Arsenal News
Arsenal News & Transfers
As featured on NewsNow: Arsenal newsArsenal News 24/7

Arsenal News, Only Arsenal, Blogs, Transfer News

Archives

August 2017
M T W T F S S
« Jul    
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
28293031  

Ex-Arsenal players: so few in management so many in journalism

By Tony Attwood

I recently wrote about an idea for a series of articles through the season on ex-Arsenal players who are now in senior management anywhere in the world.

A lot of names were submitted – although many of these are not managing now, and I was looking for current people.

The list is surprisingly small

  • Dennis Bergkamp (Ajax)
  • Remi Garde (Lyon)
  • Tony Adams (Gabala)
  • Martin Hayes (Dover Athletic)
  • Brian McDermott (Reading)
  • Vladimir Petrovic (Serbia)
  • Pat Scully (Limerick)
  • Paul Dickov (Oldham)
  • Brian Marwood (Manchester City)
  • John Jensen (Blackburn)
  • Ian Allinson (Boreham Wood)

There are other suggestions and I am trying to trace details – Marc Overmars is one such – is he still at Go Ahead, or has he retired, or moved to Dennis Bergkamp with Ajax.

I am excluding ex-Arsenal men who are at Arsenal – we keep in touch with them anyway.

You can read the opening piece here and the second piece here I am hopeful that I will be able to find out a bit about each man’s progress this season and keep anyone interested updated.  The series will appear on the Arsenal History site, which I run on behalf of Arsenal Independent Supporters Association, although as I say in that article, I think getting news from Tony Adams is going to be tough.

And as pointed out in the earlier discussion, yes it seems strange that we have so few men in management, but so many in journalism.  Why is that?

Which leads to another form of enquiry.  Ex Arsenal players in journalism.  I think we should gather a list and keep an eye on them this season.  All suggestions below please – with the name of their publication or broadcaster.

63 comments to Ex-Arsenal players: so few in management so many in journalism

  • jayj

    Good the news of the world is gone on the other hand now the sun runs for 7 days, what changes? NOTHING!!!

    Same shit for 7 days.

  • Mandy dodd

    Ex arsenal in journalism, amongst them Ian wright spouting nonsense this morning in a Murdoch paper. If he really writes this column, maybe his status as an arsenal legend should be reconsidered. These days he sounds bitter against wenger, maybe he has never forgiven him for calling time on his arsenal career?
    Not sure when he wrote this tripe, assuming he did but he should be thinking about whether he wants to associate with this group of publications if he wants to be taken seriously. Think it was an article on arseblog that suggested he may have got some of his info from hacking a dead baby’s voicemail!

  • Anne

    @Mandy dodd:

    Jesus, you’re right, if we’re looking at the same article. That’s awful. This is actually my ‘favorite’ part of it: “I get accused of having a go at Arsenal.”

    Gee, I wonder why?! That entire column is just about the longest “go at Arsenal” I’ve read all transfer season. It’s one thing to fabricate a quote from someone, but another to post a fake column in their name, so I think he probably said this.

    If he’s writing for the Sun, he has to follow their editorial line, but why would he? I’d say he definitely sounds like he’s bitter against Arsenal over something.

    Actually, the only thing that makes the column worth reading is that it so clearly lays out the Sun’s official editorial “stance” of open warfare against all things Arsenal . Of particular interest to me was this:

    “I’ve been engaged in fierce debates with some of whom have fallen for this guff that at least Arsenal’s not in debt…the Glazers have borrowed fortunes in Manchester United’s name…But Man Utd have also been in…Champions League finals… Real fans don’t give a hoot about debts.”

    So, why would the Sun want Arsenal to acquire debt? They’re clearly putting editorial pressure on them to do so, but what benefit would they get out of that? Where is their interest? When a business is in debt, it’s horrible for the business, because it no longer controls its own affairs…the creditors do (witness Liverpool last season).

    I wonder if someone linked to the Sun is benefitting from exercising such indirect control over other EPL clubs, and would like to do the same to Arsenal as well? Questions worth asking…Here’s a link to the article:
    http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/sport/sunsport_columnists/3681696/Ian-Wright-says-Arsene-Wenger-only-buys-unknowns.html#ixzz1ROPJ1sFy

  • Charlie

    It’s not good for Arsene. Those who know the job become managers and those who think they know better become journalists. If past players were managers they would be giving him words of support appreciating the challenges of the job. Instead they sit on their sofa in a studio or at their writing desk trying to make a name for themselves by thinking of controversial things to say knowing deep down than whatever their criticisms they could never be a manager at the top level.

