[Archived] Guardian article on Kean - unbelievable!

[Glenn]

First rule of modern online UCG management. If it doubt or if asked, remove it THEN decide if it's an acceptable risk to put it back.

[yoda]

I see. Has the issuing of a letter to Glen M et al not been referenced here quite a few times?

Maybe we should just refer to the one who's name cannot be mentioned as, Jade Sneer Moron

[Gav]

It's his opinion and an alternative point of view to the one generally seen on here about Kean and Venky's but because you disagree with what the writer is saying, or the way that he said it, doesn't make it bad journalism.

Come on Jim its a terrible piece of journalism, lazy at best, agenda ridden at worst. Its akin to the daily mail telling us Hilter was an ok sort of bloke, you'd not be happy with that even though its an alternative point of view.

NO I'M NOT COMPARING KEAN TO HITLER BEFOE ANYONE STARTS.

[yoda]

or maybe, Jar Nerd Someone

[M-K]

I see. Has the issuing of a letter to Glen M et al not been referenced here quite a few times?

Indeed it has, so I shouted the guy's name here to make the point that it doesn't matter whether you refer to him by his given name or a pseudonym - it's exactly the same thing, because I know who you're talking about, the Guardian knows who you're talking about and Jar Jar Binks sure as hell knows who you're talking about.

In other words that's why some of those comments have been deleted. No media conspiracy, just the same reason they're deleted here (although you have to be a bit more blatant to provoke the ban hammer here).

[Rovermatt]

Have the references to the letter on here all been deleted since Glen first reported it?

Something that was reported here, in a public forum, was reproduced in another location. There's nothing libellous about referring to a factual event which has already been widely dispersed as having happened.

[philipl]

http://www.pcc.org.uk/case/resolved.html

This is the record of resolved (ie mediated) cases at the PCC. Agreed there are about 6 complaints made for everyone resolved but if you click on those cases on that list at random, is the complaint we have any weaker than several of those?

[dave birch]

Interestingly, an article appeared on the ABC (Australia) website about the declining standrds of journalism.

It said, in part:

"It is the memory of the old-school journalism once championed by Rupert Murdoch that gives the modern 'profession' its scraps of dignity, writes Jonathan Green.

It was at the tail end of journalism's golden moment, the brink of its transformation and decline.

This is the late seventies and your current interlocutor - long schooled in the necessity of avoiding the perpendicular pronoun (one of any number of lost journalistic niceties) - was a year and a bit into a three-year cadetship at The Canberra Times.

......

I

Style, it needs to be said, once meant more in journalism than a keen sartorial sense. Style was a common set of principles around grammar and usage. They were strictly applied and gave a newspaper a coherent literary form.

Journalism back then was not an opportunity for individual expression; it was a precise and formulaic attempt to record an unadorned, balanced version of events.

The notes from the chief sub would pick your copy apart, raising queries over expression and accuracy, reinforcing points of style: "Only horse races start, everything else begins." These were serious issues, back before bylines, lifestyle sections, computers and colour. Back when stories were simple accounts of verifiable, demonstrable, reportable fact.

That culture is long lost by now. Subediting is either outsourced or centralised, and made mechanical by higher and higher demands heaped upon fewer and fewer people. Reporters opinionate, facts are mutable in the service of agendas. Journalism ain't what it was......."

The full article is at www.abc.net.au "The Allegory of Journalistic Decline".

[philipl]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/aug/23/prince-harry-photos-clarence-house

If the ginger muff is appropriate for the PCC to rule on....

[Hanks]

After the flak they got for the Alexander article do you think they are trying to make amends here :- http://www.guardian....ip-match-report

[Rovermatt]

After the flak they got for the Alexander article do you think they are trying to make amends here :- http://www.guardian....ip-match-report

Some of the comments underneath from obvious Rovers supporters are bonkers.

[philipl]

Very good blog from Andy Cryer in the Telegraph tonight.

[yoda's brother]

here you go

http://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/sport/9889730.Blackburn_Rovers_column__No_fan_feels____grateful____to_Venky___s/?ref=mr

well done andy

[brfcfaninmadrid]

Hey all, now that my registration has FINALLY been accepted (2 days waiting just to be able post? someone should look at that...) thought I would add my own voice to this thread. As a long-time Guardian reader I was appalled at the Jeremy Alexander article and have been pretty disappointed at the coverage we have received over the last few months. I should point out that this article was a blog, not a match report (although the distinction is a little blurred in this case), but doesn't excuse what was written.

