The Secret Diary of Lee Ryder (aged 44 and a half)

[Happy Face 29]

They contradict themselves, suggesting only 300-500 were there to show anti-Ashley sentiment, as if that proves it's only a small minority....but then pointing out that negative Ashley stories drive sales up, suggesting widespread animosity among the chronicle readership.

[JawD 31]

In fairness, I doubt she had much say in the matter. I think most employees at the club are puppets these days.

[Kid Dynamite 5903]

If it was between putting my name on it or not paying my mortgage that month then yeah, Id stick my name on it

[NJS 3977]

The thing is the fat cunt knows the papers want/need access so will probably be forced to apologise and promise not to report any anti-cunt events in the future. However to some extent he obviously thinks its still a pre-internet world where there are no other outlets for dissent/organisation. The more we see his actions, the more unfathomable his other success seems.

Edited October 28, 2013 by NJS

[hostile_statue 0]

We always say that Ashley doesn't give a fuck what we think of him, but this shows us that the fat man do care, at least if it's in any way associated with Sports Direct. His weak spot has been detected, now go for the kill!

[ewerk 26284]

 

If you were head of Media/PR and had to stick your name on something as moronic like that with no input would you? I wouldn't.

So either

#1 she did have input

#2 doesn't have the sway to convince people based on her job title to stop pr suicide, making her either not every good at it/or as you say a puppet

#3 didn't care her name was on it

 

I'd be getting a new job myself before my career history was filled with fairly large errors in judgement

 

Or #4 Three less papers to deal with means she can finish at lunch time on a Friday.

[Howmanheyman 26775]

Hope Wendy has a good long shower when she finishes work, you know, to wash the stench of this regime off.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Wonder what her credentials were when going for the job, Why the lads in her interview thought "oh aye she's the one for us" does her twitter profile offer any clues

 

 

Just to prove it isn't personal I'll jump in the shower with her and scrub her back.

[JonTheMag 4]

This is brilliant from Luke Edwards. Link is here, and is less of a headache to read: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/newcastle-united/10409369/Were-sports-reporters-Mr-Ashley-not-media-partners-and-were-worth-more-than-you-think.html

 

Newcastle United’s owner Mike Ashley does not like newspapers. We are a nuisance to him, we criticise and dare to question his decisions, but most of all we do not pay millions of pounds every season for the right to cover Premier League football matches.

Last week, the Newcastle board, led by Ashley, Director of Football Joe Kinnear and Football Secretary Lee Charnley, decided to punish the three local papers on Tyneside: The Chronicle, The Journal and Sunday Sun.

The decision to ban them came after several threats had been made via the club’s media department that they would be if they continued to offer negative coverage of the team and the club.

So what was the ban for? One of the papers, which are all part of the Trinity Mirror stable, the Chronicle, gave too much coverage to an anti-Ashley protest march and did not defend the club’s owner enough in the face of a very vocal organising campaign.

Last season, Newcastle also banned the Daily and Sunday Telegraph for writing a story about the danger of dressing room divisions after the 6-0 home defeat by Liverpool and that certain players, namely Yohan Cabaye, were more interested in themselves and trying to secure a move than the team.

The story has since been confirmed by the club’s former goalkeeper Steve Harper on the record and Cabaye missed three games at the start of the season while on strike in a bid to force Newcastle to sell him to Arsenal. My ban has been lifted.

Write a story that is true and you can prove, but we don’t like it because it is uncomfortable for us? You’re banned. Write a story covering the details of a protest march, why it is taking place and what it hopes to achieve, but don’t defend Ashley? You’re banned.

There are some of you reading this who will also claim not to like newspapers. Journalists are not the most popular people and it’s fashionable to knock the industry in the wake of the Leveson Inquiry and phone-hacking scandals.

But the very fact you are reading this in the first place means you still have an interest in what we write. Whether you agree with what you read is irrelevant, disagreeing is part of the fun.

We are, fundamentally, a source of news. We spark debate and we comment on things that happen in the game, but most of you read a newspaper or its website because, on some level, you enjoy it. After all, nobody is forcing you too.

Ashley doesn’t like the media when it comes to focus on his life or business interests. He is a very private individual and there is nothing wrong with that.

So why, if he doesn’t speak to the media about Sports Direct, doesn’t explain himself to journalists and, through them, to his customers that have turned up in their droves for years and turned him into a billionaire, should he communicate with Newcastle’s supporters?

That isn’t going to change. He doesn’t have to say anything in the media if he does not want to, just as any chief executive of a big business doesn’t have to tell a business reporter why he has stopped employees using the internet to read about football when they’re supposed to be working! Tut-tut if that’s you.