  • Meditation

    This is how ian wrights sun article starts which makes me think there is an agenda to destabilise arsenal fans then ultimately arsenal through manipulation and using fear fear tactics. “ON TUESDAY I was stopped in the STREET(every day fan.You and I) in camden(london-heritage core arsenal,core fans)by an Arsenal fan, who asked me, simply: ‘What the hell is going on with OUR CLUB?(apparently were going through hell)( every single arsenal fan.our club is in turmoil)
    It sounds BRUTAL, it sounds BLUNT( dark and wilted ), but it SUMS(money?)up the MOOD(context) of the supporters as this summer LURCHES from FRUSTRATION to DESPAIR.(apparently despair is coming for us whilst we sit there frustrated)
    Gael Clichy’s(a so called painful loss to the masses) move to Manchester City wouldn’t bother me much in NORMAL CIRCUMSTANCES.” NOTE things written in block capitals is what i think are keywords,triggers or suggestions within the article and within the brackets is my opinion. For me it was interesting how the first paragraph finished with “NORMAL CIRCUMSTANCES”. For me it links into the comment i left yesterday before i had read the ian wright article.

  • Meditation

    YESTERDAYS COMMENT- In my personal opinion what we are seeing is the results of a discreet hostile takeover.It may seem far fetched but i believe for the past five years arsenal and their fans have been the victims of manipulation. Step 1-destablise. step 2-demoralise step 3- cause a rebellion step 4- move in and take over. The four steps to a take over if im not not mistaken created by the kgb as war tactics to take over governments to be seen as the hero cleaning up the mess that was created. Sound familiar. The people (fans)are the key because we create change through voting or rebellion.Thats why the arsenal fans are seeing so many news reports and rumours.Why all these tactics? IN MY OPINION ITS SO US FANS DEMAND CHANGE WHICH UNDER NORMAL CIRCUMSTANCES we would reject then the persons who in the background have been waiting patiently offers the the solution.Question is who would this. Funny how we have an americans and russians fighting for territory.Mini cold war me thinks.

  • Meditation

    Hopefully in time its a case of great minds think alike instead of paranoid minds think alike.UNTOLD GREAT AS USUAL. I apologize for at times not saying thanks for the time and effort you put in to create the untold experience.To all who comment with thought provoking comments also. PEACE

  • Charlie

    Couple of points. First he says Clichy wants to move on to a club where he can win things, which is coincidentally almost exactly what Denilson said. It’s a standard retaliation to being told that you’re surplus to requirements. Secondly he says that Wenger would dither in the transfer market whether he had money or not. He wasn’t dithering when he signed the player that obliterated your scoring record and almost made you look average though was he Wrighty ? Too many players think they would make great managers and think they know how the transfer market works when in reality they don’t have the intelligence for it. Legendary player but i wish he wouldn’t comment on things that he doesn’t understand.

  • Charlie

    The final point i wanted to make is on the idea of us being a feeder club for Man City. Kolo Toure was sold for 16m and now 2 years later he’s banned for taking illegal substances and may not play at the top level again. Adebayour was sold for 25m and after being frozen out at City was sent to Real temporarily because their main striker was injured. Hardly what you’d expect from a 25m striker. Vieira was suggested but he spent one year there after many years at Inter so it’s stupid to include him. Now we have sold them Clichy who was almost certainly the worst player in our first team last year. If we’re a feeder club we’re feeding them our rejects and making good money from them so i don’t see a problem. It would be accurate to say that Barcelona are a feeder club to Arsenal after we signed so many of their promising youngsters, this is not the same thing.

  • bob

    It was eye-opening for me to learn yesterday that Murdoch had made a massive takeover bid for ManUre in 1999 which used BSkyB as a purchasing vehicle. His appetite was finally blocked by a government commission after massive opposition by ManUre fans. My feeling is that the target in Murdoch/Sun’s campaign is the self-sustaining model (SSM) itself. The model he tried to impose in 1999 is the Rich Man Takeover (RST) that dominates the top of the EPL table; whereas the alternative obviously is the SSM which Arsene/Arsenal champion. I think this offends him ideologically and economically; and, as the row now raging around his News of the World is showing the nation, Ruppie’s minions do any self-interested thing they can get away with. Arsenal is one Alternative that they’d love to string up (bring down), and (quoting Bob Dylan) sell postcards (aka The Sun) at the hanging.

  • bob

    Charlie,
    FYI, your argument disputes one of what were 3 rotten AA articles in The Sun: (1) we have become ManShitty’s feeder club; (2) Djourou de facto accepts Cesc’s departure, in saying there’s life after Cesc; and (3) characterizing Cesc as contemptuous of Arsenal with this article headline: “Fabregas: That’s My Lot, Gunner” Read it and weep. Better yet, don’t bother.

