craig 5,195 Posted October 8, 2009 Share Posted October 8, 2009 One indicator, IMO, of how someone can create a situation or perception is the reaction and who from. So if we ignore the OF Fans as we are, for the most part, biased I look to other fans. What is known is that both the term "f.enian" and "hun" have been deemed sectarian. I am not sure about how many fans of other clubs call the Tims by their pet name but I have friends who willingly and unwittingly will call me a hun. I am personally not offended but when I light-heartedly call them a bigot they laugh it off as if you are joking. Which of the two terms has been given more air time ? Yep, "f.enian". And I suspect that fewer fans of other clubs call them by that name but not so many will stop callung us huns due to the lower level of press coverage. That is a telling sign to me. And if we continue to have the "ostrich" approach then regardless of this being truth or, in 99% of the time with Speirs, lies the shit WILL stick and become truth. We, and the club, will be ostracised as the only bigots. We know that they are more bigotted than we are but you already see this trend creeping in. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexscottislegend 2,057 Posted October 8, 2009 Share Posted October 8, 2009 wrapped around the fish supper of irrelevance in the chippy of cyclopia.I did enjoy a frisson of pleasure in a Manchester pub, when, being hailed as 'another Nazi!' (in a jovial manner, if that's possible) I recounted at some length the Communist Manifesto to an increasingly desperate and bored group of regulars. Their luck was out, though...the way to the door was blocked by a sea of blue. So even if Spiers had a constituency in England (which he doesn't) and even if he had some influence in Scotland (which he doesn't) the simple answer to his misinformation is the truth. My award for the metaphor of the year. Brilliant! 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
biggordy 0 Posted October 8, 2009 Share Posted October 8, 2009 I believe the people of the Republic cringe when they hear of such goings on in the Scottish media. They, like most civilised countries, like to be liked. Spiers' one man mission to have everyone across the religious divide to be at each others throats merely stirs up hatred by association. ie. celtic, Ireland, Catholicism. He, in his position as "sports writer" for a national newspaper, has taken sensationalism to a new level. By his biased reporting he has somehow managed to anger everyone here and abroad, as well as portray Scottish/Irish Catholics as poor wee innocent victims of the nasty, jack booted West of Scotland, Rangers supporting Protestants. This person has to be stopped before it reaches frenzy level amongst those inclined and more people get seriously injured (or worse) all because of his mock outrage. Excluding him from Ibrox would be a start because he appears not to be there to report on the football. His pass should be confiscated immediately even if only on the grounds that has can no longer be considered as a "sports journalist" 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Spliff 0 Posted October 8, 2009 Share Posted October 8, 2009 Recent Media Articles News - Assembly News Two recent media articles have caused much concern for Rangers fans. The first was an article by Michael Walker in the Daily Mail on 2 October and the second was an article by Graham Spiers in The Times on 5 October. Colleagues in the Rangers Supporters Trust have liaised with the Assembly and the action taken is fully supported by the Assembly. In the case of the Daily Mail, there has been direct communication with Michael Walker to the effect that he has been "sussed" and Rangers fans will look elsewhere for objective reporting. Walker has responded stating he made efforts to contact the Assemby (no record of any contact) as well as Ally McCoist, The Police Service of Northern Ireland, Strathclyde Police, Nil by Mouth and a Celtic Supporters Group but only had responses from Souness and Strathclyde Police. He stated he did not get the balance right in his article and "..should have made reference to the tiresome and offensive nature of some of Celtic fans' chanting..". He stated he would be in touch if he returned to the same subject. Doesn't excuse the tone of his article but at least he conceded he did not get it right! In the case of Spiers, given his previous record, the matter has been referred directly to the Club with a strong plea that "enough is enough" with this individual. There seems little to be gained by going public and crawling over old ground - there is clear evidence that this guy is out to damage us. Whatever happened to the notion that these guys are there to report on the match? The Assembly Committee will continue to try and improve media handling as we recognise how important it is to many fans. Our aim is to have a positive media relationship and promote the many good things that our fans can be proud of but we will work together with fans to tackle negative media where appropriate http://www.thebluenose.co.uk/news/assembly-news/recent-media-articles-20091007240/ 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig 5,195 Posted October 8, 2009 Share Posted October 8, 2009 This is the stuff that the club's PR consultants should be doing. Questions should be asked as to whether they are employed for the benefit of the club or for the sole benefit of the club's ex-chairman, and current CEO, when negative press is aired about them. If the latter the two individuals should be recompensing the club for the cost of said consultants. I hope that the club will listen to the recommendation of the Assembly in relation to Speirs. However, if they do, they need to pre-empt the odious little cretins rebuttal because we know it will be filled with tripe such as "I told you they were cowardly" or "they have banned me because I speak the truth". basically the club, if they have the balls to ban him, should put out a press release which explains why he is banned and also give specific instances (there are MANY) of when he is flat out lying. