He's a disgrace. Fancy buying pasties from Greggs. With his money he could have them droned in from Ye Olde Pastie Shoppe in Bolton. Or borrow Pep's helicopter and nip over there himself.
The Media and their treatment of Raheem Sterling | Agrees new 5 year deal
- Thread starter VanGaalEra
- Start date
Is this the press having a dig at Sterling, or is this people trying to pretend the press are having a dig at Sterling?
Why is anyone going to think less of him for shopping in Primark? I read it more as trying to make him relatable. I shop in Primark, my missus worked in Primark for several years. Are you suggesting this degrades us as people in some way?
Fine until he wanted to leave, and he/his agent handled that really badly. That's where it became a soap opera
Years ago the press tried to claim that he had several 'babymamas' (jamaican/black stereotype), they have an obsession with his spending habits;
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ling-shows-eye-bargain-just-like-rest-us.html
https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/la...lary-new-million-house-eats-Greggs-Poundworld
https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/la...buys-Knutsford-mansion-Pep-Guardiola-BPL-news
https://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/raheem-sterling-adds-impressive-haul-9194103
Basically it all adds up to a stew of unnecessary attention and distraction, you see this kind of behaviour aimed at black players much more frequently than white players - and its usually found in America (see: Laura Ingram's "shut up and dribble" quirk aimed at LeBron James the other week for example)
This idea that if you're young, rich and black - there's a duality;
1 - you should be happy, therefore stick to sports
2 - you aren't deserving of what you've got, therefore it comes with the territory to be a scapegoat.
This article sums it up quite well
https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...e-should-take-our-hats-off-to-raheem-sterling
But there's others;
https://www.tifofootball.com/features/media-complicit-latest-assault-raheem-sterling/
http://klickitout.org/bobby-gardiner-on-media-treatment-of-raheem-sterling/
https://www.irishtimes.com/sport/so...-sterling-criticism-is-not-football-1.2706735
https://www.newstatesman.com/politi...ish-football-clear-our-newspapers-well-stands
If it was a one off then yeah, maybe, but there's been an absolute shitload of articles for years criticising Sterling for either being cheap, and/or spending too much (occasionally literally in the same article).
I'm not going to click the article to say what tone the author is writing in, but it's pretty difficult to separate it from that pattern.
Daily mail ain’t the best of sources as they always do this type of shit.
Yesterday they wrote article about a former eastenders actress who is back on the booze and clearly doesn’t look right. They also included a grand total of 57 pictures of her in the article. Pathetic really.
So I’m not gonna feel sorry for Raheem because atleast he ain’t vulnerable or needs help. I doubt anyone gives a feck if he goes to Greggs.
Yesterday they wrote article about a former eastenders actress who is back on the booze and clearly doesn’t look right. They also included a grand total of 57 pictures of her in the article. Pathetic really.
So I’m not gonna feel sorry for Raheem because atleast he ain’t vulnerable or needs help. I doubt anyone gives a feck if he goes to Greggs.
Again, how is him shopping at Primark a criticism?
Do you see this as a criticism of a person? If not, why are you pretending it is one?
Did you only read the first half of the first sentence of my post?
Before the narrative shifted Sterling used to be an absolute meme of a footballer 
Yes but you have admitted to not even reading the article.
You also don't explain in any way how saying someone shopping at Primark constitutes having some kind of agenda against them.
If you try really hard to pretend there is an agenda you will always find one. Next time he shops at Primark there might not be an article, then you can claim it's part of an agenda against him because the papers don't want people knowing he isn't too stuck up to shop there.
There not trying to make him relatable. The employ people to trawl through famous people's social media accounts in order to generate content. It's a content hungry world we live in.
All the tabloid websites are full of this type of crap.
There's nothing to "pretend" there's an agenda. Just because no racial insults have been thrown about doesn't mean something isn't racist.
It's not about this individual time of him shopping at Primark.
It's the fact that last week he bought his sister a house, the week before that he's in Greggs, the week before that he's in Poundland, this week he's in Primark - each time telling us how much he earns.
It fuels a disturbing stance as if footballers aren't allowed to be people.
Then when he makes a mistake on the pitch, because he's human, people start throwing about "he gets paid millions to kick a ball about and cant do x", which leads to incidents like in December last year where he was racially assaulted.
These things don't happen by coincidence.
What makes it sinister is that these very same 'journalists' years ago used to publicly write that he had multiple kids from different mothers, and printed stories about him being an absent & irresponsible father. After that they tried to claim he had some sort of drug addiction to 'hippy crack'. After that they attributed quotes to him that he didn't make.
Then when he gets his move to City they print an article which states exactly how much money he is going to earn while you are reading that article.
It's disgusting, and it's a clear agenda.
You may not see it, or care for it - but it's not some new unheard of phenomenon - the way the media treat him is abhorrent, talking as if it's only limited to where he shops is surface level and completely misses the undertones of the articles.
Well yeah, but it's called social media because it's there for people to trawl through If they so wish. The idea it's just Sterling this happens to, or that it's part of some orchestrated campaign against him...or more specifically that saying "he shops at Primark" is part of said campaign, is bizarre.