  • Brickfields Gunners

    Tony , why no mention of David Platt ? I did put out his name in an earlier post .Wikepedia records him of being manager of the folowing -Sampdoria -1998 ,Nottingham Forrest from July 1999
    for 2 years ,England U 21 -July 2001 and now, 1st team coach at Man Shitty from July 2010.
    Ian Wright ‘s article was crap and an insult to any thinking Arsenal fan( trust me they exist!).There is a old saying which goes like this – He who can -does .He who cannot -teaches.
    While AW ,for me , exemplifies the above , I can’t say the same about Wright, who is neither doing any good nor enlightening anyone .Hope he chokes on the bile he’s trying to feed Arsenal fans.

  • Charlie

    Bob i wasn’t aware of the other two but i am living in China so i don’t get the Sun. If Cesc is behaving in that way he should consider that if he hadn’t “accidentally” handed a goal to Barcelona last season we would’ve probably taken them at least to extra time despite being unfairly penalised with a red card. As captain he seems incapable of shouldering the blame for this lack of trophies when he should take responsibility. Generally though i agree that the overwhelmingly negative press directed at Arsenal is suspicious. Consider Liverpool, how many articles have been written explaining how Liverpool dropped out of the top 4 last season and how many have beeen written about Cesc supposedly going to Barcelona ? One is fact, the other is mere speculation and propoganda. No prizes for guessing which the Sun favours.

  • Shard

    @Charlie

    I can’t find those links now, but after the Barca defeat, Cesc did own up and take the entire blame on himself. I also saw another article in the Marca where Cesc’s father said that Cesc was so annoyed that he wanted to shoot himself. He also mentioned the refereeing as having cost Arsenal. I found the English version of the second article but it claims that Cesc’s father spoke to the Sun. So now I’m not sure if Marca had the original or just picked it up from the Sun who would have fabricated it. But I think Cesc is smart enough to realise what is afoot. I for one, wouldn’t doubt his loyalty or his intelligence though I can understand the attraction of going to Barcelona, coached by his idol, for him.

    Still, I agree with you that if Cesc leaves now ‘to win things’ it is not the sign of a winner really. To use a basketball analogy, if Michael Jordan, Magic Johnson etc had done what LeBron James just did (discuss with opponents and star players to join in one team to WIN the title) then they wouldn’t be the greats that they are recognised as.

  • Shard

    Also, can someone tell me if ManCity actually own their stadium? It was built for the Commonwealth games and as far as I knew, they were paying rent to the City Council to use it. Did they purchase it later? If not, then how can they sell naming rights for something they do not own?

  • Charlie

    From Wiki….

    Manchester City F.C. signed an agreement with Manchester City Council in March 2010 to allow a £1 billion redevelopment led by architect Rafael Viñoly[9] of land around the stadium and possible stadium expansion to over 60,000.[10] Preliminary work on land around the stadium started in September 2010.[11] The club also renegotiated terms of the lease on the stadium in October 2010[12] and from July 2011, it is expected the stadium will be called Etihad Stadium or Etihad Manchester Stadium[13] in a ground sponsorship deal worth £10 million a year.[14]

    So they are leasing the stadium from the council but earning from the naming rights. Seems very dodgy

  • Anne

    @Meditation:

    Good points. I actually just submitted something to Untold analyzing the talking points campaign that is being deployed in the media against Arsenal. If they post it (may or may not, it was really long), you’ll see that I completely agree with you.

  • Anne

    @bob:

    I completely agree that “the target in Murdoch/Sun’s campaign is the self-sustaining model (SSM) itself.” However, I don’t think this campaign is limited to Murdoch and the Sun. You’re better than I am about media ownership stuff, but as I was just telling Meditation, I’ve been taking a look at this ongoing talking points campaign, and it seems to be much more extensive than Murdoch. In fact, I would say that it even extends to certain Arsenal blogs (and particularly many of the AAA set).

  • Anne

    @bob:

    I’ll just quote you a portion of what I submitted, where I break down how a propaganda campaign using talking points actually works, so you’ll get the idea of where I’m coming from.

    “As summarized by Wikipedia, a ‘talking point in debate or discourse is a succinct statement designed to persuasively support one side taken on an issue.’ As anyone who has a passing familiarity with politics will be aware, the use of these ‘talking points’ is an essential strategic component of any political or marketing campaign. The strategy is deployed as follows:

    A person seeking to influence public opinion will ‘strategize the most effective informational attack on a target topic and launch talking points from media personalities to saturate discourse in order to frame a debate in their favor, standardizing the responses of sympathizers to their unique cause.

    When used politically in this way, the typical purpose of a talking point is to propagandize, specifically using the technique of argumentum ad nauseam, i.e. continuous repetition within media outlets until accepted as fact.’”

