Next time you feel ashamed or let down by our support..

[andy steel 0]

I think I rather prefer the overkill approach of our media; it's so outrageous that it's easy to expose as fallacy and bias. A real, concerted approach, which concentrated solely on our all too real problems while ignoring those of others, and used some intelligent, sophisticated tactics would be a nightmare to counter, given the media's control of major outlets.

 

As it is, crushing the pitiful forays and squibs of the likes of Spiers is child's play.

[Bluedell 5,356]

I think I rather prefer the overkill approach of our media; it's so outrageous that it's easy to expose as fallacy and bias. A real, concerted approach, which concentrated solely on our all too real problems while ignoring those of others, and used some intelligent, sophisticated tactics would be a nightmare to counter, given the media's control of major outlets.

 

As it is, crushing the pitiful forays and squibs of the likes of Spiers is child's play.

 

90% of the people who read Spiers don't realise that he's got an agenda, and will take what he says at face value.

 

If you tell a lie often enough it is believed.

 

In case you haven't noticed there is a real, concerted approach, which concentrated solely on our all too real problems while ignoring those of others going on. Reread 26th of Foot's post as an example of the past week.

 

It's going on week-in, week-out and needs to be countered.

Edited August 13, 2009 by Bluedell
Typing too fast and not checking for typos

[maineflyer 0]

90% of the people who read Spiers don't realsie that he's got an agenda, and will ake what he says at face value.

 

If you tell a lie often enough it is believed.

 

In case you haven't noticed there is a real, concerted approach, which concentrated solely on our all too real problems while ignoring those of others going on. Rweread 26th of Foot's post as an example of the past week.

 

It's going on wek-in, week-out and needs to be countered.

 

Many now recognise the problem exists, a few believe something needs to be done but who is actually doing anything to counter it?

[Bluedell 5,356]

Many now recognise the problem exists, a few believe something needs to be done but who is actually doing anything to counter it?

 

I'm sure that there is stuff going on quietly in the background.

[andy steel 0]

No, I hadn't noticed. I had clocked some fairly simple types doing the usual 'aren't Rangers awful' stuff. But I've heard it all before, and I don't rate it as any more than the usual piss and wind.

 

To be fair, unless the likes of Stephen Fry, Clive James and Gore Vidal issue a statement denouncing us as beyond the pale, I shall continue to treat as trifling those who take a pop.

[Bluedell 5,356]

No, I hadn't noticed. I had clocked some fairly simple types doing the usual 'aren't Rangers awful' stuff. But I've heard it all before, and I don't rate it as any more than the usual piss and wind.

 

To be fair, unless the likes of Stephen Fry, Clive James and Gore Vidal issue a statement denouncing us as beyond the pale, I shall continue to treat as trifling those who take a pop.

 

So because people have bad-mouthed the club and its support in the past, it's OK for them to continue to do so?

 

I guess I just don't get where people are coming from when they appear not to care about how we are portrayed. The problem is that SDM is one of them.

[andy steel 0]

As I said, it would depend on the chastiser. After all, Hugh Keevins is never going to do anything other than slag us, but I certainly won't lose any sleep over it. Despite their best efforts, as a regular chastisee I can say it has zero effect on me.

[craig 5,199]

As I said, it would depend on the chastiser. After all, Hugh Keevins is never going to do anything other than slag us, but I certainly won't lose any sleep over it. Despite their best efforts, as a regular chastisee I can say it has zero effect on me.

 

But therein lies the problem. Many more like you say the same thing, which is "it has zero effect on me". They consider only themselves. What about the reputation of the club ? That is the crux of it Andy. As BD says, the more a lie is told without being rebuffed the likelier it is that it eventually emerges as truth.

 

If the majority of the support share your own apathy then what happens is that eventually the biased media turn their lies into truths, the majority of Rangers fans say "doesnt affect me" and all the while the club's reputation is tarnished.

 

Now, that said, it is the responsibility of the club to rebuff all the lies and mis-truths. Just what did happen to that wonderful PR company that SDM lauded so much ?

[andy steel 0]

I can't agree with that.

 

The reputation of the club is such that it can easily withstand the calumnies and brickbats of those whom, I would say, can be shown to be acting out their own adolescent revenge fantasies. Given that in a Scottish context, we know where we stand and so does everyone else - by that I mean, 99% of Scots who are interested will know eg Gerry McNee is a tim and can discount anything he says as biased - the issue is a dead duck imo.

 

In a UK context, no-one cares. If they did, and there was a sophisticated campaign, I would maybe take it seriously depending on the participants. But there isn't, I doubt there will be, so I remain sanguine.

 

And I must protest, mildly. Not taking halfwits seriously cannot, by any stretch of the imagination, be described as 'apathy.' I would prefer 'maturity', but of course, I'm biased.

[Norris Cole 0]

I can't agree with that.

 

The reputation of the club is such that it can easily withstand the calumnies and brickbats of those whom, I would say, can be shown to be acting out their own adolescent revenge fantasies. Given that in a Scottish context, we know where we stand and so does everyone else - by that I mean, 99% of Scots who are interested will know eg Gerry McNee is a tim and can discount anything he says as biased - the issue is a dead duck imo.

 

In a UK context, no-one cares. If they did, and there was a sophisticated campaign, I would maybe take it seriously depending on the participants. But there isn't, I doubt there will be, so I remain sanguine.

 

And I must protest, mildly. Not taking halfwits seriously cannot, by any stretch of the imagination, be described as 'apathy.' I would prefer 'maturity', but of course, I'm biased.

 

How do you explain the modern day phenomenon of Rangers fans introducing themselves with: "I'm a Rangers fan, but I'm no a bigot"?