I mean is there some implication that this is racist or something? I don't get it. It's a piece of nothing information. Literally no even remotely reasonable person is going to read it and lessen their opinion of Sterling.
I literally explained how it forms part of a long series of unnecessary press fixation on what Sterling is or isn't spending his money on. You're the only one fixating on the primark angle of it.
I mean ffs the article itself literally lists almost every single one of them (thanks for making me give this gutter journalism a click):
And lets also not forget that whilst this article may be saying that Sterling buying his mum a house is proof of a 'generous side' now he was absolutely hammered for it at the time:
http://www.football365.com/news/sterling-furious-after-criticism-over-mums-house
@noodlehair enjoys reading about where Sterling shops, apparently.
There is obviously an agenda against him. And there is another thing: media/fans dont accept to be proved wrong when they already made their mind about a player. You see this all the time.
Not really. This is something that happens to all footballers and celebrities in general. If Wayne Rooney shopped in Primark, it would be in the tabloids. If Andy Murray shopped in Primark, it would be in the tabloids. If some random Crystal Palace player bought a sandwich in Asda, there'd probably end up being an article about it somewhere. It's part of what comes with being a high profile sports professional.
If you make a mistake on the pitch, you will always get criticised...because you are paid specifically to perform on the pitch. If I do my job badly, I will get criticised. Whether I shop in Poundland or Waitrose, and whether anyone writes an article about it, wont make any difference to that. I really don't get the connection here.
Especially the whole racism angle. Does this kind of attention only happen to black footballers? Wayne Rooney couldn't even do uninteresting stuff in the privacy of his own home without the tabloids posting articles about it. Is Wayne Rooney black?
And again, what does shopping in Primark even have to do with someone's race, or whether they get criticise don a football pitch? When you shop in Primark do you notice it is dominated by a particular race of people? If someone you paid for a service from made a mistake in providing that service, would you be more likely to criticise them for it if you found out they shopped in Primark? What a bizarre person you would be if you did this.
Wasn't the person who assaulted Sterling some nutcase who had a history of violent and racially aggravated crimes? When you read the account of what happened alone, he clearly isn't a reasonable person, who decided, upon reading some articles about where Sterling buys his clothes, to become racist and violent. He was a racist and violent person who behaved like a violent racist.
I actually think it's slightly distasteful to relate the two things. It's hunting for racism and then creating it out of thin air. Almost trying to justify some raving racist lunatic because the paper told him to do it...even though they clearly didn't.
Spot on. It’s the same with Mayweather; the press love ‘humbling’ rich black people because apparently they’re ‘lucky’ to be where they are so they should never forget where they came from.
Newspapers get creepy obsessions with certain people, I dont read them but always see the headlines of the rags lying around in the staff room.
It's like once you're invovled in the slightest bit of controversy they will report everything about you no matter how irrelevant. They all loved Balotelli years ago, the sun got creepily obsessed with Jade Goody. The daily star is by far the weirdest one, they get obsessed with reporting on the most insignificant events. Danny Dyer is front page news at least once a week, they fecking love/hate him. I'd like to think its more to do with that than racism but I do try to be opitmistic.
It's like once you're invovled in the slightest bit of controversy they will report everything about you no matter how irrelevant. They all loved Balotelli years ago, the sun got creepily obsessed with Jade Goody. The daily star is by far the weirdest one, they get obsessed with reporting on the most insignificant events. Danny Dyer is front page news at least once a week, they fecking love/hate him. I'd like to think its more to do with that than racism but I do try to be opitmistic.
Just because it happens to other footballers & famous people doesn't mean that this agenda doesn't exist either.
Has Wayne Rooney been on the receiving end of having claims made about him having multiple kids?
Why do you think multiple journalists would have made up claims about Raheem having several kids from multiple people (considering the stereotype around Jamaicans & black fathers being absent) if race has nothing to do with it?
To be dismissive of this kind of thing, is woefully ignorant - and once again - just because no racist slurs have been thrown around, doesn't mean that racism doesn't exist.
Mayweather is a certifiable scumbag. The press gave him a free pass on his transgressions for years.
I’m referring to the fact that the media have so much to say about him flaunting his money what does that have to do with his transgressions?
To be fair I can’t stand sterling so I’m not gonna complain if the media attacks him even if it is all abit stupid.
This kind of thing is why people see an agenda against Sterling in particular (taken from F365 Mediawatch today)
He calls himself Floyd ‘money’ Mayweather, flaunting his wealth is his schtick.
It seems to have intensified since he left the 'people's club'
Nothing but a money grabbing mecercenary since then. Even though he left for a much better team and a better city.
If white pretty boys like Beckham haven't been the subject of intense and ridiculous media pressure over the years, then I could kind of understand the racism angle. I think people just see what they want to and will make that kind of leap no matter the actual reasons.
It's shit either way and even bothering to discuss what these pond scum 'journalists' write is pointless. feck them and the shit they write in their trash papers.
It's shit either way and even bothering to discuss what these pond scum 'journalists' write is pointless. feck them and the shit they write in their trash papers.