  • Anne

    @Shard:

    Having mixed up information on sourcing like that is a definite red flag. Also, Marca is Madrid-based, so not the most likely media outlet for Cesc’s father to be speaking to. It’s kind of frustrating when you have bad sourcing on quotes that you actually like 🙂

    Otherwise, I completely agree with you about not doubting Cesc’s loyalty at this point.

  • Anne

    @Meditation:

    Just to clarify, I’m not sure that I agree with your kgb “hostile takover” analogy. Just the part about the media tactics 🙂

  • Shard

    @Anne

    I don’t particularly like the quotes. I wouldn’t click LIKE on Facebook or anything 🙂 It was just a way of saying that I don’t think Cesc is disloyal to Arsenal. I would go so far as to say that Cesc loves Arsenal. At the same time Cesc loves Barcelona, and it has the added attraction of being the team on top, coached by the man who was his idol growing up. SO I can understand why he would want to go there. That in no way means he disrespects Arsenal or feels it is Arsenal’s ‘fault’ etc. But I still say that leaving a club which challenges for titles, for another club in order to ‘win things’ is not actually the sign of a winner as the media like to portray it.

  • Shard

    @Anne

    Ya the KGB analogy seemed to me to be some sort of propaganda too. But for the rest, meditation’s comment is top class. The example of how the media sends subliminal messages by placing certain words here and there is very welcome.

  • Shard

    Oh and just to be clear, I wasn’t accusing Meditation above of any propaganda. Just that he might have picked it up from something that might be a ‘propaganda’ piece.

  • Anne

    @Shard:

    Yeah, I agree that it’s definitely not the sign of a winner to leave your club for the sole purpose of winning more titles somewhere else. Personally, I think it’s somewhere closer to “the sign of an idiot.” But I think those comments and “quotes” are mainly just a backhanded way for the media to bash Arsenal, and I don’t think that they’re true of Cesc or Nasri. At least, not until I see some evidence of it.

  • Shard

    @Anne

    I agree.. I wasn’t clear there, but I meant it as a refutation of the media line. I don’t think Cesc has ever said that.

  • Ben

    Hey Tony

    I found this link to Gabala FC which is the team Adams is coaching over in Azerbaijan

    http://www.gabalafc.az/en/index.php

  • bob

    Anne,
    I hope UA/Tony publishes your talking points piece very soon, especially NOW, with the NOTW scandal raging. I agree that they succeed by repetition ad nauseum until they are fact – as we are witnessing and as you well documented on the Cesc leaving/talking last summer. To me, there is a major issue of the Original Source of the talking points as well as the scope of the echo and its repetition. If you look up News Corp (or News International) on Wikipedia, as I urge you to, you will see the specific extent of Murdoch’s worldwide holdings. They alone are a massive echo-chamber that guarantees repetition, repetition, repetition. While it would be difficult to pinpoint the source of the talking points – unless, hopefully, you’ve found it (have you!?) – the engine of their constant repetition is even more important. A good analogy is a major natural resource – the entity that extracts it from the ground (the source) does not make as much money or have as much control as the entity that distributes it (the echo chamber), UNLESS its the same entity (both extraction and distribution). In this case (anti-Arsenal talking points, especially right NOW), whatever the source (the specific origin) of the talking points, their distribution (echo, echo, echo) is massive (as I’d bet your article will show) will recur through Murdoch media (see Wikipedia), and be picked up by many others within and outside that network, passed back and forth, each one sourcing the other, until – as you and George Orwell pointed out in 1984 – it becomes FACT. Your Cesc Leaving/Tapping case study from last summer is a great example – in fact, THE great example to date. I also think that the current anti-Arsenal tsunami will prove to be another. Your shedding further light on the talking points really matters, so I hope Tony does publish it ASAP. I think the Wikipedia entry will shed further light and perhaps complement your findings. For an overview: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/News_Corporation

  • Meditation

    @Anne Thanks for the shout. I would love to see your next piece. Your last piece was an eye opener. The thing is I ran with the kgb analogy to illustrate a technique used to achieve a desired result and maybe the techniques origins.It wasn’t to say it was the kgb doing all this because any persons aiming for a takeover would benefit from the disarray from arsenal at present. I actually posted a similar comment on this website a couple years ago and all I see is more shares being bought and more confusion at arsenal where the last stage left is a takeover(normalization).Hopefully it doesn’t get to that stage.There is two types of propaganda.One to create continued opinion or to create gradual change.

