Mediawatch : Thu Jan 08, 2015 8:15 pm  

Thought this might be worth a discussion, and will update as we go through the season.

I think we have a pretty mixed set of coverage in the media.

Hull Daily Mail
Generally pretty favourable to us over the last decade or so. James Smailes is pretty relentlessly positive in his coverage, and we benefitted from this recently with umpteen articles from the training camp in Portugal. What I would say is that pretty much all the local journos just print what the clubs tell them verbatim, there's little meaningful independent critique and IMO that's due to lack of willingness to potentially compromise scoops/inside track. A shame really. When they get someone "independent", it turns out to be either Paul Cooke (who to be fair is honest) or Craig Murdock who again tends to focus only on spinning either clubs' signings/training regime positively.

Radio Humberside
Seems to me like both sides have too much previous and the relatively abivalent at best relationship is here to stay. I'm not saying this is all a one way street by the way. Whilst all three pundits (Lloyd, Richardson and Pinkney) have clear Rovers links, and there appears to be no attempt to redress the balance, we do seem slightly weird about controlling our media output. I'd love RH to appoint someone that a) knows about rugby league beyond the HU postcode and b) is FC-friendly to even things up, but that's unlikely. I'm actually a fan of Mike White. He likes to play devil's advocate across different issues, and seems, for example, the only local journo talking about City and raising any sort of challenge. I think he'd be a good impartial RL producer.

Yorkshire Post
Clearly we get a small share of RL voice in the context of Leeds Rhinos, and quite right too. Generally I find their articles well written and balanced, would just like to see a few more of them.

RL Press
Can't say I'm a regular reader, unless I know there's going to be an FC feature, which appears to be practically never. Do we get a fair share of voice for the 4th best supported team in SL (albeit the 11th best one)?

Social Media
The club website is OK, looks quite smart, can be a bit clunky to navigate to some of the good content. In terms of Twitter I'd like to see a bit more personal interaction with fans.

Looking forward to another season of "apoplexy" at the opinions of our media "friends"

Re: Mediawatch : Thu Jan 08, 2015 9:26 pm  

You are quite paranoid about the media over here generally aren't you?

Re: Mediawatch : Thu Jan 08, 2015 9:43 pm  

SirStan wrote:

You are quite paranoid about the media over here generally aren't you?

Hmm..I've said the HDM are FC friendly, RH are not, YP are balanced. Raging paranoia? OK then. How about reading the post and commenting on specifics? If not re FC or Rovers, consider the likelihood of the HDM or RH awarding Allam "Villain of the Year" as The Independent did. I think we have a high quantity of local articles but little independent analytical quality.

Re: Mediawatch : Thu Jan 08, 2015 9:55 pm  

I read all your post, I always do, as you more oft than not have something interesting to say. However, my point was more about the need to even have a thread about FC's perceived coverage versus other teams (both RL and other sports). It's also a common theme year on year with you isn't it?

Re: Mediawatch : Thu Jan 08, 2015 9:59 pm  

SirStan wrote:

You are quite paranoid about the media over here generally aren't you?

I'm not

Re: Mediawatch : Thu Jan 08, 2015 10:08 pm  

I guess it's a question of what you want to see. Living down here you could possibly argue that RL is poorly reported on. But I generally speaking feel I'm up to date on all FC news. It's out there if you wish to see it. I know FA about most other clubs unless it's a big news story. For instance I don't have a clue who our near neighbours have or haven't signed, apart from Bailey as I have no interest. But I imagine I'd soon be up to speed.
So in response to the start of this thread for me as the outsider it's pretty much all good.

But if the club want to attract new or lapsed fans I'd imagine the perceived bias of some supposedly level headed impartial media mouth pieces is not good for the club. There is after all nothing worse than explaining to someone who watched us on radio Humberside that GLs view point is totally at odds with reality at times.

The bottom line is that with social media the world is smaller and I'd like to think that the likes of RH and HDM with their bias will soon be moved aside. The more we have blogs like Wilfs. Fanzines like Up the cream etc then traditional media will either have to up the anti or lose out.

Re: Mediawatch : Thu Jan 08, 2015 10:18 pm  

Jake the Peg wrote:

I'm not

"People like you never are" to quote Basil Fawlty.

Re: Mediawatch : Thu Jan 08, 2015 10:27 pm  

SirStan wrote:

I read all your post, I always do, as you more oft than not have something interesting to say. However, my point was more about the need to even have a thread about FC's perceived coverage versus other teams (both RL and other sports). It's also a common theme year on year with you isn't it?

I think media coverage is a relevant topic Stanley. Let's agree to disagree. Won't be the first time. Round and round we go, and oh, don't you know, this is the game that we came here for? Love a Kemp, me.

Re: Mediawatch : Thu Jan 08, 2015 10:42 pm  

@airlie_bird wrote:

I guess it's a question of what you want to see. Living down here you could possibly argue that RL is poorly reported on. But I generally speaking feel I'm up to date on all FC news. It's out there if you wish to see it.

Agreed, there's loads of stuff out there. My point is most material is club-generated, whether directly or via HDM. Which is why the YP articles are IMO of most interest.

@airlie_bird wrote:

I know FA about most other clubs unless it's a big news story. For instance I don't have a clue who our near neighbours have or haven't signed, apart from Bailey as I have no interest. But I imagine I'd soon be up to speed.

Try social media, @seangleese3 is insightful.

@airlie_bird wrote:

But if the club want to attract new or lapsed fans I'd imagine the perceived bias of some supposedly level headed impartial media mouth pieces is not good for the club. There is after all nothing worse than explaining to someone who watched us on radio Humberside that GLs view point is totally at odds with reality at times.

True enough. IMO there should be some form of B&W representation on RH even if outnumbered 3:1, and they should broadcast a fans forum. We have plenty anyway but are missing a trick not reaching a wider audience.

@airlie_bird wrote:

The bottom line is that with social media the world is smaller and I'd like to think that the likes of RH and HDM with their bias will soon be moved aside. The more we have blogs like Wilfs. Fanzines like Up the cream etc then traditional media will either have to up the anti or lose out.

Great point. So much choice these days, resonance with the reader/listener will be crucial.

Re: Mediawatch : Fri Jan 09, 2015 9:47 am  

SirStan wrote:

You are quite paranoid about the media over here generally aren't you?

Its not paranoia if they ARE out to get you