Jump to content
CoatbridgeBear

Emmanuel Eboue arrested for Arson

Recommended Posts

On 08/07/2018 at 19:12, The Dude said:

Do tell us how it works and which bits I’m wrong on then. I mean you were a regular in Daily Record editorial meetings seemingly so you must have a good idea. 

I'm surprised you can hear yourself think in those meetings, with all the rattling of the rosaries.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Inigo said:

Tbh, I'd use the collage. Makes it Scotland relevant whilst giving a hint of the larger picture that he's a biggish star on a larger stage than Scotland.

Not sure I see this use of the strip the same way I see the ones where it's people that have kicked dugs or bottled folk that are pictured with Rangers tops on. Don't see that they have to make that more relevant, and it seems quite gratuitous and malicious when they do it. Presumably in those instances they'll be conducting broader searches for images and consciously choose those from a selection? It seems more damaging to try to display Rangers fans as being involved in criminality than to display a player that wore a Rangers top once, or a player you might even be trying to lead to leads us to think played for us once, was involved in criminality, seeing as the fans are the club, whereas players are just people that pass through generally, whose behaviour once they've left us has nothing to do with us. 

I suppose you could read that it's a small part of a subconscious drip, drip of negativity into it. But on the grand scale, even though the DR to me DO have a vindictiveness towards us, this isn't one that annoys me much. It's pretty low on the negative-drip scale compared to some other things. Also have to say that I've seen plenty of things involving folk that have been up to shenanigans pictured in the DR wearing sellic strips.

P.S. As a budding journalist, you should know better than to misuse seen vs saw. I'm far more disgusted by this than anything else. Five to the back of the hand for you, Black.

I do it all the time. 😂 I rush type stuff just as they come and then go back and make it appear a little less like it was written by a complete idiot. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, 2daludaludalu said:

I'm surprised you can hear yourself think in those meetings, with all the rattling of the rosaries.

They get put away after we take communion then get our orders from Mr Lawwell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, The Dude said:

You wanted the long answer? Fair dos. 

I’m absolutely obsessed with football. I’ll spend most of my day doing something related to football - whether it’s watching a game on TV, attending games, writing about it, talking about it, reading about it. I’ll watch games from across the world just because it’s a game of football. I’ll often try get to as many games as I can in a week (whether it’s senior games, youths or even school’s football) but I always read the papers and thought that what I’d read was a bit shit. 

There were no real opinions offered on the game itself and many of the columnists at the time either made grudges against players or themselves the star of the show. I didn’t want to read about Gerry McNee not liking ‘Number Eight’ or how Bob Shields drank in eight different boozers before missing the game. I wanted to read about how Brian Laudrup would leave defenders for dead before delivering an inch-perfect cross for McCoist to nod home. I wanted to read about why the way Walter Smith’s teams were set-up were the ideal way to counter any side in Scotland and made the most of the players at his disposal. 

Instead it was inane shite and cliche-filled drivel and I decided I could do better despite having absolutely no qualifications beyond what I got at School. I’ve always aimed to bring more balance towards the reporting of Rangers (and would like to think the literally thousands of articles I’ve had published over the last few years bear that out) and feel that everything I’ve put out since starting this, while hardly anything spectacular, has given Rangers fans something that can’t be accused of having any hidden agenda. 

By doing my job, as I think it should be done at least, I’m happy that what I write is balanced and fair to Rangers, and anyone else for that matter. Who knows, maybe I’m barking up the wrong tree and have spent the last five years chasing something I shouldn’t have bothered with. 

Maybe being fair in my work will come back and bite me in the arse but it’s done me fine so far.

What do you mean bring more balance to the reporting on Rangers? This suggests an imbalance not in our favour.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Sportingintegritymyarse said:

What do you mean bring more balance to the reporting on Rangers? This suggests an imbalance not in our favour.

He'll wear you down eventually.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, The Dude said:

They get put away after we take communion then get our orders from Mr Lawwell.

Aye you're no joking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, The Dude said:

😂 Of course. Although out of curiosity (and unrelated to the topic) can I ask why you seem to exclusively use The Rangers in a similar manner to certain sevcoists? Maybe purely coincidental but jumped out at me. 

i really am not surprised that you do not know the given name of The Rangers, poor try at deflection from your ludicrous defence of the indefensible, still you taking the rhebs tainted shilling probably explains it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Sportingintegritymyarse said:

What do you mean bring more balance to the reporting on Rangers? This suggests an imbalance not in our favour.

