relative media coverage

Status
Not open for further replies.
Because... and there is no easy way to put this, but seeing the downfall of Manchester United, England's most successful team over the last 20 years is infinitely more appealing to the neutral masses, to a much wider audience than two teams clawing it out for what will most likely be a fruitless chase for 4th place. I can almost guarantee the viewing figures for United V Fulham were much greater than the Spurs game, and that's no reflection on us or Spurs. Both teams had an awful lot riding on the fixture which is one reason it was a Super Sunday game to begin with.

It's not a conspiracy against us, spurs or any other team. Sky and BT Sport will always focus on the teams at the bottom and top ends of the table for their matches as they ultimately bear the most significance, that's the long and short of it.
 
fozzy said:
i never said sky decide in fact the part you quote me on states that but you say you dont agree? :unsure:.
Click to expand...

I said I don't agree with "all" you said.

You are cutting off the branch upon which you are perched.

For "Stoke/Hull or Barnsley" today read Chelsea and Manchester City circa 1993.

There would not have been high viewing figures nor much media interest for a City v Chelsea fixture back then.

In fact that wasn't even a Premiership fixture for a good few years round the turn of the century when Citeh actually fell into the third tier of English football.

Ditto Arsenal in the days before Rioch bought Bergakamp then Arsene turned them into what they have become.

Sky certainly never hyped up the Arsenal back four a lá The Full Monty.

You are perfectly right in saying Sky aren't a "charity" and they will only show what they can sell.

But clubs like Chelsea and City have shown that what "sells" one day isn't exactly what sells ten years later.

In the mid 90s Newcastle v Blackburn was a massive fixture and Sky hyped it for all they were worth.

Times change, fella.....nothing stays the same.
 
Cookachoo said:
I agree, I'm just saying that seems to be where they've got "struggling" from.
Click to expand...

I read the article, 1 win in 4 isn't really struggling when the opposition is considered, and also the fact that Everton completely outplayed Tottenham.

If we were steamrollered by Tottenham, as we were in the first half vs Liverpool, then they could call us struggling.

It's typical media hype. If we'd won the last 4, they'd be asking if we could make a late run for the title. It's all nonsense.
 
I personally don't mind so much that we get fewer live matches (the lower crowds and the f****g about with KO times being just two reasons)-- it's the relative absence of any proper coverage of us (and many other big clubs) between games that bugs me. And what coverage there is is bog standard, unresearched stuff and does nothing to give the true picture as understood by the true support base eg that Moyes was far from universally liked by the support was never discussed, or even mentioned, on SSN or BBC. Meanwhile some of the truly big football stories affecting traditionally big clubs (eg the demise of the likes of Wolves) are totally ignored and not seriously aired.

On top of the TV ignorance, there is nowadays, somewhat perversely given the technology now available, the Londoncentric national Press coverage. In days gone by, all the popular morning national newspapers, had their sports pages tailored for the different regions. In the north west for example, you'd never see much written about the London clubs, however successful they were, until they came to town. Now, despite the ease with which newspapers could now be produced to be printed with different versions for different areas, we instead get the morning papers continually leading on Arsenal, Chelsea, Spurs etc ie the regional variation is minimal from the London version. [Although somewhat bizarrely the Express distributed on Merseyside seems to focus on the north east clubs!] Everton rarely rate more than a couple of paragraphs in any paper. Young kids live off reading and hearing about their team. Pity they have to look so hard to find any [although on this last point, top marks to Alan Myers for clearly now pushing items about us down the line to SSN, who seem now to duly put them on, suggesting they are open to a proactive PR approach from clubs]
 
It would be great to vote with our feet and watch SKY and BT absolutely crap themselves.

It would have a massive effect on their income and they would have to act.

I am moving house next month and will cancel my SKY subscrition and not go back (I will get BT TV but no sports)

If we all did it they would soon change their coverage.

TBH - I will just go to the games and stream the others
 
mrb85 said:
I personally don't mind so much that we get fewer live matches (the lower crowds and the f****g about with KO times being just two reasons)-- it's the relative absence of any proper coverage of us (and many other big clubs) between games that bugs me. And what coverage there is is bog standard, unresearched stuff and does nothing to give the true picture as understood by the true support base eg that Moyes was far from universally liked by the support was never discussed, or even mentioned, on SSN or BBC. Meanwhile some of the truly big football stories affecting traditionally big clubs (eg the demise of the likes of Wolves) are totally ignored and not seriously aired.