Okay he may call himself that but it doesn’t mean the media should attack him for it because, as I said, it stems from the fact that they believe people like him are lucky to be where they are
He calls himself 'Money' Mayweather. He does stuff like going into clubs with stacks of (fake) money and throws it off balconies into the crowd in front of cameras. What do you expect?
Ostentatious and public displays of wealth are his thing.
If there was a media conspiracy against him they have plenty more ammo to go at than his 'money' persona.
That's just what you believe though. What people believe isn't the same as fact.
Deserves stick for shopping at Primark. The mens clothes there are awful!
it doesn't happen to all footballers or all celebrities in general, it happens mainly to either young black successful sportsmen who the press dislike, or white footballers from very humble beginnings, again who the press have a reason to dislike, it's a very slow and constant drip drip drip of pointless shite to make people dislike even more who the agenda is against, he's rich and flaunting it, he's rich and he's a tightarse, can't win either way. Ask people who in the current England setup they can't stand and I reckon a large majority will say Sterling, ask the reason why and it's 'he's a flash bastard' or words to that effect
How dare the rich bastard shop in Primark and have the temerity to leave Liverpool.
Mayweather is a good one, especially in the lead up to their fights and post fights
McGregor has basically made a career by being similar to Mayweather in his bravado and spending habits, but how McGregor's spending is written about vs how Mayweather's spending is written about is very different.
On top of that, the whole NFL taking a knee debate. Considering over 2/3's of the NFL are black, all the media insisted that they are lucky to be in the position they are in (statistically yes, they are, but doesn't take away from the message) and therefore they should be grateful that they are playing professional sports and leave "politics" out of it. The politics being the systemic prejudice and discrimination.
There's just so many facets to this.
The politics thing you mentioned is a very true and important point. When Stormzy rapped about Grenfell during his performance at the Brits I saw a handful of dailymail comments saying that he should leave politics out of an awards show e.g. this comment:
https://mobile.twitter.com/DMReporter/status/967539683902271489/photo/1
It was the same with black panther- as black people, we were highlighting the fact that it is a huge step in the black community to see a superhero movie centred around black people and not about slavery for once then non black people complained about this because it became a thing of ‘politics’. It’s almost as if we were supposed to just ‘shut up and enjoy the movie’. I guess talking about these things makes people uncomfortable.
What is this agenda though? I mean, think reasonably about this...what would be the reason for the tabloids to have an "agenda" against Raheem Sterling? They are posting the same kind of shite articles about him as they do any number of other uninteresting celebrities. Do you actually think a bunch of racist people in an office sit there deliberately writing articles about Raheem Sterling shopping in shops, because they are racist? Why? Where are the other examples of them doing this? Why aren't they racist against Lukaku? Pogba? Welbeck?
Wayne Rooney did have a bunch of stories about him shagging grannies, which as I recall turned out to be made up. There was a story about his dad and family being involved in some gambling/money laundering scheme. With these things you find one Journo will make it up (or rather, trust an incorrect source), and the rest jump on the back of that...again not something that applies only to Raheem Sterling.
This is gutter journalism and no one is denying that's what it is. The kind most of us don't even understand the point of...but you're trying to paint it as something different. Papers write gutter stories when they know there are enough people who are willing to read them. It's not really more complicated than that.
You need to explain to me where racism does exist in pointing out that someone shops in Primark because I really am lost on that. At the very worst, and even this is a bit of an assumption stretch, it's snobbish journos trying to belittle a footballer for being common enough to shop somewhere that they wouldn't.
Last edited:
The press are all a bunch of cnuts, in all extremes. Stirring things aside (in this case it's really a nothing article, although you have to ask why they print these if not to stir..), they have far too much power. They are our opinions, on everything. They're everyone's moral compass. We judge what's right and wrong pretty much on what we read. A few grubby shits working in an office somewhere telling whole swathes of people their opinions are wrong. Brexit, Trump, the whole mad paranoia about North Korea (a country that wouldn't last more than 5 minutes in a war) - it's fecking bonkers. The whole sun/star/daily mail thing is a disgrace anyway. Gossip being sold as news. I wish people were smart enough to not buy into it.
The world's calling out for a psychopath run news agency - no compassion, no bullshit, no padding, no agenda's...just fact. Wouldn't that be nice?
The world's calling out for a psychopath run news agency - no compassion, no bullshit, no padding, no agenda's...just fact. Wouldn't that be nice?
So we now have black AND poor people. Seriously if we keep adding certain groups to this list, we will end up full circle and back closer to the truth...
...they sell papers by slagging off successful people because the sad little idiots who buy them love that sort of shit. It always has been, it always will be.
...they sell papers by slagging off successful people because the sad little idiots who buy them love that sort of shit. It always has been, it always will be.
I'd personally say that's a terrible example. Of all the things they could go at him for, they play up to the tag he gives himself to promote.
If there was racism in that, he's done a lot worse than throw fake money around to go at him for.
It's just the tabloid shite. Hopefully these newspapers will go out of business soon given the younger generations steer away from newspapers and get their news from online sources instead.
England would be much better off without those tabloids.