Adam Leitch Webcast-pointless

[1965onwards]

A pathetic reporter more interested in staying on the right side of the clubs management than doing a proper reporting job.

 

If you look at the player ratings he gives (especially this season and last),we should have been and should be in play-off positions.

 

The Echo is far too cosy with the club.

 

A typical provincial paper with a typical provincial reporter.

 

Only one question needs to be asked :

 

"When is He and his paper going to ask the questions that the supporters want answered."

[Long Shot]

I think that a little harsh on Adam - he is just a young lad who is no match for Lowe and, even if he was, would his sycophantic bosses back him? People like Ian Murray and Simon Carter are only in it for their own ends and have no vestige of journalistic traditions, certainly as far as Southampton FC are concerned anyway. Everything is so cosy - even the the bitter Lawrie Mac's column is a bastion of blandness. Our club is dying and LM prattles on about Jock Stein and Matt Busby. Come on big man, get stuck in and tell the fans the truth - if you have the cojones? The guy hates Lowe but says nothing controversial. Is that down to the Echo or LM? I know one thing - if we were in Manchester now the local paper would be in uproar at Bassett's revelations but..............

 

So Adam - if by chance you read this thread - how about an interview with Lowe and ask him to answer Bassett's allegations? Do you have the cojones?

[fos1]

I think that a little harsh on Adam - he is just a young lad who is no match for Lowe and, even if he was, would his sycophantic bosses back him? People like Ian Murray and Simon Carter are only in it for their own ends and have no vestige of journalistic traditions, certainly as far as Southampton FC are concerned anyway. Everything is so cosy - even the the bitter Lawrie Mac's column is a bastion of blandness. Our club is dying and LM prattles on about Jock Stein and Matt Busby. Come on big man, get stuck in and tell the fans the truth - if you have the cojones? The guy hates Lowe but says nothing controversial. Is that down to the Echo or LM? I know one thing - if we were in Manchester now the local paper would be in uproar at Bassett's revelations but..............

 

So Adam - if by chance you read this thread - how about an interview with Lowe and ask him to answer Bassett's allegations? Do you have the cojones?

 

Fully agree the Echo should be asking questions on this and printing the answers have some balls please our club is a mess and you seem to be sitting on the fence !!

[um pahars]

I think that a little harsh on Adam - he is just a young lad who is no match for Lowe and, even if he was, would his sycophantic bosses back him? People like Ian Murray and Simon Carter are only in it for their own ends and have no vestige of journalistic traditions, certainly as far as Southampton FC are concerned anyway.

 

Not sure I would agree on this one.

 

Adam Leitch needs to stand up and be counted. The way the Echo panders to the Club and toes the party line is an absolute disgrace. They should be in there asking questions, refelcting what the vast majority of supporters are thinking and reporting honestly and independently. Instead we get a slightly different version of the Official Site printed every day.

 

In fact, I actually have more respect for Simon Carter because he at least used to have the balls to stand up to Lowe and ask awkward questions. If anything, I think the Echo's reporting has become watered down and psycophantic since Carter has been somewhat sidelined.

 

If this was happening anywhere else the local media and supporters would be asking some serious questions, not coming up with excuses and reporting from some parallel universe.

[Delmary]

Not sure I would agree on this one.

 

Adam Leitch needs to stand up and be counted. The way the Echo panders to the Club and toes the party line is an absolute disgrace. They should be in there asking questions, refelcting what the vast majority of supporters are thinking and reporting honestly and independently. Instead we get a slightly different version of the Official Site printed every day.

 

In fact, I actually have more respect for Simon Carter because he at least used to have the balls to stand up to Lowe and ask awkward questions. If anything, I think the Echo's reporting has become watered down and psycophantic since Carter has been somewhat sidelined.

 

If this was happening anywhere else the local media and supporters would be asking some serious questions, not coming up with excuses and reporting from some parallel universe.

The Echo is just an extended mouth-piece of SFC. The Echo should learn from their local rivals The P*mpey News. They're not scared to stand up against PFC when required.

[PokingFun]

This guy is trying to do a job. Do you really reckon if he asks searching questions of Lowe that he would get a response? Get in the real world. The guy probably has a mortgage to pay like everyone else and therefore prefers not being controversial if that is what his bosses want from him. Its called self preservation and I am sure Saints do not represent his or societies only interest locally either.

[solentstars]

oh my god we are slagging echo reporters of now

[um pahars]

This guy is trying to do a job. Do you really reckon if he asks searching questions of Lowe that he would get a response? Get in the real world. The guy probably has a mortgage to pay like everyone else and therefore prefers not being controversial if that is what his bosses want from him. Its called self preservation and I am sure Saints do not represent his or societies only interest locally either.

