it was my interview that had him laying into journalists, and I gave it to the City website).
Why did no-one post my match report from last night's paper, which strongly defended City?
Then, as soon as something with a negative City vibe comes along, it gets pounced on as proof.

Is it because some people are not trying to find out if there actually is balance, but rather trying to prove their opinion, that the MEN is unbalanced and anti-City?

I suppose it's easier to criticise on BM as it will get lost in the mire sometimes. The truth is, there hasn't been real criticism on here, just constructive debate.

I quite like you reviews and although you get things wrong like anybody else, most understand what it's about. It does say something that you choose Bluemoon to debate your points, especially after having a link posted here, knowing you'll get more hits on your site.

SHame really.

[Swales4ever]

[highlight]I'm not going to post any more on this thread[/highlight], as I don't want to wander between here and Blue Moon.
But the fact someone posted Neil Leigh's article proves my point.
Why did no-one post my article with Vincent Kompany? (it was my interview that had him laying into journalists, and I gave it to the City website).
Why did no-one post my match report from last night's paper, which strongly defended City?
Then, as soon as something with a negative City vibe comes along, it gets pounced on as proof.

Is it because some people are not trying to find out if there actually is balance, but rather trying to prove their opinion, that the MEN is unbalanced and anti-City?

[youtube]JtqF0qBqzZo[/youtube]

[Cocacolajojo1]

Mcfc1632. I'm actually of the opinion that there is a pro united bias in general and am curious to see if that applies to the men as well.
However, I found that the debate was a bit confused... Or that people were comparing different things rather. Alex idea of actually trying to measure the bias or no bias, even though it might not be perfect, could provide some sort of fixation point for the discussion.

[Alex Sapphire]

Sorry - Alex / Coca - this is an example of where you are just handling this plain wrongly (of course IMO)

You are positioning this in a totally naive way – as if you could just draw a line in the sand last week and say lets keep a tally from here.

I'm not saying that at all. My suggestion wasthat people post ANY biased piece (of any age). I know that there are plenty who feel this is a long-standing problem, I just don't agree. And I've read the same paper and the same articles so it must be about interpretation.

and "naive " is provocative

This is like saying during the 20th century lets assess the contribution of Germany to European democracy – starting from 1950 – I am being deliberately OTT and a bit stupid there but – it makes the point IMO.

Even that article you quote Alex – FOR FUCKS SAKE!!!!!! Written on the 14th May – do you think that even a MuEN journo would not have to write something positive?????

That's a fair point about the one article, but I've posted three thus far of different (less historic) dates. What did the MEN say about ther two clubs in 1999, and do you think we got our "fair share" for struggling out of the second division while the scum were somewhere else?

Trust me had that been roles reversed it would have been a gushing and drooling well beyond what was written about CITY

Point is I shouldn't have to trust you (or John or others) I should be able to read the article where they drooled. Show me, cos I don't remeber it. Of cause there's been a lot of gushing, but the feckers have won stuff. And when we've won theyve gushed for us too (see above)

Alex – you are missing the point – I would respectfully suggest (learning from Mancio’ humility here)

We have had fucking decades of shite from this paper – and even now the balance is not even. If there was to be any imbalance in a local paper you would expect to be in the favour of the champions – from the centre of Manchester – but oh no.

missing what/whose point? It's not the MENs fault that over decades we gave them more stories than our fair share that weren't to be proud of. From Swales regime, manager sackings , relegations, runaway foreign owner, the list goes on. How would YOU have reported some of that.
At the same time, the Scum are flying high, but MEN still managed to have some fun with Knighton, Magnier and McManus and this lot

Sorry – as much as I have respected all your posts in the past – this is a mis-guided thread.

I am very disappointed that you could post a ‘somewhat flattering article’ posted the day after the momentous event of the 13th seemingly as a counter to an article issued this week.

Thank you. Likewise.
It's not my thread annd I agree it was misguided. We've agreed about the 14 May article, so please look at the others. Did you read the derby article where SB suggests their dynasty is over and we are the future??

It is even more of a fucking disgrace that the MuEN print this article in late October 2012 – only a couple of days after Vincent Komapny – the captain of the EPL champions Manchester City – a local club to the MuEN came out and stated in spades that such comments are disgustingly ill-informed.

