YoungGer97
Well-Known Member
Greeting about the access charge and the article is behind a paywall
Clowns :shh:
Clowns :shh:
This has been an exceptional sporting summer: The British Lions’ pulsating victory in South Africa. Adam Peaty heading for gold in Tokyo. Novak Djokovic claiming a record-equalling 20th Grand Slam at Wimbledon. Collin Morikawa winning the Open golf championship on his debut. I would like to add the start of the football season in Scotland. Except there is a sour taste to it.
Last season brought one of the most remarkable resurrections in the history of the Scottish game. Rangers, a club mired for years in financial scandal, insolvency, and a humiliating demotion to the third division, completed their return to the heights of the premiership by winning the title — their first in ten years. Under a brilliant manager, Steven Gerrard, they have turned their fortunes around.
That comeback was reported, daily and in detail, on the back pages of every Scottish newspaper. Not any more. Rangers are proposing that coverage should be paid for. Not a pound or so, but big money. Newspapers will be asked for £25,000 for the privilege of reporting team news. That would allow one reporter and one photographer to attend matches and pre-match press conferences, and buy five exclusive interviews and a sit-down briefing with the manager. For £10,000 they would have access to the club, and one “exclusive” story. The media would be expected to pay for news — a concept that runs counter to the whole concept of freedom of the press. The response from newspapers can best be described as “cool”. One hopes the proposal will be thrown out with much the same disdain as the “super league” put forward by European clubs who ignored the interests of their fans in the interest of profit.
It is an arrogant policy. It assumes that such is the power of a club that has forced itself to the head of the premiership, newspapers will be prepared to join an exclusive club within which information will be shared. That information, of course, will be controlled by Rangers. One has to assume that the privileged briefings and interviews will be entirely at the behest of the club’s executives. Independent scrutiny will go out of the window.
This is not only about making money, it is about the power to manage news and ensure that it is positive. For a club that has only just emerged from the mire, this is hubris of a high degree.
Rangers may be enjoying a one-year high, but who is to say it will be maintained? A manager departs, say, the wins drop away, suspicions grow that the bosses are withholding investment in good players. Who is there to probe for the truth, when every reporter is inside the bubble?
The club seems unaware of all this. It argues that as television pays high fees for coverage, so should newspapers. But there is a crucial difference. Coverage of live games on TV is a boost to ratings, which have a commercial value. Newspapers are giving readers an insight into where the club stands. When, for instance, yesterday’s friendly against Real Madrid is reported, there will be no question-and-answer with the manager, no discussion about tactics or team choices. Any comments will have to be gleaned from Rangers TV, controlled by the club itself.
What is depressing is to note the complete lack of comment from the Scottish Professional Football League — the body that governs the national men’s association football league. Its own rules say there must be media access, but it has, so far as I can see, said nothing about all this. If Rangers have their way and some news organisations accept their terms, this will be the thin end of an almighty wedge, with Celtic possibly willing to join in, and then the other powerful clubs signing on.
The club argues that in the era of social media, fans and their organisations have a far wider reach than newspapers. Better by far to restrict access to supporters — that way favourable coverage can be guaranteed. The fans agree. They have a low opinion of the press, which reports bad news as well as the good. That can change, however, and if an independent voice is excluded, who will represent the interests of fans when they demand answers to what has gone wrong?
A good example is the Europa League incident in which the Czech player Ondrej Kudela was accused of racially abusing the Rangers player Glen Kamara. A disputed episode that required good, objective reporting, it would have been, under Rangers’ new terms, confined to a club-controlled statement, with no investigation of the circumstances, or the rebuttal from Kudela. One-sided news is no news at all.
Football is entertainment as well as spectacle. No self-respecting theatre, concert hall or pop venue would consider charging critics for access. Pretty soon the notices would dry up and the audiences dwindle. In England, where clubs would quite fancy charging newspapers, the argument has got nowhere. Nor should it in Scotland.
Rangers would do well to remember an ancient virtue called humility. It is less than ten years since the club was downgraded to the third division, where it lost 1–0 to Stirling Albion, then the bottom club in the country. Success is never guaranteed; a downward spiral can occur in the blink of an eye. Best perhaps to remember that old adage about pride coming before a fall.
So they're threatening Rangers that they'll write negative articles? What has been their excuse for the last 20 years?
It assumes that such is the power of a club that has forced itself to the head of the premiership, newspapers will be prepared to join an exclusive club within which information will be shared. That information, of course, will be controlled by Rangers. One has to assume that the privileged briefings and interviews will be entirely at the behest of the club’s executives. Independent scrutiny will go out of the window.
From the scumbag who accused Rangers fans of bombing Lawell's house then deleted the tweet.
Rat.
When I was growing up, newspapers were essential. Not now. I can get enough online via newspapers or fan media.
So we give them free access to write their interpretation or spin and the charge people to read it?Talk of hubris by a legacy press that is no longer trusted by the general public is highly amusing.
The claim of freedom of the press as some sort of right is highly contentious when we are faced with a dishonest press that skews the news by obfuscation, omission, and sometimes outright lies to suit their own agenda.
The insinuations throughout the article about Ranger's previous problems in 2012 are a case in point.
The reporting by the press all the way through these matters was often one of exaggeration and hyperbole, all of it negative.
The agenda seemed to be one designed to open any wounds that became visible and one might have been forgiven believing that the press were delighted to heap problems upon the shoulders of the club some of them often imagined by the press themselves.
In the last thirty years, the Scottish press have been dishonest in their reporting of the club.
Always emphasising the negative whilst playing down or often ignoring the positive.
This type of drip-drip has been wholly to the detriment of the club as a business and to the support as a community.
On the other hand for a comparison, we have seen how they have dealt with their favourite club where the opposite has been the order of the day.
One need look no further than how they manage news about the biggest scandal that should have rocked Scottish sport but has been suppressed at every turn by a compliant and disgustingly agenda confirmed press.
The author talks about humility or lack of it at our club.
To have the Scottish press dare to lecture us on humility is up there with Peter Sutcliffe offering a lesson on violence against women.
The press don't exist to inform or report on the news fairly any longer, they cannot be trusted as even brokers in the matters surrounding Rangers, nor indeed much else.
The BBC are indeed just the most obvious example of the rest, but in truth, they are all much the same.
The claim is that the new policy of Rangers will be to the detriment of the fans.
As one fictional old manager of the England national team would have said, ... 'My arse!'
So they're threatening Rangers that they'll write negative articles? What has been their excuse for the last 20 years?