 

I certainly think Murray has alot to answer for, as I assume he's the one who brokered the 'deal' with Lowe, but at some point a journalist has to stand up for himself and be counted.

 

Does Leitch want to be an independent journalist asking the questions many people want answering, reporting honestly what is going on and not just regurgitating what the Club are putting out, or is he happy to be a poodle???

 

I certainly don't think the Echo should deliberately set out to be anti Club, anti Lowe or anti anyone, but the current stance, given our circumstances, is risible.

[Long Shot]

This guy is trying to do a job. Do you really reckon if he asks searching questions of Lowe that he would get a response? Get in the real world. The guy probably has a mortgage to pay like everyone else and therefore prefers not being controversial if that is what his bosses want from him. Its called self preservation and I am sure Saints do not represent his or societies only interest locally either.

 

 

Of course you are right but the world is/was full of journalists who were prepared to print and be damned. The Echo is now a worthless rag and from your post it sounds like you too have given up the ghost - which is a shame.

[lordswoodsaints]

the echo is sh1te,any controversial letters are heavily edited to suit there own views,they are too scared to poke too deep because they know they will be gagged by the club and lose all privilages.

[Delmary]

the echo is sh1te,any controversial letters are heavily edited to suit there own views,they are too scared to poke too deep because they know they will be gagged by the club and lose all privilages.

... Edited 11 November, 2008 by Delmary
wrong thread

[Totton Red]

Told you months ago that the deal was done on the return of RL & MW

[lordswoodsaints]

i remember the last few weeks or burleys reign and the saint radio was criticised on air by a listener that had phoned in,basically the listener was a bit p1ssed off that the reporter didnt probe burley about certain things and the reporter said that if they asked the questions that everybody wanted to hear then the club would no longer allow them to speak to the manager or give them any access to the club.

this is why the echo never digs too deep.i know this to be true because a mate of mine works on the sports desk.

[Gordon Mockles]

the echo is sh1te,any controversial letters are heavily edited to suit there own views,they are too scared to poke too deep because they know they will be gagged by the club and lose all privilages.

 

Would/Could the club do that?! What would "removal of privileges" mean? (restricted access from games, training ground, etc.) Surely more media curtains would infuriate fans even more...errrr, in retrospect - I don't think the club care.

 

FFS - Why don't the club ban fans that wear glasses in case that's a sign of intelligence & they might write a nasty letter or phone in some censored radio station after watching a crap game & give a damning report! What has this politically correct, absurd country come to?! Next you'll be telling me Paul Mc Cartney hasn't retired & still persists in performing!!

 

Banning reporters or removing privileges due to dictated articles or censorship is pretty fascist & petty mind. Juvenile!!

 

I do concur, The Echo reporting & general Sports editing & content is pretty shambolic. I think that sentiment echoes true (no pun intended!) for most of Southampton in general!!

Edited 12 November, 2008 by Gordon Mockles

[Gordon Mockles]

As a reporter, I think the day your journalistic content is compromised & your integrity tarnished, is the day you get up & leave your desk, never to return. Work elsewhere. Be objective. Don't pander to the pompous. Your reputation & integrity, as a journalist, are your major organs, without which you don't exist.

[um pahars]

Would/Could the club do that?! What would "removal of privileges" mean? (restricted access from games, training ground, etc.) Surely more media curtains would infuriate fans even more...errrr, in retrospect - I don't think the club care.

 

They certainly could and in the past under they have.

 

As an example around the time that Jones was relieved of his duties, Meridian news ran a story that Lowe didn't like. Consequently they were banished from The Dell.

 

It's not just us though, The News have also had their share of bannings from Fratton Park.

 

As a reporter, I think the day your journalistic content is compromised & your integrity tarnished, is the day you get up & leave your desk, never to return. Work elsewhere. Be objective. Don't pander to the pompous. Your reputation & integrity, as a journalist, are your major organs, without which you don't exist.

 

My sentiments as well.

 

Even if it is a local rag, even if the circulation is small and even if there may be a message coming down from above, any self respecting journalist would be looking at the current situation and thinking we really should be doing something different than the 'boys done well and nirvana is just around the next corner' stuff.

[Wes Tender]

If the Club has struck a deal with the Echo that they will be granted access to the Club hierarchy and players in return for a agreement that the Echo loses its impartiality and independence when it reports Club matters, then that stinks like a month old kipper.

 

A local paper has a duty to report local issues with impartiality and objectivity and if it loses those ideals, then it is just a worthless collection of paper probably more useful for wrapping chips or perhaps more appropriately for use in wiping arses. If they cease to report the news without bias, then they forfeit their right to call their publication a newspaper and they might as well just make it another free distribution product paid for by the advertisers.

