What Do The Bbc Think Rangers Lose From Their "boycott"?

[buster. 1,114]

13 minutes ago, The Dude said:

If we were serious about it we'd be raising it via the SPFL every time and also making regular complaints to the BBC Trust.

But it would be wise to make complaints that had a chance of being upheld otherwise the club would start to get ridiculed and the whole issue would be laughed away.

Much of what appears on messageboards wouldn't be upheld.

 

You have to box clever (even if it means a 'longer game') and not just pander to fans complaints with token efforts.

 

Nor can we forget that we can't control media output although I appreciate that the BBC have stricter guidelines that we can look to take advantage of.

[Pure_Quality 3,295]

10 minutes ago, The Dude said:

The guy from the PA could quite easily discuss it with his colleagues in the press gantry. It can be quite a busy place during game. Plenty other journos sat there. It would also likely be discussed in the press room post match, as many incidents are, as they file their copy.

The BBC will also have full video of the match, either live or on a slight delay, which could be used to corroborate an claims made.

I wasn't at MW's presser yesterday, does that impact my ability to accurately report what was said during it?

Press conferences are entirely different to match footage, and I agree if they are taped would make no difference.

Seeing a game in person does however ensure any reporting is 'your own' opinion. If there was no benefit of doing this the newspapers, which are all trying to cut costs to the bone, or Sky etc wouldn't pay 3/4 people to be at a match, it would be done by generic copy. It's daft to say their output won't be impacted by this.

[The Dude 20,026]

2 minutes ago, buster. said:

But it would be wise to make complaints that had a chance of being upheld otherwise the club would start to get ridiculed and the whole issue would be laughed away.

Much of what appears on messageboards wouldn't be upheld.

 

You have to box clever (even if it means a 'longer game') and not just pander to fans complaints with token efforts.

 

Nor can we forget that we can't control media output although I appreciate that the BBC have stricter guidelines that we can look to take advantage of.

I don't mean going with every piece of paranoia posted by folk on forums or twitter. Every time the club has a legitimate complaint they should raise it via the SPFL and the BBC Trust. Half the stuff fans come out with that is 'biased' is utter horseshit tbh.

[Blue Avenger 22,567]

23 minutes ago, Smile said:

BBC sources then insisted there would be no staff member going to Ibrox until the ban on Mr McLaughlin is lifted and they would rely on agency staff.

 

They are just going to rely on freelance staff so still they are sending someone picking up a pay cheque from the BBC, But not actually employed by the BBC.

 

 

 

 

Exactly!

They are trying to be smart arses and will distance themselves from the bile that the agency journo furnishes them with and make some pathetic apology after the damage is done, albeit they would remain to be ultimately responsible.

[buster. 1,114]

Just now, The Dude said:

I don't mean going with every piece of paranoia posted by folk on forums or twitter. Every time the club has a legitimate complaint they should raise it via the SPFL and the BBC Trust. Half the stuff fans come out with that is 'biased' is utter horseshit tbh.

Agreed

As I said before BBC Scotland have bosses down South and if we had an evidence backed dossier built up over time we would be better requesting a meeting with them. (eg. the McCoist clip editing) 

[The Dude 20,026]

1 minute ago, Pure_Quality said:

Press conferences are entirely different to match footage, and I agree if they are taped would make no difference.

Seeing a game in person does however ensure any reporting is 'your own' opinion. If there was no benefit of doing this the newspapers, which are all trying to cut costs to the bone, or Sky etc wouldn't pay 3/4 people to be at a match, it would be done by generic copy. It's daft to say their output won't be impacted by this.

Take a look. Their output hasn't been affected by it other than a lack of commentary on open all mics. Match reports aren't opinion pieces, you aren't their to offer an opinion but to report on the match taking place. If they are using PA copy (which is good enough for every single news outlet across the planet) then there's no issue there.

Lots of newspapers/websites do use generic copy. Particularly when it comes to newspapers that aren't local to Glasgow.

The people Sky have at games that aren't being broadcast live tend to produce on camera pieces which you couldn't substitute for generic copy.

[The Dude 20,026]

4 minutes ago, Blue Avenger said:

 

Exactly!

They are trying to be smart arses and will distance themselves from the bile that the agency journo furnishes them with and make some pathetic apology after the damage is done, albeit they would remain to be ultimately responsible.

You've no idea how press agencies work. Their copy wont be used by just the BBC. Eurosport, ESPN, ITV, all use agency reporters. Quite often the same one.

[Blue Avenger 22,567]

4 minutes ago, The Dude said:

You've no idea how press agencies work. Their copy wont be used by just the BBC. Eurosport, ESPN, ITV, all use agency reporters. Quite often the same one.

 

And that makes a difference?

They are all at liberty to edit. Who's to say those with the agenda and there are many, that suits the beeb and will give them exactly what they want and secure a good stream of steady income.

 

Watch this space.

[Pure_Quality 3,295]

4 minutes ago, The Dude said:

Take a look. Their output hasn't been affected by it other than a lack of commentary on open all mics. Match reports aren't opinion pieces, you aren't their to offer an opinion but to report on the match taking place. If they are using PA copy (which is good enough for every single news outlet across the planet) then there's no issue there.

