What's new

Spurs Chatters, Please Read

Real_madyidd

The best username, unless you are a fucking idiot.
Oct 25, 2004
18,792
12,448
True but this shows your Inability to spot an accurate articall from a false one, because flatters wasnt saying not to read storys that people come up with, but not to treat them as fact, and what makes a journilists view any different then Flatters

No it doesn't. What it shows is that you can't read the English language.
 

C0YS

Just another member
Jul 9, 2007
12,780
13,817
No it doesn't. What it shows is that you can't read the English language.

yeah sorry about that, mate I was slightly overdoing that, all I ment to say was that Flatters was not saing that the papers should not be read with any seriousness and should not be taken litrelly, but was not saying how papers should start writting only factuall reports because that would be very boring indeed.

I may of read you post wrong, but to me you where suggesting that flatters had no right to tell you what to do, and I was trying to say that nor do newspapers
 

camaj

Posting too much
Aug 10, 2004
8,195
883
I think the issue is partly to do with how much evidence people can realistically put on the table

The problem is people don't seem to care if there's a lack of evidence. If someone makes a claim, some people just accept that the person telling them is honest and accurate.

Part of the problem are the ITK folk. Best I can tell they pick names at random and/or pick up on something that's been mentioned in the papers/another ITK. Then if there's a lot of talk about a particular player they'll start saying "happening this week" or "happening today".

Then it happens and people accept they genuinely had an insight rather than making educated guesses. And if it doesn't happen they'll say "deal fell through/someone changed their mind" and people accept that rather than believing they made a bad guess.

Now I can't prove they're fake but I can't prove they're doing anything more than guessing. The accuracy of their information seems no better than the newspapers (which are pretty poor) and usually worse. If someone was genuinely ITK they'd find out before the name appeared in the paper, probably a few days in advance. The only paper that has a good track record seems to be L'equipe
 

talkshowhost86

Mod-Moose
Staff
Oct 2, 2004
48,100
47,054
The problem is people don't seem to care if there's a lack of evidence. If someone makes a claim, some people just accept that the person telling them is honest and accurate.

Part of the problem are the ITK folk. Best I can tell they pick names at random and/or pick up on something that's been mentioned in the papers/another ITK. Then if there's a lot of talk about a particular player they'll start saying "happening this week" or "happening today".

Then it happens and people accept they genuinely had an insight rather than making educated guesses. And if it doesn't happen they'll say "deal fell through/someone changed their mind" and people accept that rather than believing they made a bad guess.

Now I can't prove they're fake but I can't prove they're doing anything more than guessing. The accuracy of their information seems no better than the newspapers (which are pretty poor) and usually worse. If someone was genuinely ITK they'd find out before the name appeared in the paper, probably a few days in advance. The only paper that has a good track record seems to be L'equipe

To be fair the good ITKs do genuinely have contacts within the club and I think everything they post is stuff that they genuinely believe. There's about 4 or 5 who I'm fairly certain have links within the club and they don't just post stuff to wind people up.

The problem is that there are so many people 'within' the club that it has to be noted that not everyone 'within' the club actually knows what's going on. I will say unequivocally though that most of the ITKs post their stuff sincerely and aren't just wind up merchants. It's just a case of being sensible with how to interpret the info.

As far as journalists go I'm sure some of them do have contacts within the club but ultimately they are alot less trustworthy. They actually make money on the stories they write so are much more prepared to just make stuff up...as they do at the Evening Standard for example.

You can tell the ITKs from the journos very quickly if you look at the info over a number of years.
 

yanno

Well-Known Member
Aug 1, 2003
5,857
2,877
I just don't see the point in believing anything that hasn't got enough evidence to back it up. If you think there is enough evidence, then by all means take it into consideration, but most of the time it just appears to be conjecture, which would be neither here nor there.

The basic position to take with all media is to ask "how do they know what they claim to know?". An attitude of healthy scepticism is as applicable to the broadsheets as to the redtops, with the rider that redtop journalists are under even more pressure from their bosses to sensationalize stories than their broadsheet colleagues. (And as a freelance journalist, the increasing casualization of my industry makes this pressure even worse - if you don't deliver, you don't get rehired).

So, I agree at the broad level with Flatters' comments - always look sceptically at press articles.

But sometimes stories are not littered with direct quotes because they're based on interviews given off the record, or an unattributable basis. I've written about this at tedious length on this forum in the context of the late August feature article in the Observer, which I'm convinced was based on an unattributable interview with Jol. I based this judgement on the sheer number of opinions it attributed to Jol which were not common knowledge, the prominence of the article and the style of writing which were all journalistic code for an off-the-record interview. Plus the fact that it was published the Sunday after Kemsley was paparazzied in Seville so it was credible that Jol would be hurt and want to get his side of the story out. And finally because broadsheets have smart lawyers whose job is to ensure the financial liability if their paper is sued is not unlimited, so they make sure their journalists have some sort of basis for the stories they want to publish - especially when the target has deep pockets and a tendency to sue (and Spurs are a relatively litigious club).