 

I wonder whether they appreciate the irony that there is a parallel between their falling circulation and the falling match attendances at St Mary's. Both are caused by the arrogant disdain and contempt with which they treat their supposed customer base.

[PokingFun]

Of course you are right but the world is/was full of journalists who were prepared to print and be damned. The Echo is now a worthless rag and from your post it sounds like you too have given up the ghost - which is a shame.

 

Given up the ghost in what respect?

 

All I am stating is that if an individual doing a job accepts that his role in life as an employee is to do as he is told then that is surely his prerogative if he feels that is the best way to secure his and his family's income. Thats nothing to do with being a journalist.

 

Adam Leitch is a sports journalist, not an investigative journalist trying to dig up as much dirt as he can so that he can offer sensationalist headlines. He reports primarily on the goings on that happen on the pitch and from what I have seen he relates these back realistically enough.

 

The off field stuff and politics he probably has no concrete access to and bar stating his own opinion on goings on there is little else he can report on matters. Why would Adam Leitch want to run the risk of losing some important contacts on the football side or ending up gagged by a court when he is a sports journalist?

 

I just think some of our fans expectations of the echo and Adam Leitch are unrealistic. You all have a choice to buy the echo or not. If you think the information is puppeteering for the club then don't buy it, simple as that really.

 

And no I don't work for the echo or in journalism!?!? :-)

[Roman]

Given up the ghost in what respect?

 

All I am stating is that if an individual doing a job accepts that his role in life as an employee is to do as he is told then that is surely his prerogative if he feels that is the best way to secure his and his family's income. Thats nothing to do with being a journalist.

 

Adam Leitch is a sports journalist, not an investigative journalist trying to dig up as much dirt as he can so that he can offer sensationalist headlines. He reports primarily on the goings on that happen on the pitch and from what I have seen he relates these back realistically enough.

 

The off field stuff and politics he probably has no concrete access to and bar stating his own opinion on goings on there is little else he can report on matters. Why would Adam Leitch want to run the risk of losing some important contacts on the football side or ending up gagged by a court when he is a sports journalist?

 

I just think some of our fans expectations of the echo and Adam Leitch are unrealistic. You all have a choice to buy the echo or not. If you think the information is puppeteering for the club then don't buy it, simple as that really.

 

And no I don't work for the echo or in journalism!?!? :-)

 

I'm too far away to get the Echo. Are you seriously saying that the main local newspaper turns a blind eye to the extraordinary goings-on at the club? That it isn't a 'story' - regardless of whether Leitch or some other reporter deals with it?

 

Speaking as a former newspaper and TV journalist, I find that unbelievable. Funniest of all is the idea that a resourceful reporter wouldn't 'have access' to inside stories at the club. Not having access is like a red rag to a bull to any self-respecting journalist. If you don't have it, you go and get it. The great thing about being a local journalist is having connections.

 

The best reporters who work in their local area feel they have a duty to reflect what happens in their local communities, and not simply the views and prejudices of the powerful. That, pretty much, is the definition of 'The Fourth Estate'.

[LGTL]

The Echo is in agreement with the club, FACT. Adam can only report what he is told to report.

[Roman]

The Echo is in agreement with the club, FACT. Adam can only report what he is told to report.

 

With what 'FACT' is the Echo in agreement with the club? I don't understand.

[LGTL]

The club gives access to the Echo in return for favourable news reports. People can beleive what they want I don't really care, but that is the reason, rather than Adam Leitch's poor news reporting.

[Roman]

The club gives access to the Echo in return for favourable news reports. People can beleive what they want I don't really care, but that is the reason, rather than Adam Leitch's poor news reporting.

 

That's not an answer to my question. What do they agree on? And how is this known?

[South City Si]

I think it would help if most of the journalists were from or at least supported Saints, and therefore would have the interests of the club and the fans with them.

[WestSaint]

Lets be honest here - The paper is an advertiser and just masquerading as a newspaper. You will not get any hard news from them that could compromise their advertisng revenues.

[Ash]

Adam Leitch needs to stand up and be counted. The way the Echo panders to the Club and toes the party line is an absolute disgrace. They should be in there asking questions, refelcting what the vast majority of supporters are thinking and reporting honestly and independently. Instead we get a slightly different version of the Official Site printed every day.

Local media in most places do exactly the same thing, I'm not sure Adam Leitch needs to "stand up and be counted" at all. His interests lay with his employers and his own career, why should he care at all?

If he is a Saints supporter and not giving Lowe the once over, maybe (and this is going to seem completely inconceivable to people who consider Lowe the spawn of satan) he agrees with the way that Lowe is running the club.

 

A lot of nonsense on this site about petitions, banks withdrawing their support etc. etc. but this point really is a futile.

