BCFC Matthaus Posted February 15, 2007 Report Share Posted February 15, 2007 Editors reply ;Ifind it hard to disagree with these fans and the many others who have contacted us about this story.In short, we got it wrong. Bradley Orr was the victim at Ashton Gate. His recent criminal past was irrelevant to the story, as was that of Steve Brooker, Dave Partridge and Scott Brown. To mention their recent history was an error of judgment. It was the wrong decision and I would like to apologise for it. However, what I cannot agree with is how some fans - particularly some who have written to us online - then take a leap of faith to the conclusion that the story was indicative of some kind of Post bias against Bristol City. There is no such thing. Anyone who reads the Post every day will know that.This paper is a great editorial and commercial supporter of both City and Rovers. And to that support we add scrutiny, because our other role is to ask difficult questions on behalf of the fans. That support and scrutiny are dished out in equal measure to both clubs.Finally, City fans who think we're pro-Rovers might like to know that, over the years, just as many Rovers fans have contacted us to accuse the Post of being pro-City.Mike Norton, Editor.So Mr Norton has admitted an error of judgment and said that he would like to apologise for it. Does that mean the apology will appear in the EP, or just in the reply to your email. If it does appear in the EP - can someone put it on the forum - as I don't buy it anymore! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
icamanicity Posted February 15, 2007 Report Share Posted February 15, 2007 It would have to be a front page apology so all the world can see it, like the front page stories about us. Anyway it stays banned, from me !.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fat Controller Posted February 15, 2007 Report Share Posted February 15, 2007 It would have to be a front page apology so all the world can see it, like the front page stories about us. Anyway it stays banned, from me !..The story about the incident appeared front page, so the apology should do also. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DanC Posted February 15, 2007 Report Share Posted February 15, 2007 The story about the incident appeared front page, so the apology should do also.Shame it's tucked away on page 11 then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
citybabe Posted February 15, 2007 Report Share Posted February 15, 2007 The story about the incident appeared front page, so the apology should do also.exactly what I said in the other thread - I also pointed out that it took him three days to put this together (and got slated for saying so!) The EP must have known fairly quickly the reaction of the city fans - it remains cancelled in my house (though they keep delivering it!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bucksred Posted February 15, 2007 Report Share Posted February 15, 2007 An excellent shout there bucksred, I posted my complaint on the Bristol Evening Post website yesterday and they've removed it along with about 20 other complaints by our fellow Redz. Perhaps I need to buy some spray cans and spray my complaint on the outside of their HQ at Old Market. Sounds good, only I don't "condone" that sort of behaviour..... Editors reply ;Ifind it hard to disagree with these fans and the many others who have contacted us about this story.In short, we got it wrong. Bradley Orr was the victim at Ashton Gate. His recent criminal past was irrelevant to the story, as was that of Steve Brooker, Dave Partridge and Scott Brown. To mention their recent history was an error of judgment. It was the wrong decision and I would like to apologise for it. However, what I cannot agree with is how some fans - particularly some who have written to us online - then take a leap of faith to the conclusion that the story was indicative of some kind of Post bias against Bristol City. There is no such thing. Anyone who reads the Post every day will know that.This paper is a great editorial and commercial supporter of both City and Rovers. And to that support we add scrutiny, because our other role is to ask difficult questions on behalf of the fans. That support and scrutiny are dished out in equal measure to both clubs.Finally, City fans who think we're pro-Rovers might like to know that, over the years, just as many Rovers fans have contacted us to accuse the Post of being pro-City.Mike Norton, Editor.Well well well, grudging, but an apology.Jay & the St boys n girls. any value in monitoring the stories and letting them have it if they show bias in future? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OC 1645 Posted February 15, 2007 Report Share Posted February 15, 2007 The story about the incident appeared front page, so the apology should do also.Well written that's the voice of common sense, nothing less than a front page apology should be accepted before the BCFC fans' boycott of the Bristol Evening Post is lifted. The Evening Post could also acknowledge that our players were extremely harshly sentenced with regard to the Romeo Brown's incident with gross corruption occurring with regard to the charges against the bouncers being dropped. This country has the most corrupt and class based criminal justice system in Western Europe and this fact should be published alongside any Bristol Evening Post apology. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BCFC Matthaus Posted February 15, 2007 Report Share Posted February 15, 2007 Shame it's tucked away on page 11 then.What does it say? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.