  • Meditation

    @Shard I also believe that the video may have been propaganda also. Again it was to show an example that named the techniques used that I refer too and to show the psychological and emotional processes that may occur if the four step plan was implemented(normalization). who would do it? why do it? Many answers to be found. Also it was an ironic joke about the cold war because of the players involved. I mean you could use the technique for many a purpose, or the technique could be used by many people especially in the new media age.

  • Shard

    @Meditation

    It was in actual fact a very good way to express yourself. I probably shouldn’t even have brought up the kgb thing (oh wait, I didn’t-blame Anne for that :)) I thought your comment was brilliant actually. It’s probably just the impulsive-compulsive element in me that I even mentioned the kgb thing separately. I realised it was just an illustration.

  • bob

    Anne, Shard, Meditation, Stevie E, Notoverthehill, all:
    Here’s an example of how seemingly unconnected news media can cite “breaking news” from one another (or pretend to be unconnected), having no accountability for sourcing the information, and then repeat the original allegation ad nauseum until it becomes fact:
    (This from today’s Guardian:) “The company [News International] had already announced plans to introduce more seven-day integration at its four titles, the News of the World, the Sun, Times and Sunday Times.” So, if one burps forth a Cesc/anti-Arsene/anti-Arsenal “story,” all can simultaneously provide their own news “scoop.” And, as evidenced by some AA blogs today, it will be picked up as featured headlines across the blogosphere and straight media as well. Evidence: this week’s The Sun’s “Djourou” and “Cesc resigned to be a Gunner” so-called stories are blog Headlines (there for the knee-jerk clicking) on the continually-updated Arsenal News website. This is a small sample of how repetition of anti-Arsenal talking points can and will continue to work. (Hint, hint: Tony, please consider publishing Anne’s talking points piece soon.)

  • bob

    p.s. In other words, the inter-linkage of media outlets and those blogs who take their leads from them has a — multiplier effect — on distributing a given message (talking point) far and wide, which no single outlet would have on its own. (And to this we could add TV outlets as well, of course.)

  • Anne

    @Shard and Meditation:

    LOL, Shard. We need to stop thinking alike. I was actually just coming back here to clarify my own comment on the kgb analogy. I thought it was a good point to begin with, and I kept thinking about it after I logged off. I had just decided that I disagreed with your “propaganda” comment enough that I was going to respond to it 🙂

    I also wanted to clarify that, in my comment, I meant that I liked the analogy, but that I haven’t been able to take my own analysis far enough yet to conclude that the media campaign relates to a hostile takover. Although I can’t rule it out either 🙂

  • Ugandan Goon

    There is a term for this guys, churnalism- a form of journalism in which press releases, wire stories and other forms of pre-packaged material are used to create articles in newspapers and other news media in order to meet increasing pressures of time and cost without undertaking further research or checking.
    After the revelations of just what might constitute work for today’s hacks- you the usual bribery, invasion of privacy, i am surprised people still believe anyone buys a newspaper much less pay for one.
    as for the self sustaining model being under attack, don’t entertain the smallest doubt, we know just how fox news savages commies over in the US, the idea that an institution like arsenal can dare to stand up against conspicuous consumption and all it entails and might cause one or two people to stop living beyond their means and god forbid actually question those who do might just be too much to stomach for rupie poopy pants- (he has got to be incontinent at his age, hasn’t he?)
    I have bought less than 100 newspapers in the last decade mostly because i can read them online but also because i can decide the context with which to digest any bits of information that interest me, i am just as depressed as everyone else but glad that i am not threatening to cancel my season ticket for the tenth time in ten years or talking about looking good naked and gypsy weddings.
    By the way, does anyone think the non appearance of most of our senior players in the training videos might be one of Wenger’s little conditions for undertaking this tour of asia? you know you wanna make money? fine. I’ll be redknapp if you are taking the first team out whoring and knackering them out before the season’s even began?

  • Anne

    @Meditation:

    Just to clarify, I thought that your kgb analogy was very smart. I didn’t take it to mean that you thought the kgb was behind it (although I wouldn’t be surprised if they were taking a cut somewhere 🙂 ). No, I’m well familiar with the fact that the basic principles of tactics and strategy are the same, no matter which context you apply them in.

    Sun Tzu’s “Art of War” is actually required reading in most business schools, and the students are taught how to apply military tactics in the business context. I have no problem whatsoever with your use of a military tactic as a comparison. It’s highly valid.

    Looking at your comment a little further, I would say that your “Step 1-destablise. step 2-demoralise step 3- cause a rebellion” are entirely consistent with my own research of the tactics behind this propaganda campaign. (I’m about to go into the details of that in a minute in a response to bob, so I won’t elaborate here). But I haven’t gotten so far as the “hostile takover” part yet. I can think of too many other potential motives for the same conduct to narrow it down at this point.