[Roman]

Local media in most places do exactly the same thing, I'm not sure Adam Leitch needs to "stand up and be counted" at all. His interests lay with his employers and his own career, why should he care at all?

 

Do you know this to be the case? A career in journalism is advanced by making a name for yourself, whether it's by a strong record of getting 'scoops', the quality of writing (which in sports reporting requires a certain fearlessness), or whatever. Kowtowing to your employer won't get you anywhere near a national newspaper job for example, unless it's in something like the marketing department.

 

Reporters are banned or criticised day in, day out by clubs. Have you not heard Kinnear's outbursts against the Daily Mirror? Have you seen Fergie on the BBC recently?

[FloridaMarlin]

Given up the ghost in what respect?

 

All I am stating is that if an individual doing a job accepts that his role in life as an employee is to do as he is told then that is surely his prerogative if he feels that is the best way to secure his and his family's income. Thats nothing to do with being a journalist.

 

Adam Leitch is a sports journalist, not an investigative journalist trying to dig up as much dirt as he can so that he can offer sensationalist headlines. He reports primarily on the goings on that happen on the pitch and from what I have seen he relates these back realistically enough.

 

The off field stuff and politics he probably has no concrete access to and bar stating his own opinion on goings on there is little else he can report on matters. Why would Adam Leitch want to run the risk of losing some important contacts on the football side or ending up gagged by a court when he is a sports journalist?

 

I just think some of our fans expectations of the echo and Adam Leitch are unrealistic. You all have a choice to buy the echo or not. If you think the information is puppeteering for the club then don't buy it, simple as that really.

 

And no I don't work for the echo or in journalism!?!? :-)

 

"And no I don't work for the echo or in journalism!" I think we can tell that from your perception of a sports journalist's role.

 

"Adam Leitch is a sports journalist, not an investigative journalist trying to dig up as much dirt as he can so that he can offer sensationalist headlines."

 

As beat reporter, it is a sport's journalist's role to cover all aspects of the club's activities, both on and off the field, and not only because the two are inextricably linked.

 

It's not a question of digging up dirt. Any journalist worth his salt will want to break the stories on the important issues which affect the club.

 

At the heart of this, is the issue of where a sports reporter's role begins or ends.

 

What is a sports journalist? It may sound like an exercise in semantics, but is he a journalist who just writes about sport, or is he a journalist who ALSO writes about sport?

 

How many of the sports journalists at Heysel, Hillsborough or Bradford put their pens down as events unfolded and said: "I'm not writing anything on this, because it's nothing directly to do with the match," and leave the press box?

 

Probably none, because they are journalists, first and foremost, and as a journalist your duty to your readers and your personal desire is to tell the tale.

 

Now, some papers will try and 'protect' their beat reporter by getting guys from the news desk to cover the off-field activities. The rationale behind this is that they can somehow try and persuade the club that it wasn't our football man that uncovered the financial irregularities, so don't take it out on him by banning him from the ground.

 

It hardly ever works.

 

So, has a deal been done, or is the Echo in the club's pocket?

 

To some extent, the local paper is always in the club's pocket. Its coverage is at the behest and whim and mercy of the club.

 

In the UK, all papers have always operated from the overriding fear of having their privileges withdrawn.

 

That's partly down to self-interest and lack of collectivism in the UK.

 

If one paper is banned by a club because of its stance or something it has written, the others rub their hands and immediately try and take advantage.

 

In the States, the media takes a wider view and looks at a bigger picture. An attack on one paper is viewed as an attack on ALL the media, an undermining of their rights and privileges, and even an assault on their right of freedom of speech as set down in the Constitution.

 

Consequently all the media organisations would unite in their condemnation of the club, and it would not be a case of the club banning one paper, but of the club risking a media blackout!!

 

Freedom of Speech and an assumption of a right to know is also probably more ingrained in the American public than the UK. In the UK, fans expect reporters to be fellow supporters.

 

You only have to look at the Echo website for proof of this. How often is a reporter who has tried to tell it as it is slammed for being negative and failing to get behind the team?

 

Unfortunately, all this makes for is a weak and compliant media. Football and clubs in the UK know that banning one paper will not produce the sort of collective outrage and response they would suffer across the pond.

 

Because of that, Football and clubs know they hold the aces, and control the media agenda.

 

The product of that? Football and clubs basically take the p*ss out of the media in the UK. No access to players, no one-on-one interviews. The only comments from managers or players come from tame, insipid controlled press conferences, presided over by a club (or FA, in the case of England) press flunky who stares daggers at the assembled reporters, fields the questions and bats away any potentially controversial or dangerous ones.

 

It is standard practice in the States in all the major sports - NFL, MLB, NBA, NHL - that pre-game, the media is given access to players at the training camp, and post-game they are allowed into the locker rooms (or dressing rooms) 15 minutes after the end of the match, once the coach has done his debrief.