So, with a bit of healthy scepticism, I think we can all separate the wheat from the chaff in the newspapers. And I agree that the recent Berbatov coverage has been pretty outrageous, and largely a case of hacks over-egging stuff in the search for that elusive paycheck.
 

Gilzeanking

Well-Known Member
May 7, 2005
6,093
5,019
Interesting post from yanno .

My feelings about press coverage may be familiar to some SCers

Looking back at our recent experiences Jol/Ramos etc , I'm wondering if , now we're moving away from it , if people here are starting to get a proper perspective on what happened as the hoo hah dies down .

Essentially , the Board made a decision to get a new manager and we signed one with incredibly good qualifications .

Talk to 90% of Spurs supporters after we signed Ramos and they'd tell you everything is hopeless ,we are a laughing stock, the board are buffoons/ traitors (there was even a sack Levy thread here) and we're a shameful bad club .

This whole deluded hysteria was whipped up by a profit hungry press , they had no interest in the REAL story for us supporters which was we'd got ourselves a world class coach .

They'd set the agenda , and at this moment of club triumph had virtually the entire fanbase pulling out their hair . Never mind the avalanche of abuse , they'd prompted , heaped on us by the general public .

90% of managers get sacked , most of these sackings were preceded by club discussions with a new manager .NOTHING unusual happened for us in this respect .

So I'd ask people to think about the powerful negative emotions they experienced over our staff change and ask....why it was so intense , why did you feel SO bad ?

My answer is that you( were made to) feel so strongly....because news companies want your money .

My advice is to keep a close watch on how your emotions can be controlled and inflamed for profit .
 

Rocksuperstar

Isn't this fun? Isn't fun the best thing to have?
Jun 6, 2005
53,288
66,756
Jack, shame on you!

Rep whoring like that :lol:

BAD Cap'n!
 

ethanedwards

Snowflake incarnate.
Nov 24, 2006
3,377
2,498
Interesting post from yanno .

My feelings about press coverage may be familiar to some SCers

Looking back at our recent experiences Jol/Ramos etc , I'm wondering if , now we're moving away from it , if people here are starting to get a proper perspective on what happened as the hoo hah dies down .

Essentially , the Board made a decision to get a new manager and we signed one with incredibly good qualifications .

Talk to 90% of Spurs supporters after we signed Ramos and they'd tell you everything is hopeless ,we are a laughing stock, the board are buffoons/ traitors (there was even a sack Levy thread here) and we're a shameful bad club .

This whole deluded hysteria was whipped up by a profit hungry press , they had no interest in the REAL story for us supporters which was we'd got ourselves a world class coach .

They'd set the agenda , and at this moment of club triumph had virtually the entire fanbase pulling out their hair . Never mind the avalanche of abuse , they'd prompted , heaped on us by the general public .

90% of managers get sacked , most of these sackings were preceded by club discussions with a new manager .NOTHING unusual happened for us in this respect .

So I'd ask people to think about the powerful negative emotions they experienced over our staff change and ask....why it was so intense , why did you feel SO bad ?

My answer is that you( were made to) feel so strongly....because news companies want your money .

My advice is to keep a close watch on how your emotions can be controlled and inflamed for profit .
Well said GilzeanKing. Most intelligent post I have read on these boards for along time.
 

Flatters

Racist Troll
May 4, 2005
27,001
50
The fact is that we still don't know any of the facts. We still don't know exactly what happened. We never will. As I've said, I don't think you can go on what's been written in the press. They might make up a big story based on an insignificant fact, if one at all. Then the public might just go along with it, or make up something else in their head around the same fact. It's just conjecture. All these stories are just the writers opinions of the events they think might have taken place, if that. They're probably just made out of nothing to make a bigger story and sell some papers. They make mountains out of molehills. It's their job.

For example, let's take a look at Berbatov. I keep hearing people talk about his body language and that people think because he doesn't appear to work very hard during a game, that he's not happy and doesn't want to be here. Well, as far as I'm concerned, he's always played like that. Since the day he got here. It's just his style. It may just be more obvious when the team isn't playing well or when things aren't going his way. When things do go his way, he pulls everything off, and shows just how good he is, yet still in a very very casual way. So that, in my opinion, is something made out of nothing at all.
 

Flatters

Racist Troll
May 4, 2005
27,001
50
Jack, shame on you!

Rep whoring like that :lol:

BAD Cap'n!

I'm not, honest. :shifty:

It just annoys me how so many people seem to believe what they read in the newspapers, especially when it's against a player, the manager or the board and then that person turns against them even though there clearly isn't enough to go by to believe it.
 

Lucky22

Active Member
Dec 11, 2006
710
160
Basically you have to take it all with a pinch of salt - even the official website stuff. Of course, at least those at the club are trying their best to protect Spurs so they'll have a certain slant on their stuff, while the journalists, who have absolutely no loyalty other than to sell papers, are being fed 'stories' by anyone they can get to talk (usually for a few quid) or simply just make stuff up or use month-old quotes out of context. Then the players are looking after themselves or their agents are trying to engineer a move/pay rise while there are so many other people working to their own agenda (players and their agents trying to get themselves linked to Spurs, other managers/clubs trying to unsettle players).
Even when you hear it direct from a person's mouth (just look at Sol) you can't really know if they're telling the truth. It'd be funny if it wasn't bloody true!!
 