In that I’d be completely open and upfront about anything that may be viewed as contentious. Also that I make no secret of the fact I’m a Rangers fan. Had season tickets, regularly attend games, regularly travel on a supporters bus so there’s no ambiguity over what side of the fence I sit on. I’m not someone who has a career through knowing someone or by having contacts in the game. 

None of my stuff comes from being someone with an axe to grind or having pals in the game feed me info (as so much news in football does) so it has a slightly different, and arguably more neutral, balanced perspective on it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, backup said:

i really am not surprised that you do not know the given name of The Rangers, poor try at deflection from your ludicrous defence of the indefensible, still you taking the rhebs tainted shilling probably explains it.

I know fine well the given name of the club although it has largely fallen out of use these days and the only people I tend to see use it so insistently are that weird fake agent virgin on Twitter and certain disenfranchised fathers. As I said it’s maybe purely coincidental. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, The Dude said:

In that I’d be completely open and upfront about anything that may be viewed as contentious. Also that I make no secret of the fact I’m a Rangers fan. Had season tickets, regularly attend games, regularly travel on a supporters bus so there’s no ambiguity over what side of the fence I sit on. I’m not someone who has a career through knowing someone or by having contacts in the game. 

None of my stuff comes from being someone with an axe to grind or having pals in the game feed me info (as so much news in football does) so it has a slightly different, and arguably more neutral, balanced perspective on it. 

Do you not think most people managed to deduce that given you are the Rangers blogger ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, D'Artagnan said:

Do you not think most people managed to deduce that given you are the Rangers blogger ?

You would be surprised. Just look at Jonny McFarlane...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, The Dude said:

In that I’d be completely open and upfront about anything that may be viewed as contentious. Also that I make no secret of the fact I’m a Rangers fan. Had season tickets, regularly attend games, regularly travel on a supporters bus so there’s no ambiguity over what side of the fence I sit on. I’m not someone who has a career through knowing someone or by having contacts in the game. 

None of my stuff comes from being someone with an axe to grind or having pals in the game feed me info (as so much news in football does) so it has a slightly different, and arguably more neutral, balanced perspective on it. 

Oh right.

So your focus in joining the rebel wasn't about in addressing a bias against us there. It was to write about football. Shame.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, The Dude said:

You would be surprised. Just look at Jonny McFarlane...

Nothing surprises me these days.

I have a certain sympathy for you Dude - young guy trying to cut a living in an ever decreasing profession due to the advances of the technical age - the opportunities must be few and far between.

Given your apparent change of mantra regarding your reasons  I suspect you have realised changing such a rancid output given your position is nigh on impossible.

But that doesnt justify you defending the indefensible as others have called it - or as I would rather put it - affording them the benefit of the doubt. I feel they have lost the right to such priviledge after a series of inaccurate and damaging articles against our club & support, some of which were purely malicious ( perhaps even personal)

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Sportingintegritymyarse said:

Oh right.

So your focus in joining the rebel wasn't about in addressing a bias against us there. It was to write about football. Shame.

My focus was, and is, to write a blog about Rangers and try to use it to focus on positive stuff as much as possible. Mind you, out of over 4000 articles I’ve written, the Record accounts for 22 of them at last count and makes up a tiny percentage of the number of people who have read my stuff. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, D'Artagnan said:

Nothing surprises me these days.

I have a certain sympathy for you Dude - young guy trying to cut a living in an ever decreasing profession due to the advances of the technical age - the opportunities must be few and far between.

Given your apparent change of mantra regarding your reasons  I suspect you have realised changing such a rancid output given your position is nigh on impossible.

But that doesnt justify you defending the indefensible as others have called it - or as I would rather put it - affording them the benefit of the doubt. I feel they have lost the right to such priviledge after a series of inaccurate and damaging articles against our club & support, some of which were purely malicious ( perhaps even personal)

Very much so - which is arguably why - the chance to get my foot in the door at the Record would have been a foolish one to pass up. Having even briefly crossed paths   ‘professionally’ - WATP mag - you’ll understand how few platforms there are available with any sizeable audience. 

