Jump to content
oneBoro Forum

Boro clarify transfer facts - Gazette will not interview the manager or players


Recommended Posts

Didn't another news outlet tweet Taylor asking him to follow him? So he could pass on some information about Braithwaite? Sure I saw something like that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 294
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  •  

    36

  •  

    19

  •  

    16

Didn't another news outlet tweet Taylor asking him to follow him? So he could pass on some information about Braithwaite? Sure I saw something like that.

 

Yes the Canadian guy that broke braithwaite gave the info to Taylor (we assume)

Link to post
Share on other sites

So Humpty that's the article that mfc didn't like?

 

Let me know what you find out I'm very interested. Because if it is I don't get why vickers is still allowed in when shaw and Taylor aren't.

 

 

That's what i can't get my head around.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It would appear the Gazette released a story they were asked not too. There's a slight discrepancy on what i've been told regarding the journalists that have been banned and the article that was written though, so still digging. Following said article though, The Gazette were excluded from an interview Gibson did at the back end of last season.

 

http://www.gazettelive.co.uk/sport/football/transfer-news/inside-story-victor-orta-how-13090744

 

Banning local journalists for that article is still way over the top for me. That would have gotten out anyway, either through other news outlets or simply gossip. Just look how the "March-debacle" 18 months ago is still rumbling. From Boros point of view this was probably the best outcome. Let the local paper make a decent article writing what actually happened during such as disastrous season and put the matter to rest once and for all and start from ground zero. The writing was on the all when staff and players were quickly removed. 

 

Granted the article could maybe have done without the slating of Karanka, but the words on Orta were spot on, and I am at least happy to know what went wrong last season. If the club truely want transparency towards supporters the simply need to let the fans know what went wrong.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So Humpty that's the article that mfc didn't like?

 

Let me know what you find out I'm very interested. Because if it is I don't get why vickers is still allowed in when shaw and Taylor aren't.

 

 

That's what i can't get my head around.

 

Is it not possible that they've just banned the less senior of the journos as a slap on the hand? I'm not convinced the journo ban is anything personal between them and the club. Simply put the club, at this time, only want to deal with the most senior reporters at the paper. It would make little to no sense to just ban Vickers.

 

This all but confirms that the paper was surely in the pocket of the club. Whatever mutual agreement they made in order to receive more concrete information was at a sacrifice of having some unofficial mediator at the club reviewing their articles, deciding what's right to go to press, sacrificing some journalistic integrity.

 

I say that because the article the Gazette is being punished for is precisely the kind of article we need them to be able to write. People are criticising the club for cracking the whip, calling them childish... don't forget that this deal was made both ways. To think that the paper is not at fault in any way for this is, in my eyes, entirely untrue. They made their bed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What deal? It's good practise to contact the stakeholders for comment if they're going to release an expose. They did this and the club asked them not to follow through with the article. The Gazette declined. Stinks of censorship by the club.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What deal? It's good practise to contact the stakeholders for comment if they're going to release an expose. They did this and the club asked them not to follow through with the article. The Gazette declined. Stinks of censorship by the club.

 

The Gazette, a couple of years ago now, commented on some kind of improved relationship with the club which lead to improved sources at the top. That kind of improved relationship surely doesn't just go one way. The Gazette end up with better connections, what did the club get out of it if not some unofficial deal to monitor and mediate?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe the club just thought it was best to let the Gazette bring the most crucial news instead of having to deal with rumours and national sensationalist press. I really struggle to think that a newspaper would allow a football club to censor their articles and tell them what they can and cannot print. The "agreement" would likely be something along the lines that the Gazette would contact the club for a comment on various stories which has worked fine for a number of years and now all of a sudden the club thinks they can censor the paper and instruct them not to print an article that is very relevant to the entire fanbase? There is obviously some truth the story in said article but the club would rather cover it up.

 

The club is obviously in their own right to do as they see fit, but they are going about it in a bad way and it's not reflecting well on the club. At least not as long as they won't explain themselves.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I mean Vickers, Tarrentire and maybe the whole sports section were at the clubs internal promotion party at Rockliffe like 14 months ago not sure they could get any more insider than that at the time. We can recall the Victoria Gibson comments stretching back a while that seemed to be aimed towards them but that aside it's pretty established they have a cosy relationship. I mean the Gazette stuck the knife in well after it was obvious we were down they held off and held off then convinced everyone Agnew had a great chance of getting the job and how beloved he is by the chairman down I mean if they were being objective they could have easily cut out all of the puff pieces they ran on Agnew but clearly they were being fed a line and strung it out.

 

If what's upset them is all the 'reveals' about Orta and Karanka then that seems a tad sensitive considering if the knifing didn't happen on Orta/cliques/Karanka there'd be more attention on Bausor/Gibson etc them hatchetjobs by Tarrentire/Vickers did them a favour. It's bad PR for almost everyone here but does anyone really care that we won't get next day write-ups on the Gazette's post match interviews with Monk? I think we'll get by...

Link to post
Share on other sites

People are also constantly questioning why the club isn't going hard on any other paper other than the Gazette. Perhaps because the Gazette is the only one where it feels it can somewhat legitimately be disappointed in their output...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Positive exposure

 

Including when it's not earned? Including when it's not the view of the paper?

 

I think there's generally a balanced view, if not a slightly positive spin. I don't think it' borders on the sycophantic personally but i can so why many think it does given the Teesside mentality of playing everything down.

 

The Gazette is not a PR machine for the club, i think thats become pretty clear over the last few months.

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
×
×
  • Create New...