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andy steel 0 Posted October 8, 2009 Share Posted October 8, 2009 In the case of Spiers, given his previous record, the matter has been referred directly to the Club with a strong plea that "enough is enough" with this individual. There seems little to be gained by going public and crawling over old ground - there is clear evidence that this guy is out to damage us. Whatever happened to the notion that these guys are there to report on the match? I really am sorry to disagree with everyone else again - I'm not just saying that, I'm fed up being odd man out - but this part of the statement would be an open goal were it to be implemented. In particular the line 'this guy is out to damage us' can be swiftly turned on it's head to 'no, YOU are damaging Rangers, you just don't realise it.' I can't say I agree much with that sentence I've written, but it's what I would say were I GS. And the part about reporting only on the match is a bit thin; anyone who goes anywhere has a perfect right to say what they like about it, whether it be the weather or the half time cuppa. Spiers choses to concentrate on his milch-cow, namely driving sales and hits by writing mildy controversial nonsense. We can't tell people what to write, whether we like their effluent or not. It's easy for me to sit here and criticise, I just wish we could get out some watertight chastisement of yer man rather than what sounds a bit like whinging. He's an easy target, let's hit him! That apart, well done to them for trying. That sounds mean and patronising, it isn't meant to be. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super_Ally 0 Posted October 8, 2009 Share Posted October 8, 2009 I really am sorry to disagree with everyone else again - I'm not just saying that, I'm fed up being odd man out - but this part of the statement would be an open goal were it to be implemented. In particular the line 'this guy is out to damage us' can be swiftly turned on it's head to 'no, YOU are damaging Rangers, you just don't realise it.' I can't say I agree much with that sentence I've written, but it's what I would say were I GS. And the part about reporting only on the match is a bit thin; anyone who goes anywhere has a perfect right to say what they like about it, whether it be the weather or the half time cuppa. Spiers choses to concentrate on his milch-cow, namely driving sales and hits by writing mildy controversial nonsense. We can't tell people what to write, whether we like their effluent or not. It's easy for me to sit here and criticise, I just wish we could get out some watertight chastisement of yer man rather than what sounds a bit like whinging. He's an easy target, let's hit him! That apart, well done to them for trying. That sounds mean and patronising, it isn't meant to be. I'm sorry that's bullshit. It's gone to far with his made crusade and it's time for sanctions. Amidst all your guff about why he should be allowed to foist his agenda on us you have forgotten that the aim of his profession is to report the news in an unbiased manner. The fact that many/most dont manage to achieve this is not reason enough for Speirs to not even try. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zappa 0 Posted October 8, 2009 Author Share Posted October 8, 2009 Amidst all your guff about why he should be allowed to foist his agenda on us you have forgotten that the aim of his profession is to report the news in an unbiased manner. The fact that many/most dont manage to achieve this is not reason enough for Speirs to not even try. GS doesn't try to remain unbiased because it suits the people he's writing for. It's controversy for the sake of selling newspapers & website hits. It wouldn't surprise me in the slightest if he was literally told to write certain controversial articles. If his editors & their superiors weren't perfectly happy with his work that gets published, it simply wouldn't be published, but they know fine well that they'll not only get away with it, but most likely promote income from their various media & they know that 'popular' or 'controversial' articles & content can massively help in selling their product. If GS's editors were under direct instruction from their superiors to ensure their company only printed or published unbiased media they wouldn't be doing their jobs properly in the eyes of their bosses. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zappa 0 Posted October 9, 2009 Author Share Posted October 9, 2009 religious divide Sorry to quote only these two words, but I've done it because they're so pertinent & important. It has to be understood eventually that certain people in the world actually want to fuel & even create/manufacture such divides as they & their kind have always done. These are our real enemies. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norris Cole 0 Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 What is even more disturbing than Queersie continuing his attacks is that he wouldn't have written this article had his team won on Sunday. Which immediately has any sane person questioning his motives. As for "cowardly Rangers turn a blind eye to bigotry" - in the last couple of years, one half of the Old Firm has admitted they have a problem. The other half introduced rebel tunes over the PA. All that said, the F.T.P. stuff doesn't help us in the slightest. It's been a long, long time since I saw anyone who wasn't a ned shout it. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.