Pacific Quay Musings?

[JohnMc 2,463]

Genuine question, does anyone think Rangers PR department and Traynor in particular are doing a good job? I've some insight into how PR 'works' and fully accept that it's a bit like an iceberg in that you can see 20% of it but the other 80% you can't. But the Morelos interview translation is a farce, I've no idea who carried out the translation but this wasn't some mistranslation of a colloquialism, this was someone adding stuff Morelos simply didn't say. Who would do that, and why? Rangers must have sanctioned Morelos to do this interview, they must have known what the line of questioning was going to be and had a good idea what Morelos was going to say in reply. So I assume someone from Rangers was involved and sanctioned this. Morelos has been largely kept from the media, other than Rangers TV he's been conspicuous by his absence from the tabloids and broadcast media so I'm struggling to believe this wasn't agreed at a fairly high level at the club beforehand. Following the Morelos car story it's really not a great few days for us, and Morelos, who is entirely blameless is all of this, continues to be at the eye of a bad PR storm. 

Michael Stewart isn't daft, he's cultivated his 'shock-jock' straight talking, not afraid to upset people persona pretty well which is why he's in demand from broadcasters. Believe it or not people will listen to him, controversy brings listeners/viewers, far more than insight or considered opinion does. Them's the times we live in, folks. Stewart has a problem because he ignored his producer, who I suspect was shouting in his ear the other night not to slander Jim Traynor or the Daily Record or anyone else for that matter, and Stewart ignored them and carried on with his diatribe. That's actually a problem at the BBC, even in the sport's department ignoring the producer see's you being taken off air for a period of time. 

 

I'd be very surprised if anyone sues anyone else. Stewart will get a gig somewhere else, he'll continue to develop himself as the poor-man's Scottish fitba Rush Limbaugh instead of offering genuine insight into teams and players, he'll start quarrels and kick those he feels will further his persona. Scottish football is crying out for an authoritative voice, someone with genuine insights and understanding and who is capable of explaining the intricacies of the beautiful game to us ignorant fans. That person could have been Stewart, but it won't be. Realising his potential has always been a problem for Micheal Stewart. 

 

 

[Frankie 8,145]

Sky has taken responsibility for the Morelos interview farce.

 

However, there's no doubt IMO that someone at RFC was asleep at the wheel as well.

Stewart is a moron but he's a popular one amongst Scottish broadcast media.

[Bluedell 5,329]

22 minutes ago, JohnMc said:

Genuine question, does anyone think Rangers PR department and Traynor in particular are doing a good job?

 

 

I can't believe that there's anyone who thinks that.

 

My view has always been that Traynor helped King take over the club and He's kept on Traynor through loyalty and/or because he'll perform PR tasks for King himself (in a Murrayesque way), but not for what he does for the club

[craig 5,195]

1 hour ago, JohnMc said:

Genuine question, does anyone think Rangers PR department and Traynor in particular are doing a good job? I've some insight into how PR 'works' and fully accept that it's a bit like an iceberg in that you can see 20% of it but the other 80% you can't. But the Morelos interview translation is a farce, I've no idea who carried out the translation but this wasn't some mistranslation of a colloquialism, this was someone adding stuff Morelos simply didn't say. Who would do that, and why? Rangers must have sanctioned Morelos to do this interview, they must have known what the line of questioning was going to be and had a good idea what Morelos was going to say in reply. So I assume someone from Rangers was involved and sanctioned this. Morelos has been largely kept from the media, other than Rangers TV he's been conspicuous by his absence from the tabloids and broadcast media so I'm struggling to believe this wasn't agreed at a fairly high level at the club beforehand. Following the Morelos car story it's really not a great few days for us, and Morelos, who is entirely blameless is all of this, continues to be at the eye of a bad PR storm. 