    I also REALLY liked your comments about psychological manipulation in the media reports, because I’m so glad that someone other than me has noticed. The use of certain “trigger words” for purposes of demoralization is something that I completely agree is occurring, but it’s an aspect of the coverage that I’m not addressing yet myself. Initially, I’m just focusing on the basics of the talking points campaign.

    However, the talking points campaign itself is actually a pretty insidious mind manipulation tactic (albeit a common one). The way it works is that, if you acheive sufficient saturation in the media, it will trigger an involuntary response in people’s brains where, just through the level of repetition, the brain begins to accept the facts as true subconsciously.

    In other words, it takes advantage of a psychological vulnerability that we all possess to LITERALLY force certain ideas into people’s heads in a way that is deliberately intended to circumvent reason and free-will. Basically, it’s low-level psychological warfare. With a high enough level of saturation, this tactic will work on anyone, no matter how intelligent. The only way to avoid falling for it is to be familiar with the tactic, so that you recognize it when someone is trying to use it on you.

  • Anne

    @bob:

    In regards to the question of how widely the talking points are being distributed throughout the “echo chamber” of the media…Well, I think I can answer that question best by giving you the list of the 7 talking points I identified that the Sun is currently using with regard to Arsenal. The points are extremely paraphrased in my list because they show up phrased so many different ways:

    1) Cesc wants to leave

    2) Nasri wants to leave

    3) Arsenal needs to win titles (with emphasis on 6-year trophy drought)

    4) Arsenal needs to splash big cash in the transfer market and sign big-name players

    5) Arsenal is in trouble

    6) Arsene Wenger is in trouble

    7) Arsenal’s fans are angry with them

    So, you tell me…exactly how “massive” is the distribution of these points? 🙂 They’ve acheived a level of “saturation” that is so high that all of these points are virtually synonymous with any news coverage about Arsenal. Go look at the headlines on goonernews, and check how many blogs are just throwing these same points out as headlines.

    And forget who’s originating the talking points… It’s gotten to the point where it’s difficult to tell who is even deliberately distributing them, because so many honest and well-meaning Arsenal fans have begun to accept these things as true. The best way to tell is to look at the manner in which they’re being repeated. Is the person doing it trying to conduct a genuine reasoned analysis? Or are they just throwing out a laundry list of talking points and leaving it at that (ie repetition, not reasoning)?

    In addition to just media outlets and blogs, you also have to take comments sections on websites into account. Based on what I’ve seen, it appears to me that part of the media “saturation” strategy also includes flooding comments sections with these talking points. Even on this blog, dogface recently caught one person posting these talking points under something like 20 different names, I think? And it’s even worse on other blogs and websites.

    I see so many comments that seem to just be spewing out these same points over and over again (ie repetition) in the same way that the media outlets do, that I’m forced to conclude that it is in some way part of the strategy. How are you going to pin that one on Rupert Murdoch? 🙂

  • bob

    Anne,
    Yup, flummoxed at that one. Indeed, how could Ruppie have a hand in so vast and granular an echo-chamber? Really a tough one; kinda like a needle in a haystack. Ah well, perhaps a whimsical approach will start the ball rolling: Ok, I think Ruppie is actually an employment agency of last resort for these hard economic times: to wit, perhaps the 2 people with 30 aliases and a few hundred postings that Dogface just found out here on UA had summer jobs, but now lost them thanks to UA’s e-Sherlock Holmes. Maybe they sat at desks at NOTW and just were laid off (tears, sniffles). But that’s just two. And, just think of all those he employed (or deployed), even indirectly (on a click-by-click basis), in the blogosphere when his mouthpieces belched forth the 7 talking points [kudos, anne!] (yep, I can just hear them now, every morning: “Here comes the sun. Here comes the sun. I say, it’s all right…” Acccch. What have they done to my song, ma!?) As for the comments sections as echo chambers of “The Message (Parts 1-7)” – Ruppie Jr. is known in the City to be far more keen on electronic media than the mess and bother of ye old print media (all that paper and ink to deal with) so it’s Ok, lads, let’s drill or way down into the comments section and (let’s just say) hire a couple of unemployed English majors out of Oxbridge even, to use 30 aliases and spread the word. Of course, this would never happen here. Neva! So, all I can say is, it is far beyond anything Ruppie and Sons could ever think of or wish for to have conceived, let alone succeeded at achieving your conclusion that: “all of these points are virtually synonymous with any news coverage about Arsenal.” [You Aced it, Anne! kudos]

  • bob

    p.s. wait, wait, hold the presses! Another glimpse at the Wikipedia laundry listing of News Corp holdings gives me pause. Forgive me: I kinda think, that well, just kinda maybe that someone(s) who pull its strings really might not like the self-sustaining-model after all… (just a thought-crime, sorry)

  • bob

    p.p.s. BTW, does Ruppie have a Foxie or print outlet (and I use the word advisedly) down Atlanta way?