Lots of newspapers/websites do use generic copy. Particularly when it comes to newspapers that aren't local to Glasgow.

The people Sky have at games that aren't being broadcast live tend to produce on camera pieces which you couldn't substitute for generic copy.

If you don't think their output will be reduced quality because they're not actually there I think you're very misguided. There's been one game so far, and you're forming an opinion on that one situation which isn't representative of a full season.

I'd suggest it also means for Scottish Cup games we'll be less likely to be televised free to air due to a lack of access to film pre match. This will reduce our potential TV audience from 3.8m down to 1.75m approximately, which just isn't satisfactory from our national broadcaster.

[The Dude 20,026]

Just now, Blue Avenger said:

 

And that makes a difference?

They are all at liberty to edit. Who's to say those with the agenda and there are many, that suits the beeb and will give them exactly what I want and secure a good stream of steady income.

 

Watch this space.

Yes it makes a massive difference. They'll be at liberty to edit it however they can't simply add bits into it then pass it off as coming from the PA.

Your second bit just confirms you know hee haw about how press agencies work. It's not like an employment agency where a brickie might get a phone call for a job one morning. They have full time staff who report constantly and their copy is lifted by a variety of sources who don't have direct access.

[Blue Avenger 22,567]

1 minute ago, The Dude said:

Yes it makes a massive difference. They'll be at liberty to edit it however they can't simply add bits into it then pass it off as coming from the PA.

Your second bit just confirms you know hee haw about how press agencies work. It's not like an employment agency where a brickie might get a phone call for a job one morning. They have full time staff who report constantly and their copy is lifted by a variety of sources who don't have direct access.

Mer blithering pish.

Keep hold of that o level. You need it.

[The Dude 20,026]

2 minutes ago, Pure_Quality said:

If you don't think their output will be reduced quality because they're not actually there I think you're very misguided. There's been one game so far, and you're forming an opinion on that one situation which isn't representative of a full season.

I'd suggest it also means for Scottish Cup games we'll be less likely to be televised free to air due to a lack of access to film pre match. This will reduce our potential TV audience from 3.8m down to 1.75m approximately, which just isn't satisfactory from our national broadcaster.

Remember last time we banned McLaughlin? Go take a look at the reporting from the one game so far and compare it with the previous one. No difference whatsoever.

Our last few Scottish cup games have been on Sky. As is our next one. I don't see that changing. If we are chosen to be broadcast by the BBC then we can't refuse them access or we'd be in breach of contract and face potential sanctions from the SFA and also legal action.

[The Dude 20,026]

1 minute ago, Blue Avenger said:

Mer blithering pish.

Keep hold of that o level. You need it.

Which bit was 'blithering pish' exactly?

 

[Dutchy 1,200]

I'd be happy for the ban to stay in place until they apologise for their skewed reporting.

It's also important to make it obvious why the ban continues and that all they have to do is accept responsibility.

I know it's hard to get the BBC to do that in most aspects of their current misdimenours(!), but try we must, no matter how low they've become in recent years.

[Pure_Quality 3,295]

Just now, The Dude said:

Remember last time we banned McLaughlin? Go take a look at the reporting from the one game so far and compare it with the previous one. No difference whatsoever.

Our last few Scottish cup games have been on Sky. As is our next one. I don't see that changing. If we are chosen to be broadcast by the BBC then we can't refuse them access or we'd be in breach of contract and face potential sanctions from the SFA and also legal action.

Your second paragraph is the exact point. We've every right to stop a reporter coming to Ibrox if his output isn't fair and consistent, however when we've exercised that right the BBC have thrown the toys out the pram and said they aren't sending anyone to our games. We're not going to be picked for a BBC live game if they're not sending anyone to Ibrox through their own choice and that limits our FTA exposure. Its unacceptable that Rangers are suffering from reduced Scottish audience exposure due to the BBC Scotland sports editor being unable to keep his journalists in check.

The match reports from last time were shorter and less detailed too upon quickly looking, so further reduced quality. In fact, the PA reports were much better for a couple of these games so not sure exactly who they used.

[The Dude 20,026]

3 minutes ago, Pure_Quality said:

Your second paragraph is the exact point. We've every right to stop a reporter coming to Ibrox if his output isn't fair and consistent, however when we've exercised that right the BBC have thrown the toys out the pram and said they aren't sending anyone to our games. We're not going to be picked for a BBC live game if they're not sending anyone to Ibrox through their own choice and that limits our FTA exposure. Its unacceptable that Rangers are suffering from reduced Scottish audience exposure due to the BBC Scotland sports editor being unable to keep his journalists in check.

The match reports from last time were shorter and less detailed too upon quickly looking, so further reduced quality. In fact, the PA reports were much better for a couple of these games so not sure exactly who they used.

 

If you think that the BBC wouldn't broadcast a Rangers game (with the viewing figures our games bring) in the Scottish Cup then you're seriously mistaken. Especially given the BBC get second choice of which game to pick after Sky.