However, Ashley’s suspicion of the media, and newspapers particularly, has deepened since he became involved in football. Part of that is because he is under more scrutiny, but mainly it is because he has never grasped the fact a football club is a business that is part of the entertainment industry.

Like every other area of the entertainment industry, coverage is subjective. When a theatre critic slams a new production of Othello he isn’t banned from the theatre, although the director may never speak to him again. When a new album comes out, it is reviewed, positively, or negatively, depending on the reviewer’s preference.

Sales are generated through this coverage. Interest in the musician is created by interviews, features and comment pieces, which in turn publicise gigs and concerts, making the artist and, more important the record companies money.

Newspapers get to give their verdict on all of these things for free because it is, in effect, free advertising. It is a mutually beneficial relationship and has always been so.

Ashley, though, is one of the Premier League chairmen who want to make newspapers pay to cover games. Thankfully, his calls have been rejected by the Premier League who realise they need newspaper coverage. It provides the widest exposure and gives the game its largest audience figures.

In August, despite more than a decade of falling sales, an average of 7,924,574 national newspapers were sold every day. It is accepted that at least two people, on average, look at every paper so daily readership is in excess of 14m people.

Combine that with website traffic – around two million people every day read the sport section of the Guardian and Telegraph websites alone – and local newspaper sales, and over half of the adult population in Britain still get their news and sports updates from newspaper companies.

To put things into context, BBC’s Match of the Day, the most popular football show on television, averages between 6-7m viewers once a week.

But Ashley can cope with television and radio because he can make money out of them. Newspapers are different and he has no control over what we think and write about him or his football club and, within the strict constraints of libel law, we can say what we want.

We can print stories that football clubs don’t want to appear. We can reveal sensitive information, we speak to contacts in secret and we protect their identities.

We can sway public opinion with our comment pieces and our analysis. We criticise Newcastle, we complain loudly when bad decisions are made and we ask questions that are uncomfortable for the board and the manager.

But we also praise and congratulate when things go well. We write rave reviews of performances, offer adulation to players, managers and, as was the case with Newcastle a couple of years ago, praise for impressive financial figures. This is always forgotten.

The bottom line is, and it’s always the bottom line Ashley thinks of, we do not show up on a balance sheet, but we do make money out of covering football matches. Fans log on to our websites and buy our newspapers because they want to read about clubs, players, managers and, yes, owners like Ashley too.

Ashley, though, wants media partners not independent coverage. Newcastle do not control those who pay to cover Premier League football, but there is a subtle difference between newspapers and the broadcast media.

We are not constrained by contracts and we scratch under the surface. Bland pre-match and post-match interviews are a small fraction of what we do.

We sometimes find the dirty linen hidden away, not the clean, pristine stuff hung out for all to see by official club magazines, websites, matchday programmes.

We are difficult and inquisitive. We sometimes get things wrong, but in a democratic country, sports reporters, like all journalists, are allowed to say and report on what we want.

It is comment, it is opinion, it is free speech and it is under threat, because Newcastle United do not always like what we say and we don’t pay to say it.

Edited October 28, 2013 by JonTheMag

[donaldstott 0]

Whichever way you look at it, a position in the press office at NUFC is a thankless task.

 

Getting players to speak to the media is like herding cats. The amount of egos she'll have to deal with is phenomenal.

 

Nevertheless, it's her job to improve coverage for NUFC. She is right that the coverage is disproportionate. If she sits back and takes it on the chin then she's not doing her job.

 

Banning journalists in itself is not particularly new (or newsworthy) - see Fergie, Harry Redknapp and NUFC on a number of occasions in the past.

 

My guess is that the press pack will be allowed in by the end of next week and may think twice about the level of balance to the coverage the next time there is a march - in which case she will be praised by her employers.

[Renton 17745]

I read some of those articles, thought they were sycophantic towards the club tbh.

Edited October 28, 2013 by Renton

[NJS 3977]

I read some of those articles, thought they were sycophantic towards the club tbh.

Exactly - I can't see how anyone could get the idea the articles were supportive of the protests - in fact in general they backed the club.

[donaldstott 0]

 

is it disproportionate though? i'd say the vast majority of those papers are purely about the club/football and things that surround it.

 

If you put it in the terms she outlines, 0.6% of the people who attended the game, less than a third of those expected, should an objective press not be questioning the level of discontent/asking questions about apathy?

 

The problem for NUFC (which Luke Edwards alludes to) is that NUFC sells papers. So if the press can pick up stories that put it on the front and back pages they will.

[McFaul 35]

I read some of those articles, thought they were sycophantic towards the club tbh.

Absolutely spot on.