  • bob

    I think we can now go “Biblical” when documenting media-references on UA – this by categorizing the references according to the 7 Talking Points. For example:
    Dogface,
    Another example taken from today’s Sun is this: “xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx” Sun 1:5

  • gulp

    who owns Mirror and Daily Mail? Btw i see Murdoch is about to by Sky now.

  • bob

    gulp,
    He owns 39% and wants to buy it out and hold 100%. But this has been put on hold, until September and possibly way beyond, because of the current massive scandal surrounding his News of the World. That is, there is an outcry in the English public that has asked the various oversight agencies to now determine whether he/News International has sufficient moral character to be allowed to complete his desired purchase of BSkyB. All the UK media are covering this now.

  • gulp

    well in all honesty these blogs do they not take customers away from murdoc? If arsenal became “shit” bloggers would leaver the blog and rather buy the sun.

  • gulp

    oh he already owns 39% of sky? and times and notw and the sun?
    jeezes no wonder there are no neutral news coming out of those news channels. Does he indirectly have shares in any of the major clubs? via a second or thir company or anything?

  • gulp

    with all that power of communication in britain the man could overthrow governments. thats rather scary…

  • Shard

    @gulp

    I don’t think they own shares in any club anymore, but as far as I know, Sky at one point tried to buy ManU outright. It was stopped by some monopoly commission or something of the sort. Of course, ManU are also the face of the EPL. Which club has won most things since the new product was launched? Which club brings in the most consumers into the product? Which club did I hear about first in my corner of the world? Even without there being any Sky/Murdoch shares in ManU, I think Sky clearly feel that their interests converge with those of ManU.

  • Anne

    @bob:

    Finding out the origin of these talking points will be an extremely difficult task, but it might not be impossible. Basically, I always approach this kind of research using basic criminal investigative techniques.

    In a criminal investigation you always start with the “crime scene” itself, and then use that evidence to attempt to ascertain the motive of the perpetrator. Because at this point, the ONLY fact that we know about the perpetrator is that he/she/or they have SOME motive. Figuring out what that motive is is what will lead you back to them.

    In a media analysis, the equivalent of the “crime scene” is the news reports themselves. If there is an ongoing propaganda campaign, every single component of it is laid out in those news reports. In some way or another, it is out in the open and can’t be hidden. So, the first step is to figure out what the strategy is and how it works. Fortunately for us, the strategy here is a basic talking points strategy, so it’s extremely easy to decode if you know what you’re looking for.

    The next step is to then attempt to ascertain the motive of the perpetrator based on the strategy that’s being used. Basically, you take a look at the talking points, and ask “why would someone WANT the public to believe these things?” What is the perpetrator trying to accomplish? So far, I feel comfortable concluding that the general motive of this campaign is to destabilize Arsenal, and that’s all.

    But it’s not enough. You also have to determine what the perpetrator’s SPECIFIC motive is for attempting to destablize Arsenal. For example, do they want Arsenal to change their self-sustaining model? Do they want to destablize the club to enable a hostile takeover? I don’t know. Either one could work at this point.

    To narrow it down, you first have to just brainstorm, and come up with a list of every POSSIBLE motive that a person could have, and then investigate each one. You then start ruling out these possible motives based on the evidence, until you’re eventually left with just one. If you rule them all out, brainstorm again. If you’re left with more than one, the evidence will still support one more than the others.

    This is a technique that has been used in criminal investigations for years, and it really does work. It’s based on the old Sherlock Holmes idea that “if you rule out the impossible, then whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.”

    Considering the sheer volume of “evidence” that a talking points campaign necessarily generates, I think that we most likely WOULD be able to ascertain a specific motive for this campaign, using the above technique. But in order to determine the “who” and the “how,” you must always first answer the question of “why?” Otherwise, you have no idea where to look for evidence, and any conclusion you come to will be nothing more than speculation.

    So, does anybody feel like throwing out some ideas about motive? 🙂

  • bob

    gulp, Shard:
    menace in the today’s next article on UA tells us (see July 8 5:08), that News International has held in the past [unspecified when, though I have asked in a follow-up] the following: “Leeds, Chelsea, and possibly Man City and Newcastle. The holdings were 9% at the time but most have since been bought out.” That’s as far as has been posted at UA to date.

  • WalterBroeckx

    I have read the complete first media watch by Anne and I must say this is really very impressive stuff. I will put it on the site somewhere tomorrow afternoon (UK time). Stay tuned for more on Untold.