On top of the TV ignorance, there is nowadays, somewhat perversely given the technology now available, the Londoncentric national Press coverage. In days gone by, all the popular morning national newspapers, had their sports pages tailored for the different regions. In the north west for example, you'd never see much written about the London clubs, however successful they were, until they came to town. Now, despite the ease with which newspapers could now be produced to be printed with different versions for different areas, we instead get the morning papers continually leading on Arsenal, Chelsea, Spurs etc ie the regional variation is minimal from the London version. [Although somewhat bizarrely the Express distributed on Merseyside seems to focus on the north east clubs!] Everton rarely rate more than a couple of paragraphs in any paper. Young kids live off reading and hearing about their team. Pity they have to look so hard to find any [although on this last point, top marks to Alan Myers for clearly now pushing items about us down the line to SSN, who seem now to duly put them on, suggesting they are open to a proactive PR approach from clubs]
Click to expand...

Do people still read physical papers? I thought they were extinct? My home page when I switch on my computer is Google news filtered for Everton. Maybe later in the day I will remember to check the general football news through one of the online papers. So it doesn't really matter how many column inches are dedicated to other clubs - Mr Google brings me Everton news only
 
The digital era has really amplified the issue.

Actual quality journalism means nothing, it is all about the number of hits and the associated ad revenue.

A journalist can do a well researched article about Everton's relative lack of finances and get 50 comments and 10k views or write a "Why Liverpool are ace" article and get 500 comments and 100k views.

Economics alone dictate that the Liverpool articles will get published. This is why the Guardian have 2 dedicated club correspondents, one for Liverpool and one for Manchester United. Look at the most viewed sports stories and every day it will be connected to one of these two clubs.

The thing that does annoy me is that once again Everton are ignored to fit the narrative. At the moment that is that Liverpool are the great hopes for English football showing that money isn't everything. Yet Rodgers has spent £200m more than Moyes/Martinez in fees and wages in his time in charge for an extra 3 points over the 2 seasons.
 
To put it incredibly basically, you know what to expect from the main stream media, so it really shouldn't be a shock, nor should it annoy you.

It's pretty much the way it is. Nothing can really be done. The clubs mentioned make the money for the media outlets, so in reality, why shouldn't they focus on them?

If you don't like it, don't read/listen to/watch it.

I gave TalkSport a chance a few years ago but found it just wasn't what I wanted. So I stopped listening to it. (Except when Astro was on there talking about Nuggets. That was boss).
 
I was going to create a new thread on something similar about us being the invisible club but I think it's more appropriate to add onto this good points made in this one- it does genuinely feel like we are the invisible club, listening to newstalk last night (national irish sports radio show) and they were talking about the Utd crisis and how the title is absolutely out of the question and now 4th place probably is as well, the presenter stated that Liverpool and Spurs are so many points ahead of them and they'll have to overcome both of those teams in order to nick 4th, hello, have we just been deleted from the league table.

Another point is the similarity between the way the RS beat both us and arsenal, almost carbon copies games, they hit both of us on the break, took all their chances and ended up winning by 4 goals, yet if you think back on the post match reaction of both games, the media are still creaming themselves about the arsenal result but barely acknowledged the derby match - now I know we shouldn't be exactly looking to get a derby stuffing highlighted but if you think about it, the media didn't bang on about it cos we weren't one of the luvvies who got done, basically they see us in the same category as norwich and that result was 'expected'.

Finally touching back on the race for 4th issue and again comparing us to arsenals title push - I'd say we've all heard at least 20 times each this season from the papers, sky, bbc, man on the street whatever the discussion about how no one really expects arsenal to win the league despite the fact that they've been there or thereabouts at the top all season. Everton have also been there or thereabouts all season in the race to finish 4th but how many conversations have you heard/read about us even being in the hunt?? very few, the most we get acknowledged is when they read out the placings and how many points we have - my point being that even though the majority dont expect arsenal to finish 1st and least the discussion about this is constant, no one expects everton to get 4th but we dont even warrant a discussion on the matter.

Rant over, I know it shouldn't but this issue annoys the [Poor language removed] out of me
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar Threads

Welcome

Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.

→ Log in 🔑 Register
🛒 Visit Shop

Support Grand Old Team by checking out our latest Everton gear!
Back
Top