 

We don't have that right when we are contractually obliged. Hence why we banned an individual and not the organisation.

[GersInCanada 7,775]

Appeasement never works. It is long past time where we stood our ground and fought back.

[Pure_Quality 3,295]

12 minutes ago, The Dude said:

 

If you think that the BBC wouldn't broadcast a Rangers game (with the viewing figures our games bring) in the Scottish Cup then you're seriously mistaken. Especially given the BBC get second choice of which game to pick after Sky.

 

We don't have that right when we are contractually obliged. Hence why we banned an individual and not the organisation.

I'd Celtic draw an SPL top 6 side away next round Sky will show it as first pick, without a doubt.

If Rangers are drawn at home to an SPL side we should be on BBC but I doubt we will. Obviously it's conjecture from both of us at this point, but to suggest they're interested in viewing figures from Rangers fans when they've just decided on a self imposed boycott seems really silly IMO. Let's wait and see.

[The Dude 20,026]

1 minute ago, Pure_Quality said:

I'd Celtic draw an SPL top 6 side away next round Sky will show it as first pick, without a doubt.

If Rangers are drawn at home to an SPL side we should be on BBC but I doubt we will. Obviously it's conjecture from both of us at this point, but to suggest they're interested in viewing figures from Rangers fans when they've just decided on a self imposed boycott seems really silly IMO. Let's wait and see.

If they weren't interested in Rangers fans watching they wouldn't continue to show our highlights on Sportscene. They do. Viewing figures are what programmes on the BBC live and die by. They don't have the fallback of strong ad sales etc that other commercial networks do.

[True Azure 1,414]

IMO, we lose nothing by banning him. He'll make up shite to denigrate us anyway, so fuck him and his BBC(Scotland) mates as well.

[Pure_Quality 3,295]

5 minutes ago, The Dude said:

If they weren't interested in Rangers fans watching they wouldn't continue to show our highlights on Sportscene. They do. Viewing figures are what programmes on the BBC live and die by. They don't have the fallback of strong ad sales etc that other commercial networks do.

 

Firstly, the BBC are contractually obliged to show our highlights on Sportscene as part of their deal with the SPFL to show Championship highlights (which ends this year, so they must be confident we'll be promoted) but they aren't contractually obliged to pick us for the Scottish Cup, so I fail to see the correlation there. 

Secondly, the BBC have already paid the SFA a flat rate for the live Scottish Cup coverage, so they can pick whatever their small minded Scottish Sports Editor decides. Viewing figures are completely immaterial as they've no quantifiable KPI on ROI as a tax funded state broadcaster, and I'd suggest you look at viewing figures for F1 (which they've just given up) and BBC Three/Four and the decision to move one of online before you come out with statements about viewing figures being what they 'live or die by', because that's just complete rubbish unfortunately.

As I say, it's purely conjecture, so let's wait and see what happens.

[The Dude 20,026]

2 minutes ago, Pure_Quality said:

 

Firstly, the BBC are contractually obliged to show our highlights on Sportscene as part of their deal with the SPFL to show Championship highlights (which ends this year, so they must be confident we'll be promoted) but they aren't contractually obliged to pick us for the Scottish Cup, so I fail to see the correlation there. 

Secondly, the BBC have already paid the SFA a flat rate for the live Scottish Cup coverage, so they can pick whatever their small minded Scottish Sports Editor decides. Viewing figures are completely immaterial as they've no quantifiable KPI on ROI as a tax funded state broadcaster, and I'd suggest you look at viewing figures for F1 (which they've just given up) and BBC Three/Four and the decision to move one of online before you come out with statements about viewing figures being what they 'live or die by', because that's just complete rubbish unfortunately.

As I say, it's purely conjecture, so let's wait and see what happens.

They aren't obligated to show Championship highlights. They don't show highlights from all the games in our division.

When it comes to renewing the deal poor viewing figures make it very difficult to argue spending several million pounds on something noone watches.

F1 coverage is irrelevant. Sky show all races. BBC show a handful at a vastly inflated price. The BBC actually wanted to renegotiate but Ecclestone flatly refused to consider it. They pay chump change for Scottish football.

[Pure_Quality 3,295]

9 minutes ago, The Dude said:

They aren't obligated to show Championship highlights. They don't show highlights from all the games in our division.

They are contractually obliged to show us this year, but they're not obligated to show any Championship games next year

[centenary 0]

By elevating this to the level of dossiers,petitions and boycotts we are giving the bbc what they want___publicity. Indeed this is beginning to sound like the east end team dossiers on certain refs. Best to ignore mclaughlin and let him slip into obscurity. Then watch as bbc ditch him as he is no longer of any use to them.

[Ibroxholm 2,280]

Extra incentive, as if we need one, for Rangers to get to the Scottish Cup final this season.  Let's see if BBC Scotland have the nerve to boycott their showpiece sports event, or at least one of the sides in it.

Would love to see us running round Hampden with the cup and our players giving Chic and his cohorts short shrift when they come sidling up for an after match interview.