Michael Stewart isn't daft, he's cultivated his 'shock-jock' straight talking, not afraid to upset people persona pretty well which is why he's in demand from broadcasters. Believe it or not people will listen to him, controversy brings listeners/viewers, far more than insight or considered opinion does. Them's the times we live in, folks. Stewart has a problem because he ignored his producer, who I suspect was shouting in his ear the other night not to slander Jim Traynor or the Daily Record or anyone else for that matter, and Stewart ignored them and carried on with his diatribe. That's actually a problem at the BBC, even in the sport's department ignoring the producer see's you being taken off air for a period of time. 

 

I'd be very surprised if anyone sues anyone else. Stewart will get a gig somewhere else, he'll continue to develop himself as the poor-man's Scottish fitba Rush Limbaugh instead of offering genuine insight into teams and players, he'll start quarrels and kick those he feels will further his persona. Scottish football is crying out for an authoritative voice, someone with genuine insights and understanding and who is capable of explaining the intricacies of the beautiful game to us ignorant fans. That person could have been Stewart, but it won't be. Realising his potential has always been a problem for Micheal Stewart. 

 

 

I'm biased, but I could listen to Kevin Thomson's footballing insights any time.  He is far, far better than Michael Stewart, he played to a higher standard than Michael Stewart, achieved more in the game than Michael Stewart and, importantly to me, he is impartial - has a fondness for Rangers despite being a Hibby, but will always call out deficiencies in the Rangers performances when he sees them.

 

That is why he is so well-liked.  People know he is being honest and without an agenda.  He's a millionaire in his own right so isn't driven by money - his drive is a determination to reach the top.

[T-1000 174]

2 minutes ago, craig said:

I'm biased, but I could listen to Kevin Thomson's footballing insights any time.  He is far, far better than Michael Stewart, he played to a higher standard than Michael Stewart, achieved more in the game than Michael Stewart and, importantly to me, he is impartial - has a fondness for Rangers despite being a Hibby, but will always call out deficiencies in the Rangers performances when he sees them.

 

That is why he is so well-liked.  People know he is being honest and without an agenda.  He's a millionaire in his own right so isn't driven by money - his drive is a determination to reach the top.

Is that you Kevin?  ?

[DMAA 3,603]

2 hours ago, JohnMc said:

Scottish football is crying out for an authoritative voice, someone with genuine insights and understanding and who is capable of explaining the intricacies of the beautiful game to us ignorant fans.

 

48 minutes ago, craig said:

I'm biased, but I could listen to Kevin Thomson's footballing insights any time

I'm biased too @craig but I actually think I would be perfect for the job.

[JohnMc 2,463]

2 hours ago, Bluedell said:

I can't believe that there's anyone who thinks that.

 

My view has always been that Traynor helped King take over the club and He's kept on Traynor through loyalty and/or because he'll perform PR tasks for King himself (in a Murrayesque way), but not for what he does for the club

That makes as much sense as any other theory I've heard. Traynor is a sport's journalist, not a PR professional. Many journalists make the change from one to the other, but simply knowing the media landscape isn't the same as understanding how PR works. 

[JohnMc 2,463]

1 hour ago, craig said:

I'm biased, but I could listen to Kevin Thomson's footballing insights any time.  He is far, far better than Michael Stewart, he played to a higher standard than Michael Stewart, achieved more in the game than Michael Stewart and, importantly to me, he is impartial - has a fondness for Rangers despite being a Hibby, but will always call out deficiencies in the Rangers performances when he sees them.

 

That is why he is so well-liked.  People know he is being honest and without an agenda.  He's a millionaire in his own right so isn't driven by money - his drive is a determination to reach the top.

I think I've only heard on the Si Ferry interviews, and no one looks good on them! ? 

[craig 5,195]

2 minutes ago, JohnMc said:

I think I've only heard on the Si Ferry interviews, and no one looks good on them! ? 

He's also very good on RTV and BT Sport when they have him on.

[Gonzo79 13,581]

I agree regarding Thomson, although he can be a bit dreary in his delivery (not that Stewart or Stephen Thompson are any better on that front).