 

You can really imagine Sir Alex Ferguson letting the media into Man Utd's dressing room, can't you?

 

No you can't because he has never been asked, and nobody would dare ask him now.

 

The Premier League perpetuates this soft-pedalling with its woolly requirement that all clubs to make one MEMBER OF THE COACHING STAFF and two players available for post-match interviews.

 

That allows Fergie to wriggle out of talking to the BBC (only the UK's biggest broadcaster!) while the farce conducted in the tunnel of the presentation of the MoM award and other TV flash interviews serve duty as the post-match player interviews. Written media rarely if ever gain access to players, club press officers tell newspaper reporters: "Get your quotes off the tv."

 

The fear of having even the lip service that passes for access removed is the overriding one in the UK media, and now dictates everything. The failure to take a collective stance when it should have, means the UK now has the football media it deserves.

 

Insipid, compliant and weak-kneed. No wonder Premiership clubs are owned by some of the biggest crooks on the planet. No wonder managers take all sorts of underhand, illegal payments with little fear of impugnity.

 

Back to original question. Is the Echo in the club's pocket?

 

Who knows, but they won't be the only party guilty of that particular crime. Only when they realise they have nothing to lose will they take the gloves off.

 

And when their advertising revenue no longer depends or hinges on their Saints coverage (and that is often a big factor with local papers) will they realise the biggest thing they have to lose is their credibility.

[Long Shot]

"And no I don't work for the echo or in journalism!" I think we can tell that from your perception of a sports journalist's role.

 

"Adam Leitch is a sports journalist, not an investigative journalist trying to dig up as much dirt as he can so that he can offer sensationalist headlines."

 

As beat reporter, it is a sport's journalist's role to cover all aspects of the club's activities, both on and off the field, and not only because the two are inextricably linked.

 

It's not a question of digging up dirt. Any journalist worth his salt will want to break the stories on the important issues which affect the club.

 

At the heart of this, is the issue of where a sports reporter's role begins or ends.

 

What is a sports journalist? It may sound like an exercise in semantics, but is he a journalist who just writes about sport, or is he a journalist who ALSO writes about sport?

 

How many of the sports journalists at Heysel, Hillsborough or Bradford put their pens down as events unfolded and said: "I'm not writing anything on this, because it's nothing directly to do with the match," and leave the press box?

 

Probably none, because they are journalists, first and foremost, and as a journalist your duty to your readers and your personal desire is to tell the tale.

 

Now, some papers will try and 'protect' their beat reporter by getting guys from the news desk to cover the off-field activities. The rationale behind this is that they can somehow try and persuade the club that it wasn't our football man that uncovered the financial irregularities, so don't take it out on him by banning him from the ground.

 

It hardly ever works.

 

So, has a deal been done, or is the Echo in the club's pocket?

 

To some extent, the local paper is always in the club's pocket. Its coverage is at the behest and whim and mercy of the club.

 

In the UK, all papers have always operated from the overriding fear of having their privileges withdrawn.

 

That's partly down to self-interest and lack of collectivism in the UK.

 

If one paper is banned by a club because of its stance or something it has written, the others rub their hands and immediately try and take advantage.

 

In the States, the media takes a wider view and looks at a bigger picture. An attack on one paper is viewed as an attack on ALL the media, an undermining of their rights and privileges, and even an assault on their right of freedom of speech as set down in the Constitution.

 

Consequently all the media organisations would unite in their condemnation of the club, and it would not be a case of the club banning one paper, but of the club risking a media blackout!!

 

Freedom of Speech and an assumption of a right to know is also probably more ingrained in the American public than the UK. In the UK, fans expect reporters to be fellow supporters.

 

You only have to look at the Echo website for proof of this. How often is a reporter who has tried to tell it as it is slammed for being negative and failing to get behind the team?

 

Unfortunately, all this makes for is a weak and compliant media. Football and clubs in the UK know that banning one paper will not produce the sort of collective outrage and response they would suffer across the pond.

 

Because of that, Football and clubs know they hold the aces, and control the media agenda.

 

The product of that? Football and clubs basically take the p*ss out of the media in the UK. No access to players, no one-on-one interviews. The only comments from managers or players come from tame, insipid controlled press conferences, presided over by a club (or FA, in the case of England) press flunky who stares daggers at the assembled reporters, fields the questions and bats away any potentially controversial or dangerous ones.

 

It is standard practice in the States in all the major sports - NFL, MLB, NBA, NHL - that pre-game, the media is given access to players at the training camp, and post-game they are allowed into the locker rooms (or dressing rooms) 15 minutes after the end of the match, once the coach has done his debrief.

