Give Post A Chance

[Milo]

[Redhyde]

Why did they this week have an article on Bristol City fans not going to away games..Rovers attendances are down too, hell they're down at home as well while ours are up!, but no..it us they focus on. Why?

[NickJ]

[edson]

Well done for setting this up.

It's interesting to note that he's quick to talk about defamation of character in relation to members of his own staff, when that is precisely what his paper is guilty of in the distorted way they report on both clubs.

Could someone who was there explain why they felt reassured and willing to give the Evening Post their continued or renewed support, given his responses, as all I see is a string of political comments aimed at pacifying his audience without having any real substance. So maybe some of it is lost in translation.

To try and defend the paper for running an unsubstantiated report about a racist remark ahead of 200 people invading a pitch and threatening opposing fans is laughable really. To rake up Bradley's past was inexcusable. Did the apology occupy the same column inches as the story?

There is a clear and indisputable bias towards Rovers in their reporting and editorial. Quite how he can state otherwise is beyond me.

I'd also like to know how he manages to employ people from the area who love sport but have no affinity for one club over the other. I just don't see how that is possible.

I can imagine the interview:

"So, you want to be a football reporter for the Bristol Evening Post?"

"Yes, I am passionate about writing and passionate about football. Having been brought up in the Bristol area, I am well aware of the potential this city has to provide the South West with a top flight football club and very much want to be involved in that."

"Great. Do you support either team?"

"Absolutely not. As a local lad, I support both teams equally. I assumed everybody did."

"Yes, well we certainly all do here."

What a load of guff.

[GrahamC]

Not happening though, is it?

Two knocking pieces in it on us in the last 2 days, one yesterday (incorrectly in my view) saying that GJ faces his toughest test as City manager (surely that has to be during the 9 straight defeats?) and full of implication from the more reactionary posters on here about team selection, Adebola etc , plus one in it today saying our away support is down specifically because of our style of football.

Meanwhile, North of the river, a run of 2 wins in 27 games before last Saturday is completely conveniently ignored by them (no "toughest test" for Trollope, then?) whilst their away fan following also drops yet amazingly but is due to the credit crunch, not their style of football, of course....

['Orns]

The EP can go 'do one' - as Edson says, what a load of guff.

Not bought in for years anyway, and certainly won't be after reading the article. Would hope that any City fan would feel the same after reading it too.

[edson]

Just to underline my doubts. A couple of quotes:

Steve pointed out that the whole paper was cheering on Bristol City in the play-offs, and even some of those with an allegiance for Rovers were upset

and later:

On the topic of bias towards the blue few, Steve explained that there were no Bristol Rovers supporters on the sports desk.

Or is he suggesting they only employ people who support a local football team in every other department but the sports desk?

As I said, what a load of guff.

[dezgimed]

Stockhausen supports Rov*rs. I've heard it from his own mouth, not to mention seeing him wrap a tie around his pissed up head singing 'Goodnight Irene' in a pub.

[bully]

[BristolCity1992]

Eish this did not go down well then.

I do not read any papers these days from local to national well the red tops at least they are all full of crap, bile and hatred.

[Steve Mellen]

Just out of interest...

The sportsdesk does employ people who support local teams, we have two City fans on the desk. There are Rovers fans elsewhere on the editorial floor. In reply to a post earlier, Andy Stockhausen supports Brentford, and has a soft spot for Arsenal. He doesn't support Rovers. If you want a full list of alliegances on the desk, it goes like this:

One Ipswich fan

Two Spurs fans

Two Liverpool fans

Two Villa fans

One QPR fan

One Kidderminster fan

Two City fans

One Sheffield United fan

One Chelsea fan

One Sunderland fan

One Leeds fan

One Brentford fan

One Everton fan.

Some of us are from far afield who came here for work, some are local but just don't support either of the clubs in the city. And two do support their local team.

I don't think today's article could be described as a knocking piece. We looked at both clubs with the idea of seeing how the credit crunch is affecting supporters. It was a City fan who volunteered the suggestion that it's the current style of football that's putting people off travelling to away games. Rovers away support is also down, that's in the paper today.

