Sheer hypocrisy from the Times

“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.”

What a pile of sanctimonious crap. They are bricking it that after centuries of being able to control the news and narrative, that the people now have a voice online, valid or otherwise. If newspapers don’t want to report it, or pay for their content, then many others will.

And to give the impression that newspapers are giving specialist insight and are being run almost for the benefit of society, and not for profit, is even more ridiculous.
 
Rangers should withdraw charging a fee for all newspapers. That is, all newspapers who actually tell the whole truth about wee boys being raped at the scum. For over forty years. On you go shuggie etc.....
 
Ghost of Troubled Joe said:
"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."

Well, that won't happen at Rangers.!
Click to expand...
Just to take something else out that quoted section on clubs in England charging newspapers. They actually do, but it is a deal with the EPL and not the clubs individually.

www.theguardian.com

Premier League signs deal with newspapers and agencies

Three-year deal, which also covers the Football League, comes amid controversy over some journalists being banned from individual clubs
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com

Here is the deal from 2015, can’t find the latest one, but that seems to cover much of what we are asking for as well.
 
Also compare output. Heart and Hand in an average week has more in depth football articles than The Times will have in a year. Who at the Times investigated the huge paedophile scandal at Celtic? Out rape in 2012? Or even the impact of SG and 55? Do they cover Italian football? Legacy of McLeish's time at Rangers?

Nothing.... there's opinion pieces, match reports and nothing else. No journalism.
 
Remember the story about the Rangers fans obstructing Police at the Cup Final in 2016 ?

Remember how the Rangers fans acted like terrorist families in Northern Ireland, and put their children in front of the Police rapid response vehicles ?

Remember how Callum Steele of the Scottish Police Federation concurred with this ?

Remember how the author received a reward as a sports journalist of the year ?

It was, of course, a pack of lies.

When it was exposed as a pack of lies, where was the media to give us insight into the collusion between a journalist and a police service representative ?
 
Poor timmy cry some more. Perhaps if you were fair and balanced then this might not be happening oh and count yourself lucky because if it were me you would be charged lots more, tell lies get punished simples.
 
prenzlauerbear said:
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.
Click to expand...
"A disputed episode that required good, objective reporting"? Sounds like George Square and the Sweet Caroline video. The Scottish media chose instead to lie and enable powerful politicians to distort reality and push an agenda.

No self-respecting theatre or concert hall would let critics come in for free if they went and wrote reviews slandering the venue, describing shows as "anti-Irish racism" without justification etc.

It's not Rangers that need a dose of humility. Last paragraph is just demented.
 
"They're making us pay money for us to make you pay money!"

tenor.gif
 
Magnus Linklater backed Spiers to the hilt.

Much as I have doubts about what Rangers hope to achieve in charging the media for access it is hard to feel much sympathy given the hostility directed against the club for decades now.
 
YoungGer97 said:
Greeting about the access charge and the article is behind a paywall B-D

Clowns :shh:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1419582413819289602
Click to expand...
I usually buy The Sunday Times and TBH their SPFL coverage is little better than useless even though they employ actual journo's vs the gibbering idiots in the tabloids. Their main guy always seemed to repeat the deflecting garbage from the likes of TLB rather than dig into what actually happened. The 1-0 at Ibrox being a specific case in point.
Other sports and the EPL are worth the read however. The contributions by Magnificent & surprisingly Wayne Rooney are usually spot on.

When I lived in Australia they started the paywall and I subscribed and enjoyed the content however when I asked if they could offer the Scottish version they just cancelled my subscription...cheeky bar stewards!
 
Snakehips said:
“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.”

What a pile of sanctimonious crap. They are bricking it that after centuries of being able to control the news and narrative, that the people now have a voice online, valid or otherwise. If newspapers don’t want to report it, or pay for their content, then many others will.

And to give the impression that newspapers are giving specialist insight and are being run almost for the benefit of society, and not for profit, is even more ridiculous.
Click to expand...
Newspapers never discuss tactics anyway. Most journalists, when asked, prefer the mint ones.
 
I can’t remember the last time there was a piece of news about Rangers and I thought of reading about it in a newspaper. Social media and the club give us all the club news we need. Other clubs will shortly follow suit.
 
deedle said:
Magnus Linklater backed Spiers to the hilt.