 

You can really imagine Sir Alex Ferguson letting the media into Man Utd's dressing room, can't you?

 

No you can't because he has never been asked, and nobody would dare ask him now.

 

The Premier League perpetuates this soft-pedalling with its woolly requirement that all clubs to make one MEMBER OF THE COACHING STAFF and two players available for post-match interviews.

 

That allows Fergie to wriggle out of talking to the BBC (only the UK's biggest broadcaster!) while the farce conducted in the tunnel of the presentation of the MoM award and other TV flash interviews serve duty as the post-match player interviews. Written media rarely if ever gain access to players, club press officers tell newspaper reporters: "Get your quotes off the tv."

 

The fear of having even the lip service that passes for access removed is the overriding one in the UK media, and now dictates everything. The failure to take a collective stance when it should have, means the UK now has the football media it deserves.

 

Insipid, compliant and weak-kneed. No wonder Premiership clubs are owned by some of the biggest crooks on the planet. No wonder managers take all sorts of underhand, illegal payments with little fear of impugnity.

 

Back to original question. Is the Echo in the club's pocket?

 

Who knows, but they won't be the only party guilty of that particular crime. Only when they realise they have nothing to lose will they take the gloves off.

 

And when their advertising revenue no longer depends or hinges on their Saints coverage (and that is often a big factor with local papers) will they realise the biggest thing they have to lose is their credibility.

 

 

Admiral post - thanks for taking the time!

[ottery st mary]

I will ECHO that.

[PokingFun]

I'm too far away to get the Echo. Are you seriously saying that the main local newspaper turns a blind eye to the extraordinary goings-on at the club? That it isn't a 'story' - regardless of whether Leitch or some other reporter deals with it?

 

Speaking as a former newspaper and TV journalist, I find that unbelievable. Funniest of all is the idea that a resourceful reporter wouldn't 'have access' to inside stories at the club. Not having access is like a red rag to a bull to any self-respecting journalist. If you don't have it, you go and get it. The great thing about being a local journalist is having connections.

 

The best reporters who work in their local area feel they have a duty to reflect what happens in their local communities, and not simply the views and prejudices of the powerful. That, pretty much, is the definition of 'The Fourth Estate'.

 

Personally, I don't consider what goes on at Saints as particularly big news other than whta happens on the pitch. I really don't worry too much about things I cannot influence myself.

 

I guess only the echo and the club know the truth but I respect your opinion on journalists generally if you are from that trade. My view was simply that some people prefer to report (or do any work) that their boss tells them to preserve their job.

[Wes Tender]

A masterly summary Florida Marlin.

[Totton Red]

I'm too far away to get the Echo. Are you seriously saying that the main local newspaper turns a blind eye to the extraordinary goings-on at the club? That it isn't a 'story' - regardless of whether Leitch or some other reporter deals with it?

 

Speaking as a former newspaper and TV journalist, I find that unbelievable. Funniest of all is the idea that a resourceful reporter wouldn't 'have access' to inside stories at the club. Not having access is like a red rag to a bull to any self-respecting journalist. If you don't have it, you go and get it. The great thing about being a local journalist is having connections.

 

The best reporters who work in their local area feel they have a duty to reflect what happens in their local communities, and not simply the views and prejudices of the powerful. That, pretty much, is the definition of 'The Fourth Estate'.

 

Worked for the media bourne from American ideals recently?

[LaptopSaint]

Top post Florida. I don't read the Echo but I find the coverage of football in almost all the British media breathtakingly ****e. With one or two fine exceptions, no-one seems to ask the questions that matter.

[eelpie]

i remember the last few weeks or burleys reign and the saint radio was criticised on air by a listener that had phoned in,basically the listener was a bit p1ssed off that the reporter didnt probe burley about certain things and the reporter said that if they asked the questions that everybody wanted to hear then the club would no longer allow them to speak to the manager or give them any access to the club.

this is why the echo never digs too deep.i know this to be true because a mate of mine works on the sports desk.

 

So Lowe censors the Press!!

[SaintRichmond]

Via Morgan Schneiderlin, Mr Lowe has called upon the (remaining) Customers to give the Team TIME, because they will come good and get us back to the Prem.

 

Fine sentiments Mr Lowe

 

The article does not mention HOW that Goal will be achieved ....for example....

 

Will Schneiderlin, or any other of the most promising Youngsters in the Team, be around after the January Sales, to help us achieve that ?

 

Not a lot of point in getting a player to issue a Rallying call Mr Lowe, if he himself is most likely one of the very players that is being lined up for Sale

 

Now, IF Mr Lowe were to issue a statement that, until the end of this season, we do not HAVE to sell some of our promising Young Squad, then perhaps the likes of myself would put some creedance in words that are uttered through the Echo

 

But as we are likely to have to carry on with yet another "New" Team, after three or four players are SOLD in January, then the sentiments echoed in the Echo are not worth the paper they are writen on

[stevegrant]

So Lowe censors the Press!!

