Jump to content

 

 

Pacific Quay Musings?


Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, DMAA said:

I clarified in my response that I meant banned from press conferences

 

No journalist would agree with that though, as I said a few pages back you only have to read about the Kaitlan Collins controversy to see that all jounralists will alwways view a ban on a journalist attending press conference as a violation of the rights of the press.

 

We're going round in circles, but for me the bottom line is we need to deal with the problem of unfair coverage in a way which doesn't mean we don't get any coverage at all. It's detrimental to the club and the fans.

 

We do get coverage. Far better coverage and more extensive coverage than the BBC will ever offer. It's called Rangers TV, the Rangers website, Rangers Facebook, Rangers Twitter and the Rangers You Tube account. These could always be improved but they're there, they're well priced and they're infinitely better informed than the BBC. All you need to do is use them. Forget the BBC and the current dispute. It isn't going to be resolved by anything Rangers does and the BBC certainly won't be changing their ways. Move on, the past is over. Like the BBC, the dispute is now irrelevant. The only thing that matters is that we have an effective and accessible communication with our club.

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, gaspard said:

It has been clearly explained in this thread that the BBC are not banned from Ibrox or the Hummel, one individual has had his press privileges withdrawn.

 

If anybody thinks that some type of truce and reconciliation, without a complete climb-down from us, can be negotiated with the BBC they are deluding themselves..............

Marvellous summary.

Link to post
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Bill said:

We do get coverage. Far better coverage and more extensive coverage than the BBC will ever offer. It's called Rangers TV, the Rangers website, Rangers Facebook, Rangers Twitter and the Rangers You Tube account. These could always be improved but they're there, they're well priced and they're infinitely better informed than the BBC. All you need to do is use them. Forget the BBC and the current dispute. It isn't going to be resolved by anything Rangers does and the BBC certainly won't be changing their ways. Move on, the past is over. Like the BBC, the dispute is now irrelevant. The only thing that matters is that we have an effective and accessible communication with our club.

I agree 100% with this.

 

As I've mentioned before, the BBC is only relevant to a small minority of people these days.  That's not to say that it doesn't have a big impact on that minority's ability to follow Rangers.  I appreciate it does, but let's not be fooled into thinking that it has any material impact on our club or the vast majority of supporters (or potential supporters).

 

If you asked the majority of fans how they communicate with the club, I'd imagine only a handful would mention the BBC at all.  It's a prehistoric organisation, run by dinosaurs.  It's being quickly followed by mainstream media which has also become an irrelevance.  If you want to communicate, use Twitter, Facebook, forums like this, or podcasts.  Rangers TV does an amazingly job, and I just hope they find a way to broadcast via radio too because that could become an amazing service for bears all over the world too.  People don't use radios anymore, but they do listen to radio via their smartphones.

 

I don't want the club to waste a single second trying to resolve things with the BBC.  I just want them to focus on the things that make a difference to our club.  The BBC will be extinct soon anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Gaffer said:

I don't want the club to waste a single second trying to resolve things with the BBC.  I just want them to focus on the things that make a difference to our club.  The BBC will be extinct soon anyway.

As someone stated before, like it or not the BBC has reach (and influence) to 500k punters. For next to zero expense to club. Maybe more on certain occasions. 

 

Two points. 1, it'd be daft to ignore this. 2, By ignoring we hand all of that machinery to our enemies, for free (effectively as it is now).

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bill said:

We do get coverage. Far better coverage and more extensive coverage than the BBC will ever offer

I obviously meant no coverage from the BBC

 

43 minutes ago, Gaffer said:

but let's not be fooled into thinking that it has any material impact on our club or the vast majority of supporters (or potential supporters)

Looks like a few of us will just have to agree to disagree on this, I think you're way off on that one but there's no benefit in repeating reasons given on previous pages

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, DMAA said:

I clarified in my response that I meant banned from press conferences

 

No journalist would agree with that though, as I said a few pages back you only have to read about the Kaitlan Collins controversy to see that all jounralists will alwways view a ban on a journalist attending press conference as a violation of the rights of the press.

 

We're going round in circles, but for me the bottom line is we need to deal with the problem of unfair coverage in a way which doesn't mean we don't get any coverage at all. It's detrimental to the club and the fans.

 

Why didn't that happen when Fergie or Redknapp ban BBC then ?  They sent alternative reporters....

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Bill said:

We do get coverage. Far better coverage and more extensive coverage than the BBC will ever offer. It's called Rangers TV, the Rangers website, Rangers Facebook, Rangers Twitter and the Rangers You Tube account. These could always be improved but they're there, they're well priced and they're infinitely better informed than the BBC. All you need to do is use them. Forget the BBC and the current dispute. It isn't going to be resolved by anything Rangers does and the BBC certainly won't be changing their ways. Move on, the past is over. Like the BBC, the dispute is now irrelevant. The only thing that matters is that we have an effective and accessible communication with our club.

Can you imagine 100,000 Bears (just HALF of those that attended Manchester..... no Suville calculator needed) paying a fiver a month for RTV ??  That would be an additional 6 million quid a year into the club's coffers.....  Would be a very sizeable cash injection to the club.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, trublusince1982 said:

Wish the club would release some viewing figures and income for RTV. Just cause I'm nosy

I also wish RTV would consult more often with it's audience to make sure it develops in the best direction.

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, craig said:

Can you imagine 100,000 Bears (just HALF of those that attended Manchester..... no Suville calculator needed) paying a fiver a month for RTV ??  That would be an additional 6 million quid a year into the club's coffers.....  Would be a very sizeable cash injection to the club.

As trublusince1982 said above, I'd love to see subscription data.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.