Jump to content
BridgeIsBlue

The Media Agenda

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, They Gnu said:

Are you suggesting The Record are friends of Rangers?

I wouldn't say they are our friends, but our "enemy" would be the BBC,  those are the ones we have banned from the ground and punished.

The Record is almost an irrelevance, they are dying on their arse and make their money from digging at us. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, They Gnu said:

Are you suggesting The Record are friends of Rangers?

Please point out the word in my post that led you to that because I can't see them.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Think there is more that agree that the BBC suck a big dick, however none fancy the large fine that comes with your protest.

Not a protest mate , just not paying for cunts to lie about my team and it’s fans. 

Share this post


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

I wouldn't say they are our friends, but our "enemy" would be the BBC,  those are the ones we have banned from the ground and punished.

The Record is almost an irrelevance, they are dying on their arse and make their money from digging at us. 

They weren’t banned, one bias cunt had his press privileges revoked. He’s still free to pay to get in.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Please point out the word in my post that led you to that because I can't see them.

So not the enemy yet not friends... got it they are impartial?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, They Gnu said:

So not the enemy yet not friends... got it they are impartial?

Something along those lines. 

Share this post


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

I wouldn't say they are our friends, but our "enemy" would be the BBC,  those are the ones we have banned from the ground and punished.

The Record is almost an irrelevance, they are dying on their arse and make their money from digging at us. 

The death of the media is greatly exaggerated. Much is made of print dying off but digital is regulalry ignored. A far greater audience for a Scottish paper online than there is in print

Share this post


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

Something along those lines. 

You’ve gone native mate.

Share this post


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

The death of the media is greatly exaggerated. Much is made of print dying off but digital is regulalry ignored. A far greater audience for a Scottish paper online than there is in print

So is advertising their only source of income online?

Share this post


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

So is advertising their only source of income online?

No.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, They Gnu said:

You’ve gone native mate.

Far from it. I said long before I wrote for them that I don't buy there being an anti-Rangers agenda across the media. There are some bollocks writers who can't wait to take a shot at us - quite a few of them tbf - but there's no editorial agenda to demonise us.

Share this post


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

That's the basic jist of them. Moderates don't really get clicks and you need to be ever more controversial to keep outdoing the others. As much as people like to piss and moan about it, sadly its a trend being driven by what readers react to. If people didn't take the bait every time then guys like Sutton etc who exist more to ruffle feathers than offer meaningful insight would quickly vanish.

I suppose this will be the future of journalism now .Controversial as fuck .more clicks .more wages. 

while back in the day when it was a written hard copy all stories were in one publication and there was no way of ever knowing how many folk read what articles 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, magic8ball said:

I suppose this will be the future of journalism now .Controversial as fuck .more clicks .more wages. 

while back in the day when it was a written hard copy all stories were in one publication and there was no way of ever knowing how many folk read what articles 

Controversy creates cash. Especially if you're an ex-pro who is in a job because you're an ex-pro rather than someone who has a job because they write well or speak well or offer genuine insight into the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, They Gnu said:

They weren’t banned, one bias cunt had his press privileges revoked. He’s still free to pay to get in.

Important point and you are right to correct Gogzy (sorry Gogzy)

The longer that this impasse continues, the more annoyed I get. Surprised that BBC HQ down south haven’t yet sussed the fact that the most successful team in Scotland are treated like lepers. 

Might take a trophy win to get Shearer/Lineker/Crooks up here and realise how half the footballing population are being shortchanged.

Share this post


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

Controversy creates cash. Especially if you're an ex-pro who is in a job because you're an ex-pro rather than someone who has a job because they write well or speak well or offer genuine insight into the game.

How do real sport journalists get a job, if all these ex-pro are writing Controversy pieces? Shouldn't the editor be employing real sports journalist who offer genuine insight into the game?

Share this post


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

Controversy creates cash. Especially if you're an ex-pro who is in a job because you're an ex-pro rather than someone who has a job because they write well or speak well or offer genuine insight into the game.

not much hope of positivity in Rangers stories anytime soon then 

Dig the dirt on Gers and it's ching ching 

Share this post


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

How do real sport journalists get a job, if all these ex-pro are writing Controversy pieces? Shouldn't the editor be employing real sports journalist who offer genuine insight into the game? 

He hires whoever gives the best results for the business. The vast majority of sports journos largely go unmentioned and it's a handful who generate the most controversy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, magic8ball said:

not much hope of positivity in Rangers stories anytime soon then 

Dig the dirt on Gers and it's ching ching 

Comes with being the biggest and most successful club in the country. I write about the rest of Scottish fitba elsewhere and the difference in numbers from doing Rangers to doing Hibs/Hearts/Aberdeen in incredible. If I do 20,000 hits on a Rangers story, I'll be lucky to 1000 on a Hibs/Hearts/Aberdeen one.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

He hires whoever gives the best results for the business. The vast majority of sports journos largely go unmentioned and it's a handful who generate the most controversy.

That stinks. So how are people like yourself meant to climb the ladder to become a sport journalist?

Share this post


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

That stinks. So how are people like yourself meant to climb the ladder to become a sport journalist?

Work hard. It's worked fine for me.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Comes with being the biggest and most successful club in the country. I write about the rest of Scottish fitba elsewhere and the difference in numbers from doing Rangers to doing Hibs/Hearts/Aberdeen in incredible. If I do 20,000 hits on a Rangers story, I'll be lucky to 1000 on a Hibs/Hearts/Aberdeen one.

How can the balance be changed? Do we have to give proper journalist stories more hits to have that journalist writing more?

Share this post


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

How can the balance be changed? Do we have to give proper journalist stories more hits to have that journalist writing more?

That's certainly part although only really works with opinion stuff.

Share this post


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

Controversy creates cash. Especially if you're an ex-pro who is in a job because you're an ex-pro rather than someone who has a job because they write well or speak well or offer genuine insight into the game.

Friendly with an ex pro's brother in law and this is 100% what he is asked to do. Say shit that creates a lot of clicks and general bedlam. 

The pro in question has already more than made his money so I just wonder why the fuck does he need to do this? 

Putting it down to missing the spotlight and the attention.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, 35 Yard Dangerman said:

Friendly with an ex pro's brother in law and this is 100% what he is asked to do. Say shit that creates a lot of clicks and general bedlam. 

The pro in question has already more than made his money so I just wonder why the fuck does he need to do this? 

Putting it down to missing the spotlight and the attention.

That's what I put it down to.

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.

×