If the article today was in isolation, you could argue there's some sort of agenda. But I can see several other threads on this board -and maybe you'll tell me these are regular moaners, I don't know - suggesting all is not well in the camp.

[Milo]

Just to underline my doubts. A couple of quotes:

Steve pointed out that the whole paper was cheering on Bristol City in the play-offs, and even some of those with an allegiance for Rovers were upset

and later:

On the topic of bias towards the blue few, Steve explained that there were no Bristol Rovers supporters on the sports desk.

Or is he suggesting they only employ people who support a local football team in every other department but the sports desk?

As I said, what a load of guff.

I sense that many on the Sports Desk are brought in from other areas. Steve Mellen came over from your neck of the woods and is an Ipswich Town supporter. Nathan Jones is a brummie and supports one of those teams, and I'm not too sure about the others. Allegiance to either Bristol team I'm sure is not an issue raised at interview stage, and the implication from his statement was that there was at least one City fan on the Sports Desk.

Being at the meeting we got a more comprehensive response to each of these articles than has been recorded on the summary. We have also tried to respect some of the comments made by Steve Mellen in the meeting that he may well have worded differently if it was for wider readership. The over-riding sense that I got was an acceptance that mistakes had been made and that in the balance of probability these were innocent mistakes (although I personally have always found the Rovers 200 v Accused City 1 edition to be particularly dodgy). I hope that Steve Mellen has been able to report back the series of articles that have left us angry with the paper and that there may subsequently be more care taken going forward. Time will tell I guess.

[Fodbarmyarmy]

Does it really matter?

Do we win or lose games because of what the the post prints?

No - I didn't think so - in fact it gives me a larf

You all sound like a bunch of school kids crying "unfair" and "they're picking on us"

"Not going away because of hoofball" - was a comment I read on here myself so why shouldn't they print it?

Personaly I don't blame them for picking up on some of the stupid things said on here especially when you read some of the personal abuse aimed at the reporters

If you don't like it don't buy it but please don't go on and on about it and make enemies from it - its just a paper get over it

[chinapig]

Just out of interest...

The sportsdesk does employ people who support local teams, we have two City fans on the desk. There are Rovers fans elsewhere on the editorial floor. In reply to a post earlier, Andy Stockhausen supports Brentford, and has a soft spot for Arsenal. He doesn't support Rovers. If you want a full list of alliegances on the desk, it goes like this:

One Ipswich fan

Two Spurs fans

Two Liverpool fans

Two Villa fans

One QPR fan

One Kidderminster fan

Two City fans

One Sheffield United fan

One Chelsea fan

One Sunderland fan

One Leeds fan

One Brentford fan

One Everton fan.

Some of us are from far afield who came here for work, some are local but just don't support either of the clubs in the city. And two do support their local team.

I don't think today's article could be described as a knocking piece. We looked at both clubs with the idea of seeing how the credit crunch is affecting supporters. It was a City fan who volunteered the suggestion that it's the current style of football that's putting people off travelling to away games. Rovers away support is also down, that's in the paper today.

If the article today was in isolation, you could argue there's some sort of agenda. But I can see several other threads on this board -and maybe you'll tell me these are regular moaners, I don't know - suggesting all is not well in the camp.

So the view of one fan constitutes an intelligent analysis and the whole explanation - presumably because the conclusion suited you? More research required I think. Like the original story in this thread, pure sophistry.

[Steve Mellen]

Again, out of interest, is the guy quoted wrong?

[edson]

Again, out of interest, is the guy quoted wrong?

Has the guy quoted done significant research (other than speaking to Sean), before stating "Even given the current parlous economic climate, it seems financial considerations have become secondary to the need to be entertained.

In short, a significant number of City fans no longer feel they are being given value for money on the road."

[chinapig]

Again, out of interest, is the guy quoted wrong?

I'm not suggesting he was. You don't seem to address my point. How does the view of one fan constitute research leading to an objective conclusion?

[Fodbarmyarmy]

Again, out of interest, is the guy quoted wrong?