ExpatFan

Well-Known Member
May 11, 2005
1,873
1,664
Couple of points;
I know I have been guilty of sometimes believing (or wanting to believe) the "good news" about us in the press (e.g. bidding for Micah Richards, say, or plans for a new ground approved) and not believing (or not wanting to believe) the "bad news" (e.g. Berbartov leaving, Ledley will never play again etc.) I suspect some of my fellow SC members are likewise guilty.
Second point: Yes, the lazy hacks like to - or are under pressure from their editors to - come up with exclusives. But don't underestimate their collective fear of "getting the story wrong." In a previous life, I attended many pre- and post-match press conferences held by the likes of Fergie, Wenger, Mourinho, Sven etc. Afterwards, the hacks would invariably get together in a huddle and decide among themselves what "the story was" - what line to take. That way, if they all took the same line, their bosses wouldn't query what they wrote. After all, everyone else at the news conference was writing the same thing.
Anyway, just my little contribution to this interesting debate.
 

Flatters

Racist Troll
May 4, 2005
27,001
50
I don't think it's much of a problem believing, or hoping that the positive press is true. Certainly if you're happy about it, and not too unhappy when it eventually turns out to be untrue.

The main problem I have is when people start having negative feelings towards people because of the negative press those particular players, managers, board members or whoever are getting. I'd much rather people had unjust positive feelings towards someone, than unjust negative feelings. Certainly when the people you're having such feelings about are part of the team you're meant to support.
 

PLTuck

Eternal Optimist
Aug 22, 2006
15,854
32,964
I'm as guilty as the next man when it comes to believing certain things the journo scum write.

Usually it's that maybe I think something, then there's a 'story' about it in the press which confirms what I had been thinking / reading about, which seems to give it more weight.

Wrong I know, and I try not to let them cloud my judgement too much, but they are the masters at twisting the truth into what they want the truth to be.

Case in point is the Madeline McCann case. One day, there were two papers running a front page story on her, one said ' Maddie definately dead' , the other 'Maddie defiantely alive'.

Now press manipulation is a large part of police work in big cases so this may have been a case of that, (I have a great story illustrating this about a very high profile recent case, but can't put it publically. Happy to PM if anyones interested) but it illustrates how they can manipulate the quotes / facts / evidence to say what they want it to say.

I'm always saying to my misses 'they don't report the news, they make it'
 

yanno

Well-Known Member
Aug 1, 2003
5,857
2,877
Talk to 90% of Spurs supporters after we signed Ramos and they'd tell you everything is hopeless ,we are a laughing stock, the board are buffoons/ traitors (there was even a sack Levy thread here) and we're a shameful bad club .

This whole deluded hysteria was whipped up by a profit hungry press , they had no interest in the REAL story for us supporters which was we'd got ourselves a world class coach .

They'd set the agenda , and at this moment of club triumph had virtually the entire fanbase pulling out their hair . Never mind the avalanche of abuse , they'd prompted , heaped on us by the general public .

90% of managers get sacked , most of these sackings were preceded by club discussions with a new manager .NOTHING unusual happened for us in this respect .

So I'd ask people to think about the powerful negative emotions they experienced over our staff change and ask....why it was so intense , why did you feel SO bad ?

My answer is that you( were made to) feel so strongly....because news companies want your money .

My advice is to keep a close watch on how your emotions can be controlled and inflamed for profit .

Well - yes and no. The press are trying to sell more newspapers or, in the case of telly, sit more bums on sofas. They're businesses trying to maximise profits rather than organs of objective truth dissemination. That much I agree with. I also think Ramos is clearly a good coach, and I hope he gets a proper chance at Spurs.

But I disagree that the storm was largely media-created. I think the press were to a significant extent reflecting the opinions of Spurs fans. And it's now abundantly clear that Kemsley & Alexander did try to get Ramos in August two games into the season, and the only part we don't know is whether they went to Seville with Levy's blessing or in an attempt to force his hand. Whichever it was, this abortive approach to Ramos undermined Jol, and effectively messed up the first two months of our season.

Also, it's not just the "evil" newspapers whipping up a storm. If Spurs had replaced Jol with Ramos in August, all the ex-pros from the Beeb's Lawrenson & Hansen thru to Sky's Andy Gray and Souness would have been screaming blue murder, along the lines of: "how can you sack a coach who's achieved the club's best league position two seasons in a row, two games into the season?" And whilst there is an undoubted professional freemasonry of ex-players/managers protecting each other's backs, there's no doubt they would have had a case.

The bottom line is that if Levy was convinced Jol wasn't the man to take Spurs forward, he should have sacked him in the summer, triggered Ramos' release clause, and let him spend the £40 million in July & August. But he didn't, and we ended up with three months of chaos.

In summary, do the media sensationalize stuff? Absolutely. Is there smoke without fire? Very very rarely.
 
Top