  • bob

    Anne,
    Great for so asking: I think that there could well be multiple, simultaneous, possible motives. To think out loud, here are three not mutually-exclusive and perhaps mutually-reinforcing motives for undermining Arsenal (which itself offers a proven revenue stream and profit center to be factored in):
    (1) to help pre-pave (guarantee) the way to the big Rednose 20th Party (and all it’s attendant media hoopla and media revenues and Sir Fergie’s subsequent elevation to the House of Lords, now being pursued by two MPs) by severely weakening Arsenal, a perennial top 4/CL challenger, to a condition from which we cannot expectably recover;
    (2) to ruin (a)the attractiveness to players and (b) viability of the self-sustaining model itself as a genuine competitor to the Rich Owner Takeover; and with it (though not quite sure how to think this one through as yet)
    (3) to (in some way) destroy Arsenal as/for being the leading (or one of the leading) champions of Financial Fair Play as a limit to the Rich Owner Takeover model. If nothing else, they are set against ANY restraint.
    Again, not to be forgotten that it is “good business” to have the non-stop assault against Arsene/Arsenal (as I mention above, it’s a proven revenue stream and – as with the Cesc stories – a profit center of its own).

  • bob

    p.s. one of my favorite book titles again comes to mind in all this: “It would be so nice if you weren’t here…” (a title by the writer/humorist/commentator Charles Grodin, from a comment made to him at a party by a well-heeled lady grandee)

  • bob

    Would anyone care to have an office pool of which football-related names might surface on the list of 4000+ phone-hacked people? (The one that’s been listed so far by the Guardian is Wayne Rooney.)

  • bob

    Anne,
    let me amend my 2a above to read: “attractiveness to players AND their agents”

  • Meditation

    @BOB http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x9jPfeYasGM video to help you with your media research. One thing I will say dont be to tense.Discovery is suppose to liberating. @SHARD @ANNE I wasn’t offended . My reply was to clarify myself and hopefully it didn’t seem like I was trying to impose myself with my opinion because at the end of the day it is just my opinion. All our opinions are valid. I SUPPOSE WE ARE TRYING TO MAKE

  • Anne

    @Meditation:

    My clarification wasn’t because I thought I had offended you. It was because I felt like I hadn’t given you the credit you deserved for just how good of a point you made there. I’ll be interested to hear what you have to say if you’re around when Walter publishes my article tomorrow.

  • Meditation

    @ANNE My above comment somehow got sent whilst i was typing and the caps lock came on as well. Just a glitch. The actual reply is on the second to last article.The way I wanted to word it.I look forward to reading your article.

  • Stevie E

    @anne
    In London, in control of a premier league rival, resides a billionaire who’s fortune was built from a life of crime. Is it too much of a stretch to imagine that KGB tactics are being employed by the Russian mafia?

  • Anne

    @Meditation:

    Ok, I finally did find your full response. Interesting how it somehow ended up halfway here and then on the wrong thread, but I suppose stranger things have happened 🙂 Based on the comments I’ve seen from you so far, I think we probably have a lot in common in terms of how we view these issues, so I’ll look forward to having the chance to talk to you more in future.

  • Shard

    @bob

    I think one thing that should be mentioned is that the rules of broadcasting companies owning shares in clubs were set after Sky tried to take over ManU.. the limit was then placed at either 9%, or 9.99%. If you remember, ITV held 9% of shares in Arsenal, and these were the first shares that Kroenke purchased. So maybe, a broadcaster holding shares in a club doesn’t immediately suggest something sinister, though it does bring in a chance of a conflict of interest.

    p.s. All the above is from memory, but I think the facts are correct.

  • bob

    Shard,
    Good points. As I further understand it, those limits on such broadcaster holdings came in not because of the FA or FIFA or some Official’s sudden ethical compass, but because massive protest by MU fans put full-stop to Ruppie’s attempted takeover. One can take heart from such examples at any time – especially in these times – by noting that and how an activated/unified fan base can actually impact football policy. (If, for example, enough people demanded even one fair-play reform – say a unified, activated Arsenal fan base screamed no more to the next bent call on the pitch (another Newcastle, say) – then something lasting might yet be achieved, even this season (?) Witness how those with seemingly absolute power can overreach so callously as to (seemingly out of nowhere) incite the vast public opposition we see in today’s Murdoch media controversy. Perhaps the seemingly-untouchable Septic Bladder, or our very own FA will blunder big-time (i.e., steal a decisive match) this season, along their journey to The Rednose 20, and fans (not just Arsenal fans) will get mad as hell and demand fair play reforms.

  • bob

    Shard, all,
    Speaking of taking heart: here’s what a full-blown football corruption scandal looks like: http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/feedarticle/9735050