No

I didnt go to sheffield because of the way we played at Wolves

Money is also a factor of course but when we play good football you find the money from somewhere because you know you are going to enjoy your team being competitive win or lose

At the moment - and its just my opinion - I am not enjoying watching Bristol City away from home because we do not appear to be competing so therefore it does not warrant the expense

[William Stand]

At the moment - and its just my opinion - I am not enjoying watching Bristol City away from home because we do not appear to be competing so therefore it does not warrant the expense

But surely thats a very short term opinion.... we lost our last 2 at Wolves & Sheff Utd, but before that we'd won at Blackpool & Coventry & drew at Cardiff ?? If anything so far this season (& its only 10 games old) we're better away than at home ??

The thing with football is that its all about results ... good results & everything else fades into the ether, poor results & the drains come up. I honestly don't think our "style" this season is much different to last - on our game we play good possession football, when we're down on our haunches we go long, usually without much success.

I would go as far to say that if anything we are creating more chances this season than we did last.

[RedM]

I'm not suggesting he was. You don't seem to address my point. How does the view of one fan constitute research leading to an objective conclusion?

Exactly. One fan could be asked what they think of a certain player and it could be very different from anothers opinion.

One person my be affected by the rise in fuel prices and not go, whilst another is driving around on fuel provided by their company so not bothered. Other people may have visited the grounds we have played previously and not gone as they are waiting to go to new grounds for them. Changes in hours at work, family commitments, the list is endless.

oh, and just out of interest, Steve Mellen, which team does your Editor in chief support/favour?

[NickJ]

Again, out of interest, is the guy quoted wrong?

He is neither right nor wrong. He is stating an opinion.

I don't think the vast majority would say it was the style of football that puts people off going to games, although I would add that knowing that Trundle and Noble wouldnt start against Sheffield influenced my decision in not going.

Money and time would be the main reasons, I would think.

In my case, and in the case of a sizeable number of others, another reason would be the police insistence of travelling by official coach only (Cardiff) or inventing reasons to move kick off times (Wolves). Try commenting on the civil liberties issues of those factors and you might gain some sympathy.

[sunningdalered]

As any regular viewer or participant of OTIB, or any forum, KNOWS, to get to the gist of what the majority of fans think on a particular subject you have to wade through a lot of comments, which range from absurd to genuinely insightful. The example of how people feel about City's current style of play is a good example of that.

I would suggest that if you want to use the forum as a source for your reporting, you invest the time and effort into reading more widely on a particular subject, rather than lifting isolated opinions.

My biggest gripe with the EP is that you feel compelled to print half-page, and more, complete non-stories from Rovers just to maintain your editorial balance - an example would be the column inches you devoted to the on-off, on-off transfer of Hughes. Tedious. If you have nothing to report, from either camp, don't!

[William Stand]

Again, out of interest, is the guy quoted wrong?

Steve, I don't mean this the wrong way & fair play to you for sticking your head above the parapet, but you're employed by the EP. Even if you thought some of the stories were tosh - you're hardly going to come on here & say so. You're pretty much duty bound to follow (swallow??) the party line.

For the record I don't personally think the EP is biased, other than you will print what will sell newspapers.

I think the reasons away attendances are down are a combo of:

A lot of people are skint

Last year there were lots of new grounds (or grounds people hadn't been to, for years).

[edson]

I'm not suggesting he was. You don't seem to address my point. How does the view of one fan constitute research leading to an objective conclusion?

More than one fan has concluded the Evening Post is a biased crock of crap.

I wonder if they'll be running that as a headline statement of fact anytime soon.

[slartibartfast]

We take over !000 on average, which ,I think is brilliant.Maybe it's down because of "ground hopper syndrome".

They were nearly all new last year !

[RedM]

As any regular viewer or participant of OTIB, or any forum, KNOWS, to get to the gist of what the majority of fans think on a particular subject you have to wade through a lot of comments, which range from absurd to genuinely insightful. The example of how people feel about City's current style of play is a good example of that.

I would suggest that if you want to use the forum as a source for your reporting, you invest the time and effort into reading more widely on a particular subject, rather than lifting isolated opinions.