Much as I have doubts about what Rangers hope to achieve in charging the media for access it is hard to feel much sympathy given the hostility directed against the club for decades now.
Click to expand...
Same here....don't necessarily agree with the new policy but let face it we've been slaughtered by the MSM for years around sectarianism and its impact....most invented.
 
Div1872 said:
I’m not on Twitter but tweeting people like Chris Musson at the Sun or Dan Veevers and point them in the direction would be a good move

They both are on the SNPs case and Sturgeons quotes of “vile anti-Catholic bigotry” are clear lies

Same with Swinney Dornan Useless and Harvie

FF is great but it’s not got a wide enough circulation to highlight the lies from Sturgeon and co
Click to expand...
You make some pertinent points.
 
Coisty09 said:
I was in the press/media/PR game for the best part of three decades and was always amazed that’s so much was given away so freely by organizations who wanted to be featured.
When I worked as a reporter, the emphasis was always on finding the sensational/bad story but yet people still courted publicity.
It was good for making the job easy but seemed to me to be counter intuitive.
Click to expand...
The difference now is that they need us more than we need them. 30 years ago the best way to find out what was happening at the club was to read the papers so the papers had power and were used to and extent by the club for publicity. Since the internet that power had shifted completely. The msm now needs us more than we need them. They're pissed off that they have to pay for what they've had for free for decades but frankly, tough shit.
 
The press not being at games etc will make no difference at all to me as I get everything I need by fan media and the club.

As someone pointed out on twitter, what are the press going to do.....write negative stories about us?

They already do that.

Feck them.
 
bigy said:
I do think this is a really interesting debate. On the one hand I think we all believe in freedom of the press, and it is vital that independent and honest journalists are given the freedom to hold organisations (including football clubs) to account.

On the other, however, the media make money from selling stories about Rangers, and a lot of the time these stories baseless and designed to harm the Club. So why shouldn't we charge for access?

I do have a couple of questions though.

Firstly, I assume that certain competitions will require us to provide free access to media organisations (ie - the Champions League). If not will we charge foreign media a one off fee to attend?

Secondly, how do those that pay for access protect themselves? We've all seen how quickly stories/interviews on RTV and H&H get lifted. Are media outlets going to be happy paying when their 'exclusives' appear elsewhere in a matter of hours?
Click to expand...
I've not checked the papers online today but I'm going to hazard a guess that RM coming to town wasn't ignored?
Any reports or commentary must have come (lifted) from RTV/FF/H&H so whats the big deal for the papers other than some self important clown not getting to be the big I am at the game?
 
Last edited:
Snakehips said:
“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.”

What a pile of sanctimonious crap. They are bricking it that after centuries of being able to control the news and narrative, that the people now have a voice online, valid or otherwise. If newspapers don’t want to report it, or pay for their content, then many others will.

And to give the impression that newspapers are giving specialist insight and are being run almost for the benefit of society, and not for profit, is even more ridiculous.
Click to expand...
See my post 114
 
The media in Scotland have droned on about sectarianism in Scotland and Scottish football for an age yet they only see the sectarianism they want to see: they highlight supposed sectarianism from those they wish to vilify while turning a blind eye to identical words and actions from others. Selectively reporting on sectarianism is itself sectarian.

How many Rangers fans pay the licence fee? Now consider the stance of the BBC vis-a-vis Rangers. It’s a disgrace that a body funded by public money should act that way.

We as supporters should give the media none of our money. And why should the Club give them the content that makes them their living for free when they hate us and will vilify us regardless of what we do? Starve them!
 
Snakehips said:
“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.”

What a pile of sanctimonious crap. They are bricking it that after centuries of being able to control the news and narrative, that the people now have a voice online, valid or otherwise. If newspapers don’t want to report it, or pay for their content, then many others will.

And to give the impression that newspapers are giving specialist insight and are being run almost for the benefit of society, and not for profit, is even more ridiculous.
Click to expand...

I don’t remember the last time I read an educational & insightful football article by anyone in the SMSM mate.