[donaldstott 0]

Exactly - I can't see how anyone could get the idea the articles were supportive of the protests - in fact in general they backed the club.

 

It's the Ed Miliband Nazi Father thing again. The headlines aren't supportive and the journos obviously don't write them.

[Sonatine 9987]

The moment Pardew was gagged, caught live on camera...

 

http://www.itv.com/news/tyne-tees/update/2013-10-29/video-ncj-journalist-trying-to-ask-pardew-a-question/

Edited October 29, 2013 by Sonatine

[trophyshy 6434]

Shambolic in every regard.

[Gemmill 34422]

Ryder: Ah right okay. :lol:

[The Fish 8989]

 

The NUST Board were shocked and surprised to learn that the Journal, Chronicle and Sunday Sun have been banned by Mike Ashley. The local media plays a vital role in the flow of information between the football club and it's supporters, with the club having many avenues such as the match day programme, official website and social media to respond to any perceived injustice it feels, without the draconian and negative decision for all parties, of bullying the local press.

In a recently televised interview, the Newcastle United manager, Alan Pardew, in a rare moment of openness said ,in addition to Mike Ashley not understanding the football business, that "When he (Ashley) is upset he does things that aren't brilliant for the football club."

Unfortunately, we have found yet another example where Mike Ashley has got upset, the local newspapers having the temerity of reporting on a march by supporters who aren't happy with the running of the football club by Ashley.

This episode is yet another in a long line of embarrassing incidents that the football club and its supporters have had to suffer, thanks to a remote owner who runs Newcastle United with only lip service to the idea of a properly functioning board and management team.

Until the football club have an ownership structure that endeavours to work constructively with all parts of the local community, including the media and especially the supporters, Newcastle United appears doomed to continue in this day to day existence of moving from one 'own goal' to the next. A long-term plan built around an all-inclusive structure is the only way the club will ever stand a chance of achieving the potential we all know Newcastle United has in abundance.

[Rayvin 4964]

It is actually seriously depressing that there's nothing any of us can do about this. As has been said, the smart approach would be for people to simply not turn up any more... but how do you organise that when some people are so loyal to the club that they would never entertain the idea, no matter how hard it got.

 

Is Newcastle a PLC? A hostile takeover wouldn't really work given that Ashley is the majority shareholder, but people could buy up a stake in the club which might then reduce the cost of someone else coming in and taking it over - if enough of us did it.

[Monroe Transfer 0]

NUST still exist?

[essembeeofsunderland 811]

So they can attend press meetings but not ask questions.

[Happy Face 29]

That was the SOL press room. Not banned from there.

[essembeeofsunderland 811]

So our press officer was at the sos to make sure no reporters from the Chron,Sunday Sun and Journal asked Pardew any questions.

[ewerk 26284]

I would imagine the press officer is at most press conferences, the clue is really in the title.

[The Fish 8989]

 

Dear Newcastle United, it simply has to be better than this

George CaulkinOctober 30 2013 15:10PM

Newcastle United have banned The Evening Chronicle, The Journal and The Sunday Sun from press conferences and matches at St James’ Park.

The letter they sent to the titles is here

This is a response.

Dear Newcastle United,

Regarding the following matters:

•The failure of the present owner to conduct due diligence before purchasing the club

•The appointment of Dennis Wise as executive director (football)

•The treatment of figures such as Kevin Keegan and Alan Shearer

•The appointment of Joe Kinnear as manager

•Relegation

•The dismissal of Chris Hughton

•The renaming of St James’ Park

•The appointment of Joe Kinnear as director of football

•The sponsorship agreement with Wonga, the payday lenders

•The banning of three local newspapers

I write in reference to the above incidents which have taken place in your name during the ownership of one man, who operates under the name of Mike Ashley.

It is quite frankly staggering that you have devoted even a single letter of complaint to The Evening Chronicle, The Journal and The Sunday Sun about any aspect of their coverage of Newcastle, given the catalogue of mismanagement and error listed here. Even if there was merit in your argument about the reporting of the Time4Change march, which took place on Saturday 19 October and was attended by several hundred Newcastle fans, it is your response which is disproportionate.

You should be in no doubt as to the disappointment and dismay that decisions such as this generate, how bonds are stretched, how it sometimes feels like a club is being corroded from the inside, even if this dismay is not always expressed in a uniform, collective manner.

Some people demonstrate, some people moan in the pub, some people stop attending matches and more people keep going but, over time, pride and identities are chipped away. This is not a reality you can measure at the cash till of the club shop, but it is a reality nonetheless.

Indeed after reviewing all of the above episodes and in particular – well, no, just all of it, really – it is my opinion that if there is any underlying message of encouragement and support to marchers, it is provided by Mike Ashley himself.

