Tale from the past that makes you question certain journos motives regarding John Stones coverage

Status
Not open for further replies.

BoysInBlue

Player Valuation: £50m
Thought this would be worth a read, as I find it to be very pertinent given certain journalists (Matt Law from the Telegraph) constant stories from the Chelsea camp, giving us a blow by blow account of Chelsea's next moves. This is Everton-related, by the way.

Let me take you back to September 3rd, 2004....

http://www.theguardian.com/media/2004/sep/03/theindependent.pressandpublishing

Football writer quits Independent

Alan Nixon, one of football's most prolific reporters, has severed his links with the Independent following an argument over an alleged conflict of interest involving Wayne Rooney's agent.

Nixon had written for the newspaper for over a decade when his shareholding in Proactive Sports Management proved his undoing at the end of July. Proactive, known since July as Formation Group, is headed by Rooney's agent, Paul Stretford. The freelance reporter, who still writes for the Daily Mirror and the People, owns 20,000 shares in the company.

The shareholding, which Nixon has held since the company floated in 2001, has long been common knowledge in the football world, prompting comment in Private Eye as well as a Sunday Express article in January 2003. Nixon took legal action over the piece, which he claims to have settled for £18,500.

Nixon's interest in Proactive again attracted attention in July, this time from Kenny Fogarty, an ardent Everton fan who took issue with the journalist's coverage in the Independent of the Rooney transfer saga.

Mr Fogarty also pointed out on the website that he had just sent an email to the Independent's sports desk, asking: "How does a Proactive Sports Group shareholder get to write for your newspaper, offering contradictory stories on a common theme over the course of two days?"

Nixon claims that although the previous sports editor, Paul Newman, was aware of the situation, his replacement, Matt Tench - who had rejoined the Independent from the Daily Mail in April - was not. "Matt was new to the job and got startled," he said. "He knew nothing about the court case [against the Sunday Express]." Tench declined to comment on the matter.

Nixon further claims that Tench told him that stories about Proactive clients could no longer appear under Nixon's byline.

"With me it's all or nothing. I decided, 'Let's just leave it'," said Nixon. "It's not as though they paid me enough that I can't live without it."

Nixon says he bought 20,000 Proactive shares at flotation, and has not bought or sold a single share since. "I couldn't tell you how much they're worth," he insisted. "I never look. But I can't imagine they're worth as much as when they started. It's a matter of some amusement among people."

The shares were worth £5,000 when the company floated and are now worth £1,750.

He claims never to have "put any bias into my reporting" and not always to have painted Proactive in a flattering light. "I've had fierce rows with Paul Stretford about what I've written."

Past articles have referred to Nixon as a friend of Mr Stretford, whom he profiled in the Independent in April 2000. "I respect him and I hope he respects me," Nixon explained. "He'll always pick up the phone to a journalist."

Mr Stretford could not be reached for comment.
 

i am convinced one particular talksport presenter had a stake with Fellaini's agent when he moved and maybe the Stones one. and as for Stretford there was so much dodgy goings on with the Rooney move. im in full on conspiracy mode tonight so great read. definitely think there are conflicts of interest all over the media. for a start how can Sky be allowed to push out rumours that may influence the betting on skybet.
 
Seeing as they all seem to be on the side of our best players leaving "to better themselves," I'd say every hack in the UK has ulterior motives.
 
I don't really think there is anything more sinister about it than journalists hoping the deal will go through so they have something to write about.
They are not only selling their stories to the public, they first have to sell them to their editors, so if they can claim some "secret source" or inside info, their editors are more likely to publish their story and the journalist continues to get paid.
 
My honest answer is I think you're a little obsessed on this.

Trust me, we'd all be more worried if our players weren't linked away by the meaningless press.
 

That's just one writer though. They'd all have to be in on it, every single journalist, for it to be a credible theory. I simply avoid the papers and talksport these days.

One man at his level cannot influence the entire written press, let alone the television and radio too.

i am convinced one particular talksport presenter had a stake with Fellaini's agent when he moved and maybe the Stones one. and as for Stretford there was so much dodgy goings on with the Rooney move. im in full on conspiracy mode tonight so great read. definitely think there are conflicts of interest all over the media. for a start how can Sky be allowed to push out rumours that may influence the betting on skybet.
There was a thread on this very thing.

https://www.grandoldteam.com/forum/threads/sky-and-betting.77766/
 
....I think any conflict of interest is more about the team a journalist supports than financial investments. Without naming names, they don't mask their allegiance and don't report in a balanced way.
 
They're getting paid to do a job and they're probably glad they can drag this out. Basically writing the same story every day and getting paid for it.
 

They have column inches to fill and they'll do whatever needs to be done to do so..... As a profession they're not above bugging dead children's phones.
 
To be honest we all read it and flap, if we didn't take any notice and didn't click on these links then they might starve. Maybe links should be banned on here
 
It's being going on for years, and I mean decades. Clubs used to feed info to particular journalists to run stories about unsettling a player (or manager) that they wanted. It backfired on Everton once with Bobby Robson.

With the advent of the internet and the seemingly unchecked rise of agents, it was always going to mushroom. The whole game in the UK is now rotten and corrupted by money. There's an entire support industry below the clubs (media, agents, marketing groups etc.) that has an annual turnover valued in excess of £1bn - and it's largely unregulated.

The Premier League is held up as the model to follow. Every other league in Europe wants to achieve the success of their TV rights - particularly the global rights. UEFA use the same negotiators and sellers for their TV deals, as does FIFA, as does the IOC. It's out of the box now and can't be put back in.

So get used to watching junior referees and officials disallowing a "small team's" goal at Anfield, and allowing the home side a clearly-offside winner. The Premier League needs to maintain it's 4 CL places at all costs, and therefore needs the same 4 teams to qualify and improve year-on-year. The RS has to be one, so if I was an Arsenal fan I'd be worried...
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join Grand Old Team to get involved in the Everton discussion. Signing up is quick, easy, and completely free.

Shop

Back
Top