It would be bad enough to post this shit before Vinnie’s comments – but after!!!!! Clear demonstration of the culture of that paper

so you're picking on the Neil Leigh example. Isn't he their rugby man and this is as you rightly say ill-informed, badly timed horseshit. But it's not (IMO) typical. It's a bitter personal piece the likes of which are more common from London press

Alex , I would suggest that you leave SB to answer the questions as requested rather than answer for him/the MuEN. I have always respected your posts – probably without exception – but please find your own balance in seeking to be even-handed between being a CITY fan and being an MuEN choirboy

Edited to recognise that SB has commented – but SB – the ‘I will not post anymore in this thread does not wash. This is not about you – this is about the paper and your colleague demonstrated the ingrained culture amply – and by now dodging out you will not at all persuade a lot of us that there is indeed any culture change – MuEN has been ‘hard hitting’ towards Ferguson and united????? – in my best scouse accent – MY FUCKING ARSE

I'm not answering for anyone but myself. It's just that not everyone is listening. think we should stop thinking of this journalist as a poster we can berate and try to beat into submission.
He comes occassionally and this time to try to set something straight which had spilled over from another board. He's not here for the Andrew Davies/btajim/"enter name of missing poster here" treatment

The least sense talked in the whole discussion is the broken record he's getting back from some much loved board members
They are getting out years of frustration (fair or otherwise) and will not change their position. They are as guilty of not answering, and more so of not "listening".
It's like the stuff that annoys you about your wife that you should never bring up because that argumant will spiral and it will never ever end

[Tokyo Blue]

Sorry - Alex / Coca - this is an example of where you are just handling this plain wrongly (of course IMO)

You are positioning this in a totally naive way – as if you could just draw a line in the sand last week and say lets keep a tally from here.

and "naive " is provocative

You think that's provocative after you posted this?

you never booed us as reigning champions, top three in the league, protecting an unprecedented unbeaten home run did you?
That's what some twats did this week
Twats

Interesting.

[Alex Sapphire]

Sorry - Alex / Coca - this is an example of where you are just handling this plain wrongly (of course IMO)

You are positioning this in a totally naive way – as if you could just draw a line in the sand last week and say lets keep a tally from here.

and "naive " is provocative

You think that's provocative after you posted this?

you never booed us as reigning champions, top three in the league, protecting an unprecedented unbeaten home run did you?
That's what some twats did this week
Twats

Interesting.

the angry brigade don't have a monopoly on name calling Tokyo

[Swales4ever]

ouch... few of my most revered persons, before posters, arguing "passionately" at each other... is that the beauty of internet or are You seriously harassing at each others?

my, void, useless, five pence are about seeing good part points on all the three's point of view.... well, perhaps I'm just daft and lost in translation.

While I widely see Alex's aim for a tempative, tollerant debate across the barricades, I naively consider that no fucking media deserve a faith among top, progressive Blokes, which I've learnt to respect, way before to love 'em.

[mcfc1632]

Alex - firstly, I would emphasise my comments that I have always respected your posts - and if any of my earlier post came across as provocative towards you personally then I will apologise unreservedly - it was most certainly not intended to do so.

I guess the only things that I remain motivated to say are:

1/ No you should not have to trust me/others......... - but perhaps people should just reflect that if a good number of long established and respected posters (not meaning me here), whom are not known for being hysterical, have such entrenched views then maybe it is not a coincidence.

2/ As you should not have to trust – nor should we now have to set aside a generation of what we see as systemic bias just to satisfy some idea of ‘drawing a line in the sand’ and reviewing posts from this point – hence my deliberately OTT/nonsense reference to Germany/Europe.

Our views are too established and in our opinions fully justified to be so easily brushed aside by some ‘less than normal CITY bashing/ Scum gushing recent articles. We do not need to go into some exercise to justify our feelings on this subject – our views are clear and we feel fully justified to have those views.

3/ This is not about SB – this is about the paper – so yes the NL article is absolutely ‘in-scope’. Where is the governance / editorial controls that should be expected to address such nonsense. SB seems a really good guy – but sorry, the fact that the paper employs a really good guy does not mean that we should just simply adopt a view of “....oh well that is all OK then – onwards and upwards from here......”

I just happen to think that if SB is willing to come on here to garner / address the views of CITY fans then he should be allowed to do so without abuse. I hope that you do not think I was being abusive to him at a personal level – if that was seen to be the case I again I would apologise unreservedly. But equally, I do not think that there needs to be some overly protective filter – this issue is about long-standing/ingrained opinions about the paper.

