Should Everton Ban The S*n

[Mikey_Fitzgerald]

They're talking about it now on the Sunday Supplement

 

[Seathestars]

I'm not computer savvy like many on here, but there is a wonderful piece written on the back page of the sports supplement in todays Irish times written by Keith Duggan .It rips his dross to pieces, and Duggans last line reads
" the only truth contained within that shameful headline s it will always serve as Kelvin McKenzie's career orbituary ".

well worth a read lids.

Good read that mate and thank you to @gorgeousgeorgeEFC for posting the link.

It beggars belief that this Mackenzie would have a go at the City yet again.
The timing is horrific and I think sadistic.

 

[nsno-chris]

What kind of front page did S** have after the incident?

Google it finners, nobody wants to read what that rag put in the aftermath of an absolute tragedy

 

[tsubaki]

Peter Preston, in today's Observer, points out that the Sun bear rather more responsibility for this than they are being credited with by most of the media:

Why the former editor launched his ill-judged tirade against Ross Barkley is mystifying, but even more baffling is the fact that no one stopped him

The real curiosity is Kelvin MacKenzie’s “suspension” from Sun columnising (after a notably vile and clodhopping piece about the young Everton footballer Ross Barkley). It sounds almost as though Kelvin is some redtop version of Ken Livingstone, benched for putting his boot in it again.

Yet any comparison between Corbyn Labour and Murdoch Sun can’t survive for a second. MacKenzie doesn’t have unlimited licence to write or say what he likes. He doesn’t rent a white sheet of blank paper from Rupert every columnar morning. On the contrary, he’s contracted to write his piece, turn it in on time, and watch it go through the editing process before appearing in print. MacKenzie was a long-term editor. He knows what editing means. He knows there’s an executive hierarchy – from subs to night lawyers to supreme authorities – there to watch his back.

But did they? They commissioned a grisly cartoon to sit with the piece. But the racism and gorilla references that incensed the mayor of Liverpool don’t seem to have rung any alarms. MacKenzie is left to take this rap alone.

A good, richly deserved comeuppance, you may think – and maybe the end of his career. But a suspension for something the powers-that-be sanctified before turning turtle? That seems a little rough – just like this whole blundering, bewildering episode itself.

 

[MACCA75]

Who on Earth has voted 'no' here. Not sure you get Everton at all if so.

 

[Caolam]

I think we had no other option. McKenzie and the paper went with a deliberately provocative article at the time when it would get the most reaction and therefore the most coverage.
Controversy for the sake of controversy appeals to some people, Sun readers. I use the word readers in it's widest context.

 

[Amw79]

.

He was far from being right where this club is concerned.

As said, you don't go round with a megaphone calling Everton backstabbers and a club that lets the city down....and I seriously doubt anyone in charge of that club will forget his attack on them and his threat to protest against them. I wouldn't either. As soon as that idiots usefulness is at an end they need to dispatch him pronto.

I agree with this, suspect there was already work happening to make it happen, and JA didn't need to make such a public condemnation of us.

Re the bit in bold, this is important as he still does have enormous usefulness with our stadium project, so we can expect to see us continuing to cosy up with him. Important not to see that as a bad thing as we need to keep him onside, to avoid hitting unnecessary obstacles.

 

[tsubaki]

Who on Earth has voted 'no' here. Not sure you get Everton at all if so.

The poll doesn't make a distinction between banning the paper for this incident and banning it as part of the campaign to ban it being boosted by Joe Anderson and which has only really come about this year.

Everyone (or at least almost everyone) agrees with the first, less people (but still probably most) agree with the second.

 

[MACCA75]

The poll doesn't make a distinction between banning the paper for this incident and banning it as part of the campaign to ban it being boosted by Joe Anderson and which has only really come about this year.

Everyone (or at least almost everyone) agrees with the first, less people (but still probably most) agree with the second.

It's a simple question. Should The Sun be banned at Everton. It's a simple answer too.

 

[tsubaki]

It's a simple question. Should The Sun be banned at Everton. It's a simple answer too.

It isn't. The paper should be banned for encouraging and supporting MacKenzie and publishing that article.

It should not be banned because of the pressure put on the club by Anderson in order that they fall in line behind "his" campaign, in order that he benefit politically from it - especially as what that campaign proposes to do is many scales of magnitude less damaging to that paper than what the city and people did with the boycott.

 

[MACCA75]

It isn't. The paper should be banned for encouraging and supporting MacKenzie and publishing that article.

It should not be banned because of the pressure put on the club by Anderson in order that they fall in line behind "his" campaign, in order that he benefit politically from it - especially as what that campaign proposes to do is many scales of magnitude less damaging to that paper than what the city and people did with the boycott.

I'm not remotely interested in Joe Anderson, I couldn't care less what he thinks or what he has said.
Should Everton ban the Sun. Yes. It's as simple as that.

 

[John23]

They're talking about it now on the Sunday Supplement

Seen it Mikey. Apart from Miguel Delaney I thought they were a bit lets move on sort of attitude. What did you think?

 

[davek]

.


I agree with this, suspect there was already work happening to make it happen, and JA didn't need to make such a public condemnation of us.

Re the bit in bold, this is important as he still does have enormous usefulness with our stadium project, so we can expect to see us continuing to cosy up with him. Important not to see that as a bad thing as we need to keep him onside, to avoid hitting unnecessary obstacles.

The political cycle will be important with that feller and Everton's stadium scheme. He's in office until 2020 but the campaigning will begin back end of next year. It'll be interesting to see how any progress or lack of progress is handled by him. He's got a big gob and I expect a lot of collateral damage if he isn't entirely satisfied about how the club is performing. He also hasn't been exactly welcoming of the Metro Mayor for Liverpool City Region - because he was snubbed as the LP representative for the job (he wanted it and then tried to pull a bureaucratic stunt to stop the authority happening by pulling LCC from it). That could cause friction between public bodies on the waterfront development we dont need.

His ego will ALWAYS be to the fore in this Everton stadium scheme. The frightening thing now is that - and the Friday threat to the club underlines this - he probably thinks he can step into Everton's affairs, in toto, and influence them also. We are dealing with a very egotistical man.

 

[Khalekan]

Who on Earth has voted 'no' here. Not sure you get Everton at all if so.

*puts hand up*

When I first saw the Poll I thought it was yet another "the RS have banned The Sun, should we do the same" Poll.

At that time I was blissfully unaware of the latest McKenzie diatribe and I voted "No" accordingly.

And I know several others took the same stance.

But as the facts emerged I was as outraged as anyone else and if I had known about the context on which the Poll was commissioned I would most certainly have voted to exclude Sun reporters from anywhere around Finch Farm or Goodison.

 

[Mikey_Fitzgerald]

Seen it Mikey. Apart from Miguel Delaney I thought they were a bit lets move on sort of attitude. What did you think?

I thought it was very much a washing of the hands attempt

"Kelvin isn't part of the sports writing section, yet we've been banned for what he said"