Interesting article from the Independant
(I must say that compared to The Guardian or The Times, this papers falls less often in the trap of misinterpretations. I don't even talk about the tabloids, they do it on purpose !)
Glenn Moore: Old Trafford v The Press: The split that is shaming the Premiership
26 December 2002
One recent Sunday morning a Manchester United press officer was found reading, with growing bemusement, an 'exclusive' interview with one of the club's most high-profile players. "Where's this come from? I know he's not spoken to them," was the reaction.
Elsewhere in the room was a mildly exasperated journalist. "I don't know how he can call that exclusive. I ran the same interview last week," he said. This hack then admitted he had acquired the interview from a contact in Italy who had lifted it from the original version in the player's home country.
Four versions, written in three languages, published in two continents. No wonder United's press officer found it hard to source. Nor, by this stage, would the player have recognised much of what he was claimed to have 'said last night'.
This is not an isolated case. With very few exceptions every 'exclusive' Manchester United player interview you read in a national newspaper is anything but. It has been usually been 'lifted' from either United's in-house media, player websites, or foreign newspapers, which are often unreliable themselves. The exceptions are when the player is paid, either directly (Rio Ferdinand's column with The Sun) or through a sponsor. Ruud van Nistelrooy's recent Sun interview was arranged with Nike – the payback being a plug for their new boots. Any major magazine interview will be accompanied by pictures of the player sporting either clothing or footwear advertising Nike, adidas, Umbro, diadora, etc.
United claim it is not club policy to deny individual interviews but, recently challenged to produce any member of the first team squad for a one-to-one with The Independent, similar to the one recently conducted with Arsenal's Thierry Henry, the press office were unable to.
There are two main reasons for this. One is Sir Alex Ferguson. The only manager who will not conduct post-match print interviews, he might, if he is in the mood, have a brief word with TV after United's match at The Riverside today but he will then get straight on to the bus. This contravenes Premiership guidelines but the league admit he is "a law unto himself". Uefa, incidentally, insist he attends Champions' League press conferences and Ferguson obeys.
The other reason is that many players have had bad experiences with the press seeing their words 'twirled' (exaggerated) and a damaging headline added. This was Ferguson's theme when he recently addressed a Uefa conference on the media at Old Trafford. In a nutshell Ferguson, supported by Peter Schmeichel, said he neither respected nor trusted the written press and discouraged his players from talking to them.
This outlook has pervaded the whole club. The day after Ferguson spoke the club denied Quinton Fortune had broken his leg. Then the press office wonder why reporters do not check stories out with them anymore.
Does this matter? Should anyone but journalists care? Yes and some reasons were subsequently outlined at the conference by Markus Horwick, the press officer at Bayern Munich. He began by commenting it was a good thing Ferguson and Schmeichel had left as they would have "needed to be held down with ropes" when they heard what he had to say.
He said Bayern insist their players conduct interviews because the media represent the fans and sponsors who pay players' wages. Bayern also recognise a club of their magnitude will be written about whether they assist the media or not. By establishing a relationship they hope to influence the nature of that coverage. While they do not get an easy ride from the German media they do not suffer the gleeful negativity which surrounds much coverage of United.
United are by no means the only difficult club to deal with, many influential people in Premiership clubs regard the press with contempt, happily leaving reporters waiting for hours. At which point it must be admitted the media have brought much of this upon ourselves. The practice of lifting and twirling stories is widespread especially, but not exclusively, in the tabloids. A mildly expressed criticism becomes 'fumed'; a throwaway quip is spun into an issue; controversial, even malicious angles are sought.
This is primarily a consequence of the competitive nature of our newspapers, particularly among the red-tops, but in itself this would not have caused the current chasm. In Italy and Spain players are ruthlessly criticised, and stories twirled, but the symbiotic relationship survives. In Britain, though, footballers' growing celebrity has led to increasing coverage of their private lives with many players being 'turned over', especially by kiss-and-tell stories. Unsurprisingly the victims, and their team-mates, tend not to differentiate between news and sports reporters. Journalists become people to beware of. At the top level the personal relationships of the past, forged over a pint or ten, or a night clubbing, have gone and not just because of changing lifestyles and the earnings disparity.
This is sad, for the game as well as individuals. Even with the spread of media outlets – which in itself causes problems through sheer weight of demand – the agenda is set by the print media. The less contact there is between players and press the less understanding there will be. It is also short-sighted. The continual spotlight on David Seaman's failures has as much to do with his refusal to talk to print journalists (unless money is involved) as his error in Shizuoka. Accessible players are not spared criticism, but they might get the benefit of doubt.
Will things improve? The Football Writers Association are conducting meetings with the Premiership in a mutual attempt to ameliorate the situation. We will never achieve the American position, where the media, 'the ticket-seller', is invited in but a rapproachment is necessary for all parties. Football may sell itself at present but when the boom subsides it will need friends
(I must say that compared to The Guardian or The Times, this papers falls less often in the trap of misinterpretations. I don't even talk about the tabloids, they do it on purpose !)
