Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to Kerrydale Street. We hope you enjoy your visit.

You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use.

If you decide to register, please be aware that we don't accept email addresses from free web accounts like gmail, Hotmail, live.co.uk etc. Sorry, but almost all of the abuse and spam that we get is from free web accounts. The software on the forum will automatically block any requests using a free email account.

Upon Registration, you will be given access to all our varied Forums, and you will be expected to comply with our fairly stringent Rules and Regulations. Meantime, enjoy your visit

If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
The Board - general discussion (including Res 12); notes from the AGM
Topic Started: 15 Jul 2014, 12:03 AM (1,414,631 Views)
murphio
Member Avatar
Could start a row in an empty room
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
There really is a climate of fear in regards to what is published these days. Some might say rightly so. In years past newspapers could afford to take libel actions on the chin, it was part of the business. With ever declining sales, staff numbers cut to the bone, profits down etc etc - newspapers simply can't afford to take chances any longer when it comes to the stuff they put in print. I'm guessing the Guardian's legal department put the kybosh on this - I have been following this story very closely for a number of years and I don't understand the legal arguments. It appears to be a bit of a minefield. I am not in the least bit surprised they pulled the plug on something which is, let's face it, not an advertisement at all but more of a public statement. It is indeed sad that people have had to resort to such measures in an attempt to get the truth out but nevertheless I understand why the Guardian's legal department thought it simply wasn't worth the potential hassle.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Fuctifino
I'm new. Be gentle.
Cossy
10 Jun 2016, 08:51 AM
Fuctifino
10 Jun 2016, 08:48 AM
Was the article in the Swiss paper in English too? I'm sure I read that somewhere. The internet bampots will prevail :arrr:
The article in the Swiss Paper was in English. It was always in English.
Thanks mate. That's what I thought. Was it ever in French? They seem to be in full "nothing to see here" mode. We will beat them and their house of cards will come crashing down but not before they start turning on each other. It will be beautiful chaos.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
popeyed
Member Avatar
Climbing walls while sittin' in a chair.
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
FrizzP
10 Jun 2016, 08:57 AM
Sorry but In laymans terms can someone explain what this is all about. Is it basically rangers owed a debt and shouldn't have been granted a license to play in Europe but the Sfa overlooked this??
Pretty much.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Fuctifino
I'm new. Be gentle.
murphio
10 Jun 2016, 08:58 AM
There really is a climate of fear in regards to what is published these days. Some might say rightly so. In years past newspapers could afford to take libel actions on the chin, it was part of the business. With ever declining sales, staff numbers cut to the bone, profits down etc etc - newspapers simply can't afford to take chances any longer when it comes to the stuff they put in print. I'm guessing the Guardian's legal department put the kybosh on this - I have been following this story very closely for a number of years and I don't understand the legal arguments. It appears to be a bit of a minefield. I am not in the least bit surprised they pulled the plug on something which is, let's face it, not an advertisement at all but more of a public statement. It is indeed sad that people have had to resort to such measures in an attempt to get the truth out but nevertheless I understand why the Guardian's legal department thought it simply wasn't worth the potential hassle.
In the short term it seems a viable option but the exposure it is getting now surely will have long term ramifications for the paper. It seems to me the paper knows it's print days are numbered.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
He Cometh
First name on the team-sheet
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
murphio
10 Jun 2016, 08:58 AM
There really is a climate of fear in regards to what is published these days. Some might say rightly so. In years past newspapers could afford to take libel actions on the chin, it was part of the business. With ever declining sales, staff numbers cut to the bone, profits down etc etc - newspapers simply can't afford to take chances any longer when it comes to the stuff they put in print. I'm guessing the Guardian's legal department put the kybosh on this - I have been following this story very closely for a number of years and I don't understand the legal arguments. It appears to be a bit of a minefield. I am not in the least bit surprised they pulled the plug on something which is, let's face it, not an advertisement at all but more of a public statement. It is indeed sad that people have had to resort to such measures in an attempt to get the truth out but nevertheless I understand why the Guardian's legal department thought it simply wasn't worth the potential hassle.
Why would their legal department knock it back?