No change of mantra. I still aim to be a pro-Rangers voice whenever I am afforded the chance to do so in opinion pieces such as my Record blog. After spending the last 10 months also working elsewhere in a news-gathering role where the opportunity to voice opinion is much more restricted, I’m happy that the content I produced was fair and balanced. The difference between the two, as I’m sure you’ll appreciate is huge, and were the opportunity to arise at the Record (or another ‘mainstream’ outlet) I’d expect that to continue. If not it’d be a massive barrier for me working there. 

I get that you have a long-held scepticism that I can affect any sort of change - and you might well be right - but as I said at the time, I can only try. It might never happen and getting to do an opinion piece every so often might be the ceiling for me but - and this will sound schmalzy as fuck but it’ll have to do - even if folk think that the Record, Sun, BBC or whoever is anti-Rangers, it’s certainly not an accusation that I feel can be levelled towards anything with ‘By James Black’ at the top of it. 

Just now, I’m still very early in any career I might have in journalism (most folk who started at the same time as me would just be graduating just now) so it’s going to be a long slog. I’m never going to change anything overnight but in time...let’s see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, The Dude said:

My focus was, and is, to write a blog about Rangers and try to use it to focus on positive stuff as much as possible. Mind you, out of over 4000 articles I’ve written, the Record accounts for 22 of them at last count and makes up a tiny percentage of the number of people who have read my stuff. 

On 03/05/2017 at 16:23, harlands plater said:

"I can see where you're coming from to a certain extent, Dude, taking a "better inside the tent pissing out, than outside the tent pissing in" approach. 

However I can't help thinking you'll just be pissing into the wind, we will never get anything like parity of coverage from that gutter rag. And I've felt that way about it for at least 30 years".

You replied:

You're probably right but I can only try. The shite we've read for long enough is the reason I decided to give this a go in the first place. I've grown up reading the same one-sided shite we all have and decided I could do it better. Maybe I can, maybe I can't but I'll never know unless I have the platform to do so.

*******

You seem to be rewriting your own history here Dude. In March 2017, in response to a post referencing the record you replied about the shite read for long enough, the one sided shite. And this shite being the reason for your giving this (career? job at record?) a go.

When did your reason change from addressing bias to just writing about football?

There was bias then, there is bias now, scum fans are in place throughout the media and despite you once stating you wanted to provide more balance you would prefer to call folk cranks now than admit this blatant bias.

Having bills to pay I get, but what I don't get is whether you're blinded by the bias now youre within, or you're strategically playing the game. Regardless, unless you fight for us then you're as much use to us as that crank ill Phil you were so eager to introduce to the conversation earlier.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Sportingintegritymyarse said:

On 03/05/2017 at 16:23, harlands plater said:

"I can see where you're coming from to a certain extent, Dude, taking a "better inside the tent pissing out, than outside the tent pissing in" approach. 

However I can't help thinking you'll just be pissing into the wind, we will never get anything like parity of coverage from that gutter rag. And I've felt that way about it for at least 30 years".

You replied:

You're probably right but I can only try. The shite we've read for long enough is the reason I decided to give this a go in the first place. I've grown up reading the same one-sided shite we all have and decided I could do it better. Maybe I can, maybe I can't but I'll never know unless I have the platform to do so.

*******

You seem to be rewriting your own history here Dude. In March 2017, in response to a post referencing the record you replied about the shite read for long enough, the one sided shite. And this shite being the reason for your giving this (career? job at record?) a go.

When did your reason change from addressing bias to just writing about football?

There was bias then, there is bias now, scum fans are in place throughout the media and despite you once stating you wanted to provide more balance you would prefer to call folk cranks now than admit this blatant bias.

Having bills to pay I get, but what I don't get is whether you're blinded by the bias now youre within, or you're strategically playing the game. Regardless, unless you fight for us then you're as much use to us as that crank ill Phil you were so eager to introduce to the conversation earlier.

When I first started doing this by writing about kids football with Youth Football Scotland and covering anything from Under-9s to Under-21 internationals. That’s the same stuff I alluded to earlier when I mentioned the likes of Gerry McNee and his grudge with Gazza and the general shite quality of opinion and reporting around Scottish football. 