They don’t have a clue about the game, and, even last season when they had access, when were there any genuinely intelligent football questions put to Gerrard ?
 
bigy said:
I think the issue for media outlets is that if they pay this, every other team in the UK is going to do the same.

£25k to Rangers is fine, but Celtic will do the same so that's £50k, then other Scottish teams might charge too (but less).

In England your 'big' teams will start charging more - £50k / £100k - and before you know it the media outlets are paying £ millions for access that was previously free.

That is what they're scared of. And I reckon that's why a lot won't pay for it.
Click to expand...
The Times gives free access for a period then you're charged.
Well, they've all had their free access trial period, now they pay.
 
The more these creatures bleat about Rangers’ policy decision the more I believe it’s the way to go. They’ve been free to wander into Ibrox, accept hospitality and then have no obligation to act in a responsible and honest manner in their reporting. What a horde of entitled bloodsuckers they have become.
 
Personally I find this charging policy short sighted by Rangers

it may very well play well with hardcore support but for the general public & club trying to reach new fans the 20k is small beer.

I do also wonder what our sponsors think of it? Are they going to be happy with less pictures of Rangers strips with their logos no being in the paper? What is the knock on effect to our potential value on that?

much like the policy with the bbc & not giving McLaughlin a press pass this just harms Rangers / makes it easier for us to be pigeonholed / silenced in the corner and then no wonder we are continually fire fighting / trying to fight the Rangers corner from behind the eight ball

people may say %^*& them , I prefer fan media etc etc but that doesn’t take into consideration the wider world ,

it should be concerning to Rangers and all fans that for example there is no report on the Real Madrid game on the bbc website

Rangers should be embracing all forms of media , getting as much press out there as possible, shouting from the rooftops about the glory of this club, using the media to get our message across ( be it even about ticketing / covid safety etc for the friendlies we’ve had)

Diplomacy & working with the media will get this club a lot further in the long run
 
Grigo Yossarian said:
I don’t remember the last time I read an educational & insightful football article by anyone in the SMSM mate.

They don’t have a clue about the game, and, even last season when they had access, when were there any genuinely intelligent football questions put to Gerrard ?
Click to expand...

Grigo Yossarian said:
I don’t remember the last time I read an educational & insightful football article by anyone in the SMSM mate.

They don’t have a clue about the game, and, even last season when they had access, when were there any genuinely intelligent football questions put to Gerrard ?
Click to expand...
Especially when the bint from Stv was asking the same inane questions every week.
 
'This is not only about making money, it is about the power to manage news and ensure that it is positive.'
Correct. Now, pass into history quietly & hopefully quickly, RFC-hating, elitist MSM irrelevance.
 
Last edited:
The Mhedia are reaping what they've sown. They've all happily kicked us while we were down, danced to the narrative set by their bheasty influencers to spin everything they can into a negative toward about club and support, all while painting Paedo FC in a positive light and burying any bad news.

I stopped buying and reading newspapers years ago and won't click on their links to give them hits. Rangers official website, Rangers TV, twitter and Follow Follow are my sourcea of everything Rangers related.

Deck the MSM. Give Willie Vass access for free and charge everyone else. Good enough for them.
 
luckywhitefeather said:
Personally I find this charging policy short sighted by Rangers

it may very well play well with hardcore support but for the general public & club trying to reach new fans the 20k is small beer.

I do also wonder what our sponsors think of it? Are they going to be happy with less pictures of Rangers strips with their logos no being in the paper? What is the knock on effect to our potential value on that?

much like the policy with the bbc & not giving McLaughlin a press pass this just harms Rangers / makes it easier for us to be pigeonholed / silenced in the corner and then no wonder we are continually fire fighting / trying to fight the Rangers corner from behind the eight ball

people may say %^*& them , I prefer fan media etc etc but that doesn’t take into consideration the wider world ,

it should be concerning to Rangers and all fans that for example there is no report on the Real Madrid game on the bbc website

Rangers should be embracing all forms of media , getting as much press out there as possible, shouting from the rooftops about the glory of this club, using the media to get our message across ( be it even about ticketing / covid safety etc for the friendlies we’ve had)

Diplomacy & working with the media will get this club a lot further in the long run
Click to expand...
Have you been asleep for the past 10 years?
 