It was cleared by a Swiss paper and the Guardian also printed the 'New Club' advert from the same people.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
rightsaidted
First-team starter
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
And so one of the last bastions of hope for a truthful Press sells his soul - let's not kid ourselves that Greenslade doesn't know the issues here, he knows exactly what's going on. I kinda forgave Greenslade for his lies about Arthur Scargill and the miners. Years later he admitted he was wrong and apologised. It would appear that he had three choices here: 1. Say nothing. 2. Tell the truth about his own bosses and lose his job. 3. Lie and continue to take the Guardian's shilling. So 3. it is then.

How many articles did he pen slagging off the Daily Record for their lies? Six? Seven? Goodbye Greenslade.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
tenerifetim
Member Avatar
Considering retirement
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
"My understanding is that the advert was indeed booked in, but that the copy had not been seen at the time. It was in French, the ad having previously been published in a Swiss newspaper.

Once it was translated into English, the usual procedure for dealing with all ads kicked in. The content was reviewed in the normal way and it was decided, on balance, that it did not comply with the Guardian’s advertising terms and conditions. I believe legal advice was also sought."


Greenslade's assertion above about being in French is a squirrel as is the reference to a "New Club" he has poorly researched the Res12 issue and has been duped wrt being in French , he's starting to look like a @Level5PR puppet ! :cuckoo:
Edited by tenerifetim, 10 Jun 2016, 09:14 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
lunarhog
Member Avatar
First-team starter
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
tenerifetim
10 Jun 2016, 09:13 AM
"My understanding is that the advert was indeed booked in, but that the copy had not been seen at the time. It was in French, the ad having previously been published in a Swiss newspaper.

Once it was translated into English, the usual procedure for dealing with all ads kicked in. The content was reviewed in the normal way and it was decided, on balance, that it did not comply with the Guardian’s advertising terms and conditions. I believe legal advice was also sought."


Greenslade's assertion above about being in French is a squirrel as is the reference to a "New Club" he has poorly researched the Res12 issue and has been duped wrt being in French , he's starting to look like a @Level5PR puppet ! :cuckoo:
the moon howlers were all laughing that CQN sent the English article to the French newspaper and the French article to the English newspaper by mistake. Paul Brennan has denied this to be the case and it very well could be a Level 5 story.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
rightsaidted
First-team starter
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
The 'advert was in French' line has been completely discredited. If it was in French could they please just produce a copy of it. They can't. The only place the 'French' line appeared was on FF, put there by our erstwhile rotund level headed propagandist. Greenslade is history.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Brucebhoy
Club Captain
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
It's interesting that the comments section's disabled on that article.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
murphio
Member Avatar
Could start a row in an empty room
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
He Cometh
10 Jun 2016, 09:08 AM
Why would their legal department knock it back?

I really have no idea. The other day our legal department decided against using a picture of the guy struck by lightning in Lisburn. Don't know what the rationale was and didn't ask. I'd hazard a guess that in running the article (in affect it's an article rather than an ad) you are accusing an assortment of people of of impropreity. I'd want to be 100 per cent sure my facts were right first.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
rightsaidted
First-team starter
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
This is where the French lie came from:

https://exposingtherhats.wordpress.com/2016/06/01/resolution-riddy/
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Lobey Dosser
Member Avatar
Considering retirement
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
rightsaidted
10 Jun 2016, 09:11 AM
And so one of the last bastions of hope for a truthful Press sells his soul - let's not kid ourselves that Greenslade doesn't know the issues here, he knows exactly what's going on. I kinda forgave Greenslade for his lies about Arthur Scargill and the miners. Years later he admitted he was wrong and apologised. It would appear that he had three choices here: 1. Say nothing. 2. Tell the truth about his own bosses and lose his job. 3. Lie and continue to take the Guardian's shilling. So 3. it is then.

How many articles did he pen slagging off the Daily Record for their lies? Six? Seven? Goodbye Greenslade.
Greenslade joins the stenographers.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
tinytim81
Member Avatar
42
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
I assume there can only be one of two reasons for the Guardian's decision:

1. Lots of Sevco fans are avid Guardian readers and they don't want to upset them.

2. They were concerned that there could be legal ramifications if they ran the 'ad' which as I understand it was basically just a statement.

Based on the fact option one is an impossibility I'd go with the latter.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
aldo
Member Avatar
And that's the way we like it...
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
It's just too odd that the normally clued-in Greenslade should make so many inaccurate claims in such a short article