Glenn Moore: Old Trafford v The Press: The split that is shaming the Premiership
26 December 2002
One recent Sunday morning a Manchester United press officer was found reading, with growing bemusement, an 'exclusive' interview with one of the club's most high-profile players. "Where's this come from? I know he's not spoken to them," was the reaction.
Elsewhere in the room was a mildly exasperated journalist. "I don't know how he can call that exclusive. I ran the same interview last week," he said. This hack then admitted he had acquired the interview from a contact in Italy who had lifted it from the original version in the player's home country.
Four versions, written in three languages, published in two continents. No wonder United's press officer found it hard to source. Nor, by this stage, would the player have recognised much of what he was claimed to have 'said last night'.
This is not an isolated case. With very few exceptions every 'exclusive' Manchester United player interview you read in a national newspaper is anything but. It has been usually been 'lifted' from either United's in-house media, player websites, or foreign newspapers, which are often unreliable themselves. The exceptions are when the player is paid, either directly (Rio Ferdinand's column with The Sun) or through a sponsor. Ruud van Nistelrooy's recent Sun interview was arranged with Nike – the payback being a plug for their new boots. Any major magazine interview will be accompanied by pictures of the player sporting either clothing or footwear advertising Nike, adidas, Umbro, diadora, etc.
United claim it is not club policy to deny individual interviews but, recently challenged to produce any member of the first team squad for a one-to-one with The Independent, similar to the one recently conducted with Arsenal's Thierry Henry, the press office were unable to.
There are two main reasons for this. One is Sir Alex Ferguson. The only manager who will not conduct post-match print interviews, he might, if he is in the mood, have a brief word with TV after United's match at The Riverside today but he will then get straight on to the bus. This contravenes Premiership guidelines but the league admit he is "a law unto himself". Uefa, incidentally, insist he attends Champions' League press conferences and Ferguson obeys.
The other reason is that many players have had bad experiences with the press seeing their words 'twirled' (exaggerated) and a damaging headline added. This was Ferguson's theme when he recently addressed a Uefa conference on the media at Old Trafford. In a nutshell Ferguson, supported by Peter Schmeichel, said he neither respected nor trusted the written press and discouraged his players from talking to them.
This outlook has pervaded the whole club. The day after Ferguson spoke the club denied Quinton Fortune had broken his leg. Then the press office wonder why reporters do not check stories out with them anymore.
Does this matter? Should anyone but journalists care? Yes and some reasons were subsequently outlined at the conference by Markus Horwick, the press officer at Bayern Munich. He began by commenting it was a good thing Ferguson and Schmeichel had left as they would have "needed to be held down with ropes" when they heard what he had to say.
He said Bayern insist their players conduct interviews because the media represent the fans and sponsors who pay players' wages. Bayern also recognise a club of their magnitude will be written about whether they assist the media or not. By establishing a relationship they hope to influence the nature of that coverage. While they do not get an easy ride from the German media they do not suffer the gleeful negativity which surrounds much coverage of United.
United are by no means the only difficult club to deal with, many influential people in Premiership clubs regard the press with contempt, happily leaving reporters waiting for hours. At which point it must be admitted the media have brought much of this upon ourselves. The practice of lifting and twirling stories is widespread especially, but not exclusively, in the tabloids. A mildly expressed criticism becomes 'fumed'; a throwaway quip is spun into an issue; controversial, even malicious angles are sought.
This is primarily a consequence of the competitive nature of our newspapers, particularly among the red-tops, but in itself this would not have caused the current chasm. In Italy and Spain players are ruthlessly criticised, and stories twirled, but the symbiotic relationship survives. In Britain, though, footballers' growing celebrity has led to increasing coverage of their private lives with many players being 'turned over', especially by kiss-and-tell stories. Unsurprisingly the victims, and their team-mates, tend not to differentiate between news and sports reporters. Journalists become people to beware of. At the top level the personal relationships of the past, forged over a pint or ten, or a night clubbing, have gone and not just because of changing lifestyles and the earnings disparity.
This is sad, for the game as well as individuals. Even with the spread of media outlets – which in itself causes problems through sheer weight of demand – the agenda is set by the print media. The less contact there is between players and press the less understanding there will be. It is also short-sighted. The continual spotlight on David Seaman's failures has as much to do with his refusal to talk to print journalists (unless money is involved) as his error in Shizuoka. Accessible players are not spared criticism, but they might get the benefit of doubt.
Will things improve? The Football Writers Association are conducting meetings with the Premiership in a mutual attempt to ameliorate the situation. We will never achieve the American position, where the media, 'the ticket-seller', is invited in but a rapproachment is necessary for all parties. Football may sell itself at present but when the boom subsides it will need friends