Pacific Quay Musings?

[Bill 13,717]

1 hour ago, DMAA said:

Again a bit harsh Bill. Especially conssidering this is a statement of fact and not opinion. Reinstate press privileges and the BBC end their boycott, that’s what they’ve said. 

How interesting you should choose to see things from a BBC perspective. Try this instead...

 

If the BBC gave assurances to Rangers, in public, that it would apply the same standards of reporting as it does to all other clubs, then Rangers would be in a position where it would no longer need to withdraw press privileges from anyone. The only reason for not seeing it this way is if you think Rangers acted unjustifiably in the first place. I don't.

[the gunslinger 3,366]

Rangers should set about proving the bbc are reporting from rangers tv. Then seek arrests or damages etc. 

[stewarty 1,876]

10 hours ago, the gunslinger said:

Rangers should set about proving the bbc are reporting from rangers tv. Then seek arrests or damages etc. 

I may be wrong but I think the BBC may have access to other feeds that are provided as standard to broadcast partners.  It could be interesting to test the waters on that though

[buster. 4,808]

Taking different parts of what various posters have said and puttting them together could provide a solution to the immediate problem of coverage.

 

DMAA talks about reinstating press privilages to McLaughlin and John mentioned both the club and BBC Scotland agreeing on statements that basically save face for both. 

 

That would mean renewed coverage and the important benefits that go with that and deny those individuals who work on BBC Scotland the vacum to air their increasingly open contempt (often by saying nothing at all). It wouldn't change the spots of the usual suspects but as Stewarty says, we are looking at the medium term to make significant in-roads there but you have to start somewhere.

 

Bill says that the BBC is like the Arc and are becoming less important. I don't agree, they are by far the biggest broadcaster and are generally ahead of the digital curve wrt competitors. Clubs do a lot of their own coverage but there are many who don't want to always hear a one-sided take on things and for that matter, take an interest in what is happening in the rest of the football world.

 

Bottomline, we as a business need to look to the future and not always play the confrontational game that if you do for too long will marginalise you. This is exactly what the Celtic-Minded want and how they are playing it.

 

That doesn't mean bending over, it means boxing clever and subtle, a little give and take. 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited September 28, 2018 by buster.

[stewarty 1,876]

I think @JohnMc also makes good points in that there is no clear winner on either side.  The reasons for the removal of McLaughlin's press privileges are perhaps not clear to everyone, thus making it easier for the BBC to trot out their "ongoing dispute" line.

 

At least part of the issues we have had are spiv related, in that previous club officials took umbrage at some areas of coverage as it reflected badly on them.

 

Another element thats maybe not been touched on is our PR/Comms "Guru" Jim Traynor and the extent of the adversarial nature of our relationship with the BBC stemming from his own agenda.   Whilst that may have suited us back when we were fire fighting on all fronts, but I would question the value of it now.

 

It may not have been a priority up until this point, but now that we are starting to get back on track on the field and with much improved off-field operations, perhaps the Board can spend some time developing a comms and PR strategy that encompasses the development of our own media, including @Bill suggestion for our own radio station, but also removing potential barriers to our ability to work productively with key media partners, whoever they may be.

 

Part of that strategy for me would also be about lobbying the SPFL now in terms of the future of any rights deals and making sure we regain some leverage over the partners in terms of some of the contractual obligations they have, but also ensuring there is some method of such disputes being dealt with quickly, rather than having them rumble on like this for years.

[Bill 13,717]

Unfortunately, boxing clever means boxing clever, not just thinking we're boxing clever by adopting the much-loved appearance of reasonableness.

 

The sort of re-engagement with the BBC being suggested is facile and amounts to little more than being seen to do something. However, I'll willingly change my mind if even one of the proponents of re-engagement can provide a sliver of an iota of a morsel of evidence to suggest the BBC is in any way receptive to changing it's current attitude to Rangers. An attitude that we cannot prove is given huge momentum by the entrenched bigotry and personal loyalties of many of the editorial and frontline reporting staff at the BBC ... but which we know beyond doubt was one of the main reasons why the BBC so quickly initiated its current reporting policies and which is as profound today as it was then.

 

By all means box clever but don't make silly arses of yourselves or Rangers by thinking the BBC will be a willing or constructive partner to your actions. Negotiations without leverage are no negotiations at all.

Edited September 28, 2018 by Bill

[buster. 4,808]

6 minutes ago, Bill said:

Unfortunately, boxing clever means boxing clever, not just thinking we're boxing clever by adopting the much-loved appearance of reasonableness.

 

The sort of re-engagement with the BBC being suggested is facile and amounts to little more than being seen to do something. However, I'll willingly change my mind if even one of the proponents of re-engagement can provide a sliver of an iota of a morsel of evidence to suggest the BBC is in any way receptive to changing it's current attitude to Rangers. An attitude that we cannot prove is given huge momentum by the entrenched bigotry and personal loyalties of many of the editorial and frontline reporting staff at the BBC ... but which we know beyond doubt was one of the main reasons why the BBC so quickly initiated its current reporting policies and which is as profound today as it was then.

 

By all means box clever but don't make silly arses of yourselves or Rangers by thinking the BBC will be a willing or constructive partner to your actions. Negotiations without leverage are no negotiations at all.

There is no need to call some on here "silly arses" because they don't see things in the same way as you.

 

Just as a continuous confrontational war-footing from the club will not be in our best interests because in the long term it'll be us that lose. That isn't to say we don't 'battle' of occasion, there are several fronts currently open that mainly come from legacy issues.

 

Wrt to BBC Scotland, as I said previously an immediate solution of coverage doesn't change their spots but you have to start somewhere and look to make further inroads over time. Prolonging the current situation and that general approach indefinately will damage us more than it will them and is what the Celtic-Minded would like to see.

 

 

[stewarty 1,876]

I wouldn't downplay the impact of BBC influence from down south on BBC Scotland.  it seems to me that pressure is growing and that wont go on indefinitely.   So i'd argue our current stance is probably the right one in terms of holding our ground.  The more success Gerrard has, the harder it will be for PQ to justify what is happening.  

And for me, its a case if when they soften their stance, rather than if... we can then put into place other aspects of a wider PR and Comms strategy as I've suggested above.

 

If that makes me a silly arse, fair enough.

[Soulsonic5791 408]

.

 

Edited September 28, 2018 by Soulsonic5791

[Bill 13,717]

1 hour ago, buster. said:

There is no need to call some on here "silly arses" because they don't see things in the same way as you.

 

I didn't ... but if you feel so strongly that the cap fits then be my guest.