I feel strongly that the turnout of the march has caused you to tie yourselves in knots. the Chronicle and its sister titles will fight their own battles, but since when is wanting better for the club and, by extension, the reporting of that desire, “an anti-Newcastle United stance”?

Page after page is devoted to Newcastle in the local press, positive and negative, trivial and substantive, and, yes, that is partially due to sales, but it is also an indication of the club’s power and potential to be a beacon of the city. Too often, it is not.

I remember from my time at Thomson House – I’m proud that’s where my career started, by the way, doubly so this week – that what really drives sales is Newcastle victories. Winning games of football. It is just a thought, but you could always give that a go.

There are times when it is quite easy to believe that it is Mr Ashley’s stance which is anti-Newcastle. Fair and balanced? He has an open invitation to explain and argue; Derek Llambias did it, finally, and although it did not prevent some uncomfortable decisions, he did, at least, provide some context.

It is true, of course, that the cub does some fantastic work. The Foundation is wonderful, reaching into the community and using football as an instrument of improvement, lifting heads. I’ve seen what happens when Hatem Ben Arfa walks into a classroom, when Papiss Demba Cisse hands out football shirts, when Steve Harper and Shola Ameobi visit Sir Bobby Robson’s old school in Langley Park, how faces come alive, how kids find a way of engaging that did not seem possible before.

And there are some great people at St James’ Park, too, who are desperate to do the right thing, who strive to engage with fans and improve things for them. But while those baby-steps are positive and crucial, when the contentious moments arrive they fall into place behind a long line of others. Reciprocal ticket pricing and season-ticket deals are innovative and welcome, particularly during a recession, but they do not heal fracture, not all in one go. They do not make sense of the insensible.

In spite of your letter stating that the latest media ban – there have been plenty before – was a “unanimous decision”, I’m aware of individuals at the club who say they opposed it and yet, in the final analysis, their opinion has not counted.

Something similar applies to the recruitment of Kinnear – it was a done deal, no consultation, let the chips fall and let everybody get on with it. What Mr Ashley wants, he gets. Does anybody stand up to him?

I’ll relay a quick story. Over the summer I was asked by you, Newcastle, not to write something. This does not take place very often, but it happens. Just as journalists make mistakes but have sub-editors to correct grammar or statistics or tinker with the style or content of cCAULKINISANIDIOTopy, so managers, players or directors can misspeak in interviews.

I can understand that (I like to make at least one error in absolutely everything I file). What I was asked not to write were words of PRAISE from one employee of the club about another because, I was told, Mr Ashley would be furious about reading such praise.

I wasn’t going to use it anyway, because it was an irrelevance – the wider picture then was Kinnear’s arrival and the instability it provoked – but the events of this week have reminded me of just how dysfunctional this football club can be. And how we have all come to view it as normal.

Having given due consideration to the above, I have reached a decision. I realise how fortunate I am to do the job I do, I know I have a cushy lifestyle and the access I get to media facilities, press conferences and player interviews makes things easy.

I value relationships, too. I’ve always thought that getting to know people, building contacts, is the most important part of the job, because that’s how you find out what’s going on, and it’s the bit I enjoy most. I like telling stories and find that more fascinating than tactics or whatever else.

I believe that stripping cliches away from the North East is part of my job, whether it is written in my contract or not, as is being fair and honest, as I hope you’d recognise, but banning three local newspapers strikes at the heart of what I believe in. It strikes at me and every other journalist. It strikes at fans.

A side-effect of that ban and one of the most ridiculous things about it is that, by implementing it, you have ensured far more publicity for the Time4Change message than they generated themselves or the Chronicle might have generated for them. Your access is appreciated and I’ll take it for as long as you offer it, but it does not guarantee you anything other than honesty and a fair hearing.

Anyway, that decision. Last time, I attended the march as a journalist. A few members of the bedsheet-brigade turned up, but that’s fair enough – every club has their share of daft lads and Newcastle shouldn’t be defined by theirs – and while the numbers were relatively modest, the mood was positive and peaceful.

As always, it was heartening to hear people speak with passion about their club and even if the situation can appear futile, their message was valid: there is always a point in wishing for something more.

Next time – if there is a next time – I’ll attend the march as a human being, full stop. Not because I’ve got an anti-Newcastle agenda, not because I’ve got an anti-Mike Ashley agenda – you’ll get the same treatment as always – but because, as someone who lives in the city, who is proud to call the North East his home, who cares about the club and wants it to excel, it should be better. Better than this.

My position on this issue is pretty firm but hey, it’s always nice to chat.

Yours sincerely,

George.