I think you'll find Leon Crouch was the chairman at the time of Burley's departure.

 

I have vague recollection of the Echo (might have been Simon Carter specifically rather than the paper as a whole) being banned by SFC for a short period of time when they suggested that Burley was on the verge of being sacked around this time last year, so it's got nothing to do with who is in charge really.

 

FloridaMarlin's excellent post above sums up the situation very well for me. Basically, it's not "the Echo are being censored by SFC", it happens with every single newspaper/football club relationship across the country.

[SaintRichmond]

i remember the last few weeks or burleys reign and the saint radio was criticised on air by a listener that had phoned in,basically the listener was a bit p1ssed off that the reporter didnt probe burley about certain things and the reporter said that if they asked the questions that everybody wanted to hear then the club would no longer allow them to speak to the manager or give them any access to the club.

this is why the echo never digs too deep.i know this to be true because a mate of mine works on the sports desk.

 

 

 

Not exactly the same calibre of papparazzi as is around in the National Media circles ......... once they get a sniff of a story, they never lett go until they get the facts .............

 

Like it or not, that is how they survive, by "Preying" on others

 

The Echo has about as much clout as Watchtower .........

[stevegrant]

Not exactly the same calibre of papparazzi as is around in the National Media circles ......... once they get a sniff of a story, they never lett go until they get the facts .............

Or they just make them up.

 

The Echo has about as much clout as Watchtower .........

Which is precisely why, in my opinion, they feel the need to keep on the club's side. The Echo probably needs SFC more than SFC needs the Echo.

[Roman]

I think you'll find Leon Crouch was the chairman at the time of Burley's departure.

 

I have vague recollection of the Echo (might have been Simon Carter specifically rather than the paper as a whole) being banned by SFC for a short period of time when they suggested that Burley was on the verge of being sacked around this time last year, so it's got nothing to do with who is in charge really.

 

FloridaMarlin's excellent post above sums up the situation very well for me. Basically, it's not "the Echo are being censored by SFC", it happens with every single newspaper/football club relationship across the country.

 

I suspect that it's just as much a case of the Echo censoring itself. The pressures have always been there, and maybe they're now harder to resist. So possibly the urge to go for the story of Southampton's truly astonishing decline has been avoided for the sake of a quiet life.

 

Seems more like cutting your nose off to spite your face, though, because, like the club and its fans, the paper lives and dies by its (falling?) readership. They lose faith in you and you're cooked.

 

When I worked in local newspapers, it was for a paper that set itself up as an alternative voice to the big established rag, and it was a buzz going after the big, the famous and invariably pompous. If that doesn't seem to happen any more, then in a way, places like TSW ARE the alternative - a kind of samizdat of the digital age - if a little chaotic and self-destructive at times.

 

But hey, who'd want it any other way...

[ecuk268]

Sadly the Echo has declined from a slightly dull but readable local newspaper into the tabloid wannabee that it is today. There is very little actual news in it and most of that comes from "easy" sources like press releases from SFC or the city council.

 

Any newspaper worth it's salt would be doorstepping people like councillors, local authority managers (and football club directors) and trying to get some real answers. But that would take effort. Much easier (and more profitable) to fill the paper with adverts and photos of meaningless events (which they hope people will then buy) or asking people to send in their comments by e-mail which can then be printed to use up a bit more space.

[LGTL]

edit

[SaintRichmond]

Or they just make them up.

 

 

Which is precisely why, in my opinion, they feel the need to keep on the club's side. The Echo probably needs SFC more than SFC needs the Echo.

 

 

 

Das Daily Echo - Propaganda Wing of The Rupert Lowe (Formerly Southampton ) Football Club

[saint lard]

http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/webchat/

[Roman]

How very 'corporate'.

 

A few months back, there was one very good reason to buy the Evening Standard: to read Spurs fan Matthew Norman's absolutely withering attacks on the powers-that-be at Tottenham. Maybe the Echo can take him on loan.

[Ash]

Do you know this to be the case? A career in journalism is advanced by making a name for yourself, whether it's by a strong record of getting 'scoops', the quality of writing (which in sports reporting requires a certain fearlessness), or whatever. Kowtowing to your employer won't get you anywhere near a national newspaper job for example, unless it's in something like the marketing department.

 

Reporters are banned or criticised day in, day out by clubs. Have you not heard Kinnear's outbursts against the Daily Mirror? Have you seen Fergie on the BBC recently?