Lol, and he writes it from behind a paywall? Absolutely no irony there.

Maybe I'm wrong, but my understanding is that while all these fucking turds in the mhedia were routinely bad-mouthing us, whilst (just as importantly) they were also minimising or completely ignoring negative stories from other clubs, they were being finely wined and dined at Ibrox for the privilege?

I don't necessarily agree with the £20k charge for these parasitic wanks but if it gets up their snouts which are usually stuck in some trough or other, then it's a fucking brilliant initiative from the club.

What they gonna do? Give us some bad press? Wow, what would that be like?
 
luckywhitefeather said:
Diplomacy & working with the media will get this club a lot further in the long run
Click to expand...
We've tried this for years and they still tell lies about every aspects of the club and its supporters

I used to occasionally buy a paper for match coverage, particularly after a big game. After reading an article by Speirs about 25 years ago which had so many lies woven into it about us I decided I didnt want to pay to be put in a bad mood. For similar reasons I dont follow accounts I distrust/dislike on Twitter, and often dont watch the build up to Rangers' games on TV.

I haven't bought a paper in 25 yrs, and nowadays there is simply no need for them

Believe me, as a Rangers fan you are missing out on absolutely nothing by not buying a paper
 
Grigo Yossarian said:
I don’t remember the last time I read an educational & insightful football article by anyone in the SMSM mate.

They don’t have a clue about the game, and, even last season when they had access, when were there any genuinely intelligent football questions put to Gerrard ?
Click to expand...
Agree G.

From the brief things I see online, the tabloids are only after headlines and clicks, whereas the broadsheet columnists tend to think the article is about them and trying to shoehorn in as many faux intellectual metaphors as they can. No doubt trying to impress their intelligence onto the West End chin strokers.

The questions at the press conferences are honking as well, I actually feel embarrassed on behalf of our country sometimes. The best stuff these days easily comes from fans and enthusiasts/bloggers. Anyone can recap what they have just seen, but fresh insight or analysis is quite rare these days, and there are quite a few online who manage it.
 
luckywhitefeather said:
Personally I find this charging policy short sighted by Rangers

it may very well play well with hardcore support but for the general public & club trying to reach new fans the 20k is small beer.

I do also wonder what our sponsors think of it? Are they going to be happy with less pictures of Rangers strips with their logos no being in the paper? What is the knock on effect to our potential value on that?

much like the policy with the bbc & not giving McLaughlin a press pass this just harms Rangers / makes it easier for us to be pigeonholed / silenced in the corner and then no wonder we are continually fire fighting / trying to fight the Rangers corner from behind the eight ball

people may say %^*& them , I prefer fan media etc etc but that doesn’t take into consideration the wider world ,

it should be concerning to Rangers and all fans that for example there is no report on the Real Madrid game on the bbc website

Rangers should be embracing all forms of media , getting as much press out there as possible, shouting from the rooftops about the glory of this club, using the media to get our message across ( be it even about ticketing / covid safety etc for the friendlies we’ve had)

Diplomacy & working with the media will get this club a lot further in the long run
Click to expand...
The club has tried that for years to no avail! This has not sneaked up on the media we have been battling with them for years but since the the late 1990's early 2000 they have taken it to another level.
 
Snakehips said:
Agree G.

From the brief things I see online, the tabloids are only after headlines and clicks, whereas the broadsheet columnists tend to think the article is about them and trying to shoehorn in as many faux intellectual metaphors as they can. No doubt trying to impress their intelligence onto the West End chin strokers.

The questions at the press conferences are honking as well, I actually feel embarrassed on behalf of our country sometimes. The best stuff these days easily comes from fans and enthusiasts/bloggers. Anyone can recap what they have just seen, but fresh insight or analysis is quite rare these days, and there are quite a few online who manage it.
Click to expand...

Well said S.
 
I see Ruth Davidson is sticking up for them now.

Plenty of people will have voted for her in the past. Just another self serving scumbag of a politician. None of them are our friends, no matter how much they pretend to be on social media.

Very little between James Dornan and Murdo Fraser imo.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Latest posts

Back
Top