The issue that made me make that last post is that I think that the direction of this thread is going to deflect from CITY fans being able to put their considered views across. Logically that would be the opposite of what intended or what SB would / should wish to receive.

[Alex Sapphire]

Alex - firstly, I would emphasise my comments that I have always respected your posts - and if any of my earlier post came across as provocative towards you personally then I will apologise unreservedly - it was most certainly not intended to do so.

I guess the only things that I remain motivated to say are:

1/ No you should not have to trust me/others......... - but perhaps people should just reflect that is a good number of long established posters (not meaning me here), whom are not known for being hysterical, have such entrenched views then maybe it is not a coincidence.

2/ As you should not have to trust – nor should we now have to set aside a generation of what we see as systemic bias just to satisfy some idea of ‘drawing a line in the sand’ and reviewing posts from this point – hence my deliberately OTT/nonsense reference to Germany/Europe. Our views are too established and in our opinions justified to be so easily brushed aside by some ‘less than normal CITY bashing/ Scum gushing recent articles. We do not need to go into some exercise to justify our feeling on this subject – our views are clear and we feel fully justified to have those views.

3/ This is not about SB – this is about the paper – so yes the NL article is absolutely ‘in-scope’ – where is the governance / editorial controls that should be expected to address such nonsense. SB seems a really good guy – but sorry, the fact that the paper employs a really good guy does not mean that we should just simply adopt a view of “....oh well that is all OK then – onwards and upwards from here......”

I just happen to think that if SB is willing to come on here to garner / address the views of CITY fans then he should be allowed to do so without abuse. I hope that you do not think I was being abusive to him at a personal level – if that was seen to be the case I again I would apologise unreservedly. But equally, I do not think that there needs to be some overly protective filter – this issue is about long-standing/ingrained opinions about the paper

please don't apologise. I didn't intend you to feel like that was necessary. It's not at all.
I know very well the feeling we all have that City never got any credit for anything from the red half for the last God knows how many years. It's part of what makes us better.
I don't expect views that took half a lifetime to form will be changed by a red being nice occassionally about us either.
The only difference is that my recollection is that when City were nowhere I could still at least pick up the MEN and get a couple of pages or so of City stuff and most of it was accurate as far as I could tell.
Of course there were uncomfortable reads as well, but rough with smooth and all that
BTW I liked your comparison with Germany 's contribution to Europe. a lot

[City64]

It could be a bit like this ......

MCFC has become so big so quickly everyone wants to deflate us ?

Rag journos now seem to spend more time writing about Bobby manc and our mighty blue machine than anything else !

Lastly , i am truely astonished this has been allowed to happen at the MEN !

or maybe any crank journo can get noticed and make a few bob very quickly if he writes any shite about MCFC .....

[Original Dub]

Ok, for any of you retards that still can't spot the bias against city in the media...

Have a look on newsnow and you will find that EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THE TOP STORIES INVOLVING CITY ARE NEGATIVE.

From Mancini wanting to leave right through to van persie not wanting to join for 300k a week.

And when you're finished reading the full list of negative stories....

Fuck off.

[Ted Hughes]

Ok, for any of you retards that still can't spot the bias against city in the media...

Have a look on newsnow and you will find that EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THE TOP STORIES INVOLVING CITY ARE NEGATIVE.

From Mancini wanting to leave right through to van persie not wanting to join for 300k a week.

And when you're finished reading the full list of negative stories....

Fuck off.

It's like that most days.

[Alex Sapphire]

Ok, for any of you retards that still can't spot the bias against city in the media...

Have a look on newsnow and you will find that EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THE TOP STORIES INVOLVING CITY ARE NEGATIVE.

From Mancini wanting to leave right through to van persie not wanting to join for 300k a week.

And when you're finished reading the full list of negative stories....

Fuck off.

It's like that most days.

although not today , unless OD has a bitter filter on


The Top Stpories are the ones we click on (its like a vote)
Who's been voting for the Bobby story? get clicking on the lovely Tevez bio or Toure tribute

[carl_feedthegoat]

Ok, for any of you retards that still can't spot the bias against city in the media...

Have a look on newsnow and you will find that EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THE TOP STORIES INVOLVING CITY ARE NEGATIVE.

From Mancini wanting to leave right through to van persie not wanting to join for 300k a week.

And when you're finished reading the full list of negative stories....

Fuck off.

pmsl...well said though.