The English Media...?

Like I said ,they love to build someone up and then knock them down.
They had Rooney allover the press as come kind of messiah and now they're digging up dirt and telling lies .Doing their best to ruin him .

This just isnt restricted to football .Its basically anyone who is famous .

 

you could ask the mods to edit it.
just tell them what changes you want to make to the poll.

 

Basically. We're a nation of poppy-cutters and the media reflects that. On the bright side some of the writing is really quite good.

 

name some good writers.
most are terrible .

 

You have to differentiate between serious journalism and 'the tabloids'. For the purposes of discussion I'll assume you're talking about the tablois. The normal journalist standards in the UK are pretty similar to other countries.

It's not just people at the top. They just want to sell papers and will destroy everyone and everything that gets in the way.

They're not bothered either way.

LOL. Only by accident if it's happened at all. It hasn't.

LOL Now I KNOW you're having a laugh.

Pretty much, yeah.

Most people treat them more as entertainment, like a comic for adults. Some people of limited intellect, (and some foreigners who want to use them as a stick to beat us with), take notice of them.

... in the same way the national enquirer is an accurate reflection of American culture, you mean? ... or American christian fundamentalists reflect all US citizens?

No, in other words.

If you take the media overall INCLUDING TV, then that's a yes.

Essentially, we have very good TV reporting with the BBC and rather bad reporting with the media, (in general, anyway). Most other countries written media has more of a balance.

The other things that's different, particularly to the US, is that we have national newspapers. Almost nobody relies on their local papers to get the news. In the US it's probably the opposite so people have come to rely on their local papers to tell the truth.

If they didn't, people wouldn't buy them.

I don't know about unique but it's pretty bad. I can't imagine too many other countries having to put up with the rubbish we have to.

 

Henry Winter is excellent imo.

 

Not to mention how it will deter future managers from joining the team...

Not that that matters, considering the FA has basically given up hope on winning a future trophy (Hiddink for a cup of tea? WTF? Look at their 'short list')


What I've wondered is why English people buy those rediculous newspapers.

 

Americans watch FOX because they want to listen to whatever tries to advertise their stupid political/moral/religious beliefs. That's a bit different from paying money to constantly read bullshit stories about football and peoples personal lives.

You won't see ESPN SportsCenter showing the headlines of The National Enquirer every day like SkySportsNews shows all the tabloid headlines

 

Does he write in FourFourTwo? Or World Soccer?

 

I don't think it's so much a desire to destroy (although there are undoubtled a few examples where they seem determined to "get" someone, hence the SGE set-up, and in other news, the vilification of Pete Doherty, mainly because despite being a waster he still got to shag a bird most everyone else only dreams about), more that a bad story sells more papers than a good one. They'll quite happily print a pack of lies if it makes a good story. There wasn't a shred of truth in the "rooney slaps coleen in nightclub" story, but it sold papers. It's even come out that the ugly old bag (a euphamism would have been less kind) rooney was supposed to have shagged in a massage parlour wasn't a hooker at all (she just answered the phone), but of course it made a better story.

as said above, not a care in the world.

the press can be supportive in major tournaments, but that's about it.

If there was one thing I would praise the tabloids for it's their coverage of football below the premiership. Twice a week, every single match in the football league gets a full match reprot in the likes of the sun and the mirror. Contrast that to the quality press, where you'd be forgiven for thinking that there's only one match a week that's not played in the premiership.

about as wide of the mark as Geoff Thomas' shot against France.

On the whole, beyond just football, I think people know stories are embellished (any story out of the Max Clifford stable is seldom more than a very distant relative of the truth) but people seem less aware of just how much effort papers will go to deceive their readers.

Doctoring photographs to give a false impression is quite normal, even to the extent that without the changes, it'd be clear that there wasn't a story in the first place.

I think a lot of people treat it as a bit of a laugh, but there are enough who don't see through it to shape things in a bad way.

the Sun often features the "white van man" column, where they interview drivers of white vans about questions of the day - the thinking being that "white van man" represents the thoughts of the "average guy" on the street. Most tabloids have a "white van man" mentality, and consequently try to appeal to the kind of person who likes to have strong opinions, but doesn't want to have to think too deeply about them. There is certainly an element of that in English society.

particularly in football, the media has a habit of treating the important stuff lightly, and treating the unimportant stuff far too seriously.

 

He has a column in 442 but writes for The Telegraph.

 

I think that was my point... the two countries media are not the same.

 

Simon Kuper is Dutch, but I think he's the best soccer writer
in the world. Why didn't you mention Richard Williams of the
Guardian, by the way? He is pure class and I rate him as one
of the best English writers on the sport.

Over here we have Paul Gardner, an English ex-pat. All of his
articles take up one of two themes: Brazilian futebol is great;
English football is crap. It's a career, all right .........

 

Yes.

I agree.

The thing you have to bear in mind is that the tabloids are not really part of the journalistic standards in Britain. They're more a part of the entertainments industry. Like I said, they've been squeezed out by the excellence of the BBC's reporting on most factual matters.

It's actually been quite interesting to watch the rise of Fox in the US from over here. It very much reminds me of what happened to The Sun newspaper and the rest of the lower quality newspapers.

I doubt it's any accident that Americans are now complaining that their media didn't ask the difficult questions in the run up to the Iraq war. Fox News, like The Sun back in the 60's over here, is like a cancer in journalistic standards, lowering the level of the debate across the board.