My biggest gripe with the EP is that you feel compelled to print half-page, and more, complete non-stories from Rovers just to maintain your editorial balance - an example would be the column inches you devoted to the on-off, on-off transfer of Hughes. Tedious. If you have nothing to report, from either camp, don't!

Great points. I often find myself wondering what they will print on days when clearly there is nothing newsworthy going on, and they always manage to come up with something, often gleamed from here i would bet!

Trouble is by responding to this thread we are now to expect a 'Fans forum slams...' type of headlines tomorrow, or maybe they will just print what edson suggests in his last post!

[greenun]

Not happening though, is it?

Two knocking pieces in it on us in the last 2 days, one yesterday (incorrectly in my view) saying that GJ faces his toughest test as City manager (surely that has to be during the 9 straight defeats?) and full of implication from the more reactionary posters on here about team selection,

I disagree.

The article in question was headlined: Johnson faces toughest test as Bristol City boss, but the story was fair and balanced.

For example, here are the opening 4 paragraphs:

GARY Johnson faces arguably his sternest test as Bristol City manager since first arriving at Ashton Gate a little over three years ago.

Charged then with the task of restoring discipline, uniting a divided dressing room and rooting out perceived disruptive elements, the Londoner resorted to the kind of major surgery which rendered him deeply unpopular in certain quarters.

History has since proved the efficacy of his methods; City achieved automatic promotion from League One in Johnson's second season and exceeded all expectations when finishing fourth in the Coca-Cola Championship and reaching the play-off final earlier this year.

Yet while his track record is indisputable, football remains a fickle business and recent events have caused City fans, their expectations swelled by success, to question the manager.

Full article: http://www.thisisbristol.co.uk/news/Johnso...il/article.html

[Frome Valley]

I don't think today's article could be described as a knocking piece. We looked at both clubs with the idea of seeing how the credit crunch is affecting supporters. It was a City fan who volunteered the suggestion that it's the current style of football that's putting people off travelling to away games. Rovers away support is also down, that's in the paper today.

This is incredibly lazy as there are a myriad of reasons why fans are not going to away games e.g the bubble trip and fans boycotting this game, a 12.30 kick off and the promise of no open pubs in Wolverhampton, the familiarity of away games [Coventry!], the extreme cost in hard times, a wembley hangover and above all away attendances always drop in the season after promotion.

If your reporter did not bother to investigate any of the above with City supporters i would suggest the article has no vailidity at all.

[sunningdalered]

I disagree.

The article in question was headlined: Johnson faces toughest test as Bristol City boss, but the story was fair and balanced.

For example, here are the opening 4 paragraphs:

GARY Johnson faces arguably his sternest test as Bristol City manager since first arriving at Ashton Gate a little over three years ago.

Charged then with the task of restoring discipline, uniting a divided dressing room and rooting out perceived disruptive elements, the Londoner resorted to the kind of major surgery which rendered him deeply unpopular in certain quarters.

History has since proved the efficacy of his methods; City achieved automatic promotion from League One in Johnson's second season and exceeded all expectations when finishing fourth in the Coca-Cola Championship and reaching the play-off final earlier this year.

Yet while his track record is indisputable, football remains a fickle business and recent events have caused City fans, their expectations swelled by success, to question the manager.

Full article: http://www.thisisbristol.co.uk/news/Johnso...il/article.html

So, perhaps someone can tell me who exactly that article was aimed at? Why don't the EP just stick to publishing facts - about injuries, signings, how to get to away grounds etc - and spare us the opinions. IMO they would do better to carry a message saying 'If you want to know how things are going at City - go to AG, speak to someone who does, or log into www.otib.co.uk' - job done!

[Milo]

Like the original story in this thread, pure sophistry.

Sorry, but in what way have you interpreted the article as sophistry? That's a pretty strong accusation to make.

The fan who stopped buying the paper after the Sinclair for Wembley article told me afterwards that he was willing to give them the benefit of the doubt. I personally felt that the explanations given, particularly for the Inn on the Green reports and Bradley Orr, were valid, and logic tells me that the Evening Post has nothing to gain and lots to lose by pursuing an agenda to follow one team over the other. It's a statement of fact that many left the meeting reassured and I struggle to see how you interpret it as a false and misleading argument.