I too contacted the Guardian's football editor and also the reader's editor, who deals with complaints. I sent the following email:

Dear Mr Adamson

I writing to express how appalled I am by the above article that was published on the sportsblog on Sunday 19th August 2012. I am also extremely disappointed by the moderation of comments and total lack of communication from the paper.

I know I am not the first person to contact you regarding this matter but feel moved to do so by a combination of factors. This is also not the first time I have been in communication with someone from the Guardian regarding the attitude of the paper towards Blackurn fans. I remember an MBM by Barry Glendenning (Blackburn vs Man Utd) which was basically a thinly-veiled attack on the fans. A few extracts:

"Considering the tsunami of foam-flecked poison that rained down upon Steve Kean from the Ewood Park stands during their most recent home match..."

"The vitriol to which Kean, a footballer manager who appears out of his depth, was subjected to made for uncomfortable viewing and listening, but is the kind of dismal behaviour we've come to expect..."

"Yes, he must go ... and be sent on his way by an angry mob of mouth-foaming grown, adult men who sprint down the steps of stands to scream poisonous personal abuse at somebody because he's not very good at his job."

"Excellent. Another reader who genuinely appear to see no difference between protests and posionous vitriollic abuse."

" "Where do I or any other 'readers' indicate that they support, 'posionous vitriolic abuse'?" asks Paul McGarry. Well Paul, you personally haven't indicated that you support 'poisonous, vitriolic abuse', but you haven't condemned it either. "

"This is a dreadful, dreadful football match with a dire atmosphere. Still, at least there's no vitriolic abuse, eh!?!?! Eh?"

"How will their fans react to this victory? They're going to look a bit ridiculous in their "Kean out!" earrings, hats and t-shirts after their team has taken four points at Anfield and Old Trafford in five days."

Personally I found the whole tone of the MBM extremely discomfiting and many of Mr Glendenning's comments seemed to be personal attacks. Towards the end of the game I felt moved to send the following email to Mr Glendenning:

"Really Barry, Blackburn fans are no different from other fans. From the pages of this very paper only a couple of weeks ago: "I am often asked what the worst thing that I have ever heard shouted from the stands is. I've heard it all, from your kids dying of Aids to death threats and every conceivable insult about wives or girlfriends. "

We've seen incompetent owners replace competent ones and it is the same with the manager. Personal abuse is never acceptable but at least more understandable given the situation at the club. "

I was then surprised to receive the following reply shortly after:

"Ah right, the "other fans do it too" defence. Second only in feeble

irrelevance to the "their sectarian songs are more sectarian than our

sectarian songs" peddled by Celtic and Rangers fans. I love it when

actual literate humans try to present either as a defence for

disgraceful behaviour."

Again, this felt like a very personal comment for him to make, especially having spent the last 90mins+ antagonising the fans in his MBM. Generally the paper's tone regarding this matter took little account of the terrible things that had happened at the club, which were after all the reasons for the protest in the first place. We have seen a club that was generally regarded as a model for smaller clubs finacially and organisationally taken over by owners with little/no knowledge of the game, who have alienated fans and other people within the club, such as the former chairman John Williams. A competent Premiership manager (Sam Allardyce) was sacked and replaced by an inexperienced manager with worrying links to the owners and certain agents. Under these circumstances it was hardly suprising that the fanbase was so upset.

However, at the end of the season it seemed that there was finally some recognition of the unfair treatment we had received in the press (this paper included). In the season review Sachin Nakrani chose the following as a gripe of the season: "Criticism of Blackburn fans. It is easy to tut when it's not your club that is being destroyed from within. Their protests proved to be fully justified." This was echoed in the main Gripe of the Season article:

"Blackburn Rovers finished 10th under Sam Allardyce in the 2009-10 season. When the club's new Indian owners Venky's sacked Sam Allardyce and replaced him with Steve Kean in December 2011, they were 13th. With the owners prattling on about signing Ronaldinho, supporters were dubious, especially as Kean's agent, Jerome Anderson, had advised Venky's to buy the club. Blackburn stayed up, but results this season continued to suffer and games at Ewood Park have been played to a soundtrack of prolonged booing and chants of "Kean Out!". However, instead of noticing the supporters' anger at the way their club has been run by Venky's and the team has been managed by Kean, too many pundits and journalists have focused on the behaviour of the fans. While some behaviour towards Kean has crossed the line, Blackburn Rovers means more to those supporters than it ever will to owners, managers, players or neutrals, some of whom have come across as desperately out of touch. A significant part of the criticism has been a disgrace and just yet another example of the way football fans are dumped on from a very great height by those with the power and influence to make a difference."