You slightly mis-read the point. Much of the opinion content around Scottish football is one-sided. There’s a big difference from those to actual news content. Opinion stuff being one-sided (imo) isn’t an editorial bias. I have no problem with such content being skewed one way or another. I just wanted an alternative. Someone who would put a positive Rangers slant across in that type of stuff. My blog is very much one-sided. If that was seeping into news content (which I don’t believe it does) then I’d agree 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, The Dude said:

When I first started doing this by writing about kids football with Youth Football Scotland and covering anything from Under-9s to Under-21 internationals. That’s the same stuff I alluded to earlier when I mentioned the likes of Gerry McNee and his grudge with Gazza and the general shite quality of opinion and reporting around Scottish football. 

You slightly mis-read the point. Much of the opinion content around Scottish football is one-sided. There’s a big difference from those to actual news content. Opinion stuff being one-sided (imo) isn’t an editorial bias. I have no problem with such content being skewed one way or another. I just wanted an alternative. Someone who would put a positive Rangers slant across in that type of stuff. My blog is very much one-sided. If that was seeping into news content (which I don’t believe it does) then I’d agree 

So the one sidedness only related to football matters? Yet when Harlands spoke he talked generally of parity of coverage not specifically opinion content. Perhaps you've misread it and are making an argument fit.

celtic fans have infiltrated every part of the media. Do you accept that?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, D'Artagnan said:

That was a mantra he alluded to previously - I did suggest to him at the time it was a forlorn hope.

Especially when he prefers cash to integrity and has zero backbone or any real love for the Club.

No Bear who professed to be a supporter would entertain working for them in any capacity. The fervour and passion he put in to defend them shows exactly where his loyalties lie.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Sportingintegritymyarse said:

So the one sidedness only related to football matters? Yet when Harlands spoke he talked generally of parity of coverage not specifically opinion content. Perhaps you've misread it and are making an argument fit.

celtic fans have infiltrated every part of the media. Do you accept that?

No the one-sidedness referred to columnists (as I more or less am too) I don’t have any involvement with their news reporting whatsoever so couldn’t have any influence over it by writing an opinion column. Until September I hadn’t done a huge amount of actual reporting work at all and had almost exclusively done opinions or match reports. I had only done little bits of reporting with Got The Battle Fever On and even that only really consisted of a handful of exclusives. 

celtic fans have been in the media for decades. It’s nothing new. There have been celtic fans in the media for almost as long as there has been a celtic.

There are also plenty of Rangers fans in the media. Most importantly though, the higher you go, they have a boss to report to outside of Scotland who couldn’t give a fuck less about us or them. They just want a profitable business. Excluding potentially half of your audience doesn’t lend itself to that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, TEFTONG said:

Especially when he prefers cash to integrity and has zero backbone or any real love for the Club.

No Bear who professed to be a supporter would entertain working for them in any capacity. The fervour and passion he put in to defend them shows exactly where his loyalties lie.

 

So tell me which media outlets are Rangers fans allowed to work for? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, The Dude said:

So tell me which media outlets are Rangers fans allowed to work for? 

Rangers.co.uk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Goosetav said:

Rangers.co.uk

All becomes a little bit Pravda then, no? Chairman King’s word is the only word. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, The Dude said:

No the one-sidedness referred to columnists (as I more or less am too) I don’t have any involvement with their news reporting whatsoever so couldn’t have any influence over it by writing an opinion column. Until September I hadn’t done a huge amount of actual reporting work at all and had almost exclusively done opinions or match reports. I had only done little bits of reporting with Got The Battle Fever On and even that only really consisted of a handful of exclusives. 

celtic fans have been in the media for decades. It’s nothing new. There have been celtic fans in the media for almost as long as there has been a celtic.

There are also plenty of Rangers fans in the media. Most importantly though, the higher you go, they have a boss to report to outside of Scotland who couldn’t give a fuck less about us or them. They just want a profitable business. Excluding potentially half of your audience doesn’t lend itself to that. 

So there is parity in how Rangers are treated by say the Rhebel and BBC Scotland in comparison to celtic?

No doubt similar parity in numbers of Rangers supporters and scum supporters (both at grunt level and senior/influential positions) within the NUJ too I'm sure...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×