Ferguson is boycotting the BBC in protest at a panorama documentary which featured his son, not something a sports writer said. I really don't see the significance of Joe Kinnear calling someone a ****, what does that have to do with the Echo? Kinnear had a go at him for printing falsehoods about him, are you suggesting the Echo should take a similar journalistic route?

Also, I do know this to be the case, anyone with any understanding of the media and newspaper industry knows that ou tend to keep the people you get your story from sweet unless you have a real story about them. Running headlines about how it was a mistake to sack Sturrock, not buy Saha and Malbranque, not back Redknapp, appoint Burley, be well spoken in a largely working class sport. Heads will not roll, but he will be stopped from getting access to the club. See how far his career goes then.

Find an example of any other one club city where a local journalist has gone after the chairman of the local club and gone on to a national paper.

[FloridaMarlin]

Ferguson is boycotting the BBC in protest at a panorama documentary which featured his son, not something a sports writer said. I really don't see the significance of Joe Kinnear calling someone a ****, what does that have to do with the Echo? Kinnear had a go at him for printing falsehoods about him, are you suggesting the Echo should take a similar journalistic route?

Also, I do know this to be the case, anyone with any understanding of the media and newspaper industry knows that ou tend to keep the people you get your story from sweet unless you have a real story about them. Running headlines about how it was a mistake to sack Sturrock, not buy Saha and Malbranque, not back Redknapp, appoint Burley, be well spoken in a largely working class sport. Heads will not roll, but he will be stopped from getting access to the club. See how far his career goes then.

Find an example of any other one club city where a local journalist has gone after the chairman of the local club and gone on to a national paper.

 

I could give you plenty of examples of journos from one-club cities who have gone after the chairman, and who would have had the national newspapers falling over themselves to get them, if they wanted to go.

 

You might not remember Mike Neasom from The News, who went after successive p***ey chairmen, from John Deacon, thru Jim Gregory and Venables, to Mandaric with a relish, and who would have had Gaydamak wetting himself had he not died a few years ago.

 

Alan Oliver at the Newcastle Chronicle is fearless in his pursuit of the truth, just ask Freddie Shepherd and now Mike Ashley (and he could walk into any national paper he wants had he chosen to), Rick Waghorn did a lot to send Robert Chase packing from Norwich, Don Watters likewise with Ridsdale at the Yorkshire Evening Post.

 

Closer to home, Derek MacGregor worked for the Bournemouth Echo, where he was banned for some of the critical stuff he wrote when Tony Pulis was in charge. He went straight from the Bournemouth Echo to The Sun.

 

The pattern with the names above, and it's a sad one, is that all those guys are of an older generation of football writers, one which always put the pursuit of the story and the truth ahead of anything else.

 

That's not to say that the current or future generations of reporters are not pursuers of truth, but what has changed is the attitude and stance of the organs they work for.

 

You can't blame the reporter if his employer's stance is not to take the club on.

 

Even The News, once the most fearless critic of p***ey, has now become a flag-waver. The paper has realised that the football club is the biggest story in the city and consequently, its financial well-being is strongly tied to the club's. A glance at the paper (or its website in my case) shows a fawning use of the word "we" when talking about the club.

 

It's the sort of thing that would have the fearless Neasom spinning in his grave.

For all its faults, that is a level of sycophancy the Echo has not yet resorted to.

 

If you do know anything about the workings of the media, and the football press in particular, you will know that being banned by a club will do no harm at all to an individual reporter's career prospects or chances of working for a national newspaper.

 

In fact, just the opposite. It shows the reporter has the cojones to stand up and try to tell the truth, and damn the consequences. A little notoriety is actually considered sexy by most sports editors in national newspapers.

 

Editors control the direction and tone of a newspaper's coverage. Reporters actually have little control over what they write.

 

Editors will know, via the conferences held daily (more than once a day at some papers) what stories his reporters have or are working on.

 

As the director of the paper's coverage, it is the editor's decision what storylines to chase down, and how he subsequently wants them played.

 

It's down to the editor to decide whether he wants to run a story which will result in his reporter being banned, and a good editor will back his reporter if that happens.

 

That happened early on in Lowe's first term at the club, when both parties were holding pi**ing contests to scent-mark out their territory. The paper blinked first, not locally, but bowing to pressure from on high as The Echo's American owners Gannett (God love 'em) were concerned at the implications on advertising revenue and ordered the editor to back down.

 

Lowe has never forgotten his victory on that occasion and is probably still using it as leverage even now.

 

Allied to that, is the fact that increasingly these days, editors aware that the football club is invariably the biggest story on their patch, fear it would be counter-productive to upset them, with General Patton's words on tents and urination at the forefront of their thoughts.

 

Under those circumstances, it's rather difficult for a reporter to write the sort of story which you claim will harm his career!