Short of an actual apology for the way we had been treated by the paper, some recognition of our mistreatment was as much as we could hope for. So you can imagine how shocked I was to read Mr Alexander's article after the recent Ipswich game. Once again the fans were attacked for protesting against events at the club, including the continued employment of Steve Kean:

"As a coach his credentials are well proven. As a first-time manager he has come up short, which is no excuse for the level of abuse directed at him by fans."

Many of the statements in the article are also clearly untrue, or personal opinions that have little basis in reality, often contradicted by articles written in the press (including this very paper):

"Venky's have come under similar fire, a secondary target to Kean, being more remote. Without them Rovers' fans might have been looking at another Portsmouth or Rangers. Such is gratitude.Contrary to terrace chants, Venky's do know what they are doing and will go on doing it."

"...fans should be flattered that Venky's embrace Blackburn in a portfolio that includes the famous old Bombay Cricket Club and Sachin Tendulkar. Verbal terrorism will get them nowhere."

Other readers have clearly set out reasons as to why many of these statements are so ludicrous in the comments below the article. I would also direct you to the letter sent by former Chairman John Williams and other senior figures at the club, previously revealed in this very paper.

I understand that you sent an emailed reply to a fan in which you claim: "I know that Jeremy had valid reasons to write the article in the way that he did having done plenty of research of his own and spoken to sources with a deep understanding of the club." Given that this subject has been written about in the paper, contradicting many of Mr Alexander's views, I can only think that you didn't read the article before it was published. How anyone with a good knowledge of the sport can accept some of the statements made in the article is completely beyond me.

The number of posts, especially seemingly innocuous ones, that have been deleted in the comments section is also worrying, as is the total lack of communication from anyone connected with the paper regarding this matter. Usually in a controversial (and that term is used generously here) blog the writer or a member of the Guardian staff joins in the discussion, justifying views where necessary. However there has not been a single post from anyone connected with the paper, which I find somewhat strange. For a paper that is meant to encourage free comment the moderation of posts seems extremely heavy-handed and in many cases totally disproportionate.

I would like to know how an article that reads as a thinly-veiled PR piece for the owners of the club was allowed to be published in a respected newspaper such as your own, especially one that was so clearly going to antagonise fans. Those of us that have read the article (including people who don't support the club), have been left extremely upset and disappointed, both by the publishing of such an outrageous article and the subsequent handling of the matter by the paper. Some kind of explanation is the least we deserve.

A copy of this email has also been sent to the reader's editor Chris Elliott. I look forward with interest to hearing your views.

I am yet to receive a reply, this was sent a couple of days ago, but if I receive one I will be sure to let you know what they have to say for themselves.

[Rovermatt]

There are some real head-buriers popping up on that most recent Guardian article. One idiot is claiming that Kean should be given until November! He's the same guy who I had a debate with at the tail end of last season. He proclaimed Kean a 'half-decent' manager who was 'much improved' and learning from his mistakes. He even suggested I should eat 'humble pie' in the wake of that disgraceful 'Manager of the Year' bilge in The Guardian. It must be brilliant to support these people's version of Rovers.

Hey all, now that my registration has FINALLY been accepted (2 days waiting just to be able post? someone should look at that...) thought I would add my own voice to this thread. As a long-time Guardian reader I was appalled at the Jeremy Alexander article and have been pretty disappointed at the coverage we have received over the last few months. I should point out that this article was a blog, not a match report (although the distinction is a little blurred in this case), but doesn't excuse what was written.

I too contacted the Guardian's football editor and also the reader's editor, who deals with complaints. I sent the following email:

Dear Mr Adamson

I writing to express how appalled I am by the above article that was published on the sportsblog on Sunday 19th August 2012. I am also extremely disappointed by the moderation of comments and total lack of communication from the paper.

I know I am not the first person to contact you regarding this matter but feel moved to do so by a combination of factors. This is also not the first time I have been in communication with someone from the Guardian regarding the attitude of the paper towards Blackurn fans. I remember an MBM by Barry Glendenning (Blackburn vs Man Utd) which was basically a thinly-veiled attack on the fans. A few extracts:

"Considering the tsunami of foam-flecked poison that rained down upon Steve Kean from the Ewood Park stands during their most recent home match..."

"The vitriol to which Kean, a footballer manager who appears out of his depth, was subjected to made for uncomfortable viewing and listening, but is the kind of dismal behaviour we've come to expect..."

"Yes, he must go ... and be sent on his way by an angry mob of mouth-foaming grown, adult men who sprint down the steps of stands to scream poisonous personal abuse at somebody because he's not very good at his job."

"Excellent. Another reader who genuinely appear to see no difference between protests and posionous vitriollic abuse."

" "Where do I or any other 'readers' indicate that they support, 'posionous vitriolic abuse'?" asks Paul McGarry. Well Paul, you personally haven't indicated that you support 'poisonous, vitriolic abuse', but you haven't condemned it either. "

"This is a dreadful, dreadful football match with a dire atmosphere. Still, at least there's no vitriolic abuse, eh!?!?! Eh?"

"How will their fans react to this victory? They're going to look a bit ridiculous in their "Kean out!" earrings, hats and t-shirts after their team has taken four points at Anfield and Old Trafford in five days."

Personally I found the whole tone of the MBM extremely discomfiting and many of Mr Glendenning's comments seemed to be personal attacks. Towards the end of the game I felt moved to send the following email to Mr Glendenning:

"Really Barry, Blackburn fans are no different from other fans. From the pages of this very paper only a couple of weeks ago: "I am often asked what the worst thing that I have ever heard shouted from the stands is. I've heard it all, from your kids dying of Aids to death threats and every conceivable insult about wives or girlfriends. "

We've seen incompetent owners replace competent ones and it is the same with the manager. Personal abuse is never acceptable but at least more understandable given the situation at the club. "

I was then surprised to receive the following reply shortly after:

"Ah right, the "other fans do it too" defence. Second only in feeble

irrelevance to the "their sectarian songs are more sectarian than our

sectarian songs" peddled by Celtic and Rangers fans. I love it when

actual literate humans try to present either as a defence for

disgraceful behaviour."

Again, this felt like a very personal comment for him to make, especially having spent the last 90mins+ antagonising the fans in his MBM.

I had a few arguments with Glendenning in the podcast blog last season where he consistently ignored the very reason for the fans' disquiet. The man peddles in snide ad hominem attacks. Some of his responses were even submitted late at night, seemingly after a few stouts. I wouldn't expect a retraction of any kind. Even as a fellow Irishman I can't stand the guy.

[brfcfaninmadrid]

@ Rovermatt

The man is a fool, good to see I am not the only one that thinks so. Pity, because lazy journalists like him and Alexander detract from much of the good work done by writers like Jonathan Wilson, who I think has taught me more about football than anyone else.

[jim mk2]

I should point out that this article was a blog, not a match report

The article appeared in the print newspaper, so how was it a blog ?

[brfcfaninmadrid]

Ah, that is the problem with being abroad, only have the online version! On the website it is under the blogs section.

If it was dressed up as a match report in print that just makes it even worse...

[jim mk2]

If it was dressed up as a match report in print that just makes it even worse...

Been through this before. It was a Monday morning comment / opinion piece. Match reports are in the Sunday papers.

[Rovermatt]

Did this guy not just say he's new on this MB today?

[aletheia]

Excellent article by Oliver Kay in The Times today. Criticises The Observer blog and sympathises with fans.

[Stuart]

Excellent article by Oliver Kay in The Times today. Criticises The Observer blog and sympathises with fans.

He wouldn't have if Ince had been manager...

Some memories don't fade quickly.

[philipl]

Excellent article by Oliver Kay in The Times today. Criticises The Observer blog and sympathises with fans.

Collecting additional evidence for the PCC- that will be useful.

He wouldn't have if Ince had been manager...

Some memories don't fade quickly.

Olivers Kay and Holt getting mixed up?

[SergioPeter89]

Can someone copy the Times article in here? Or PM it.

[Kelbo]

Can someone copy the Times article in here? Or PM it.

You cant copy that onto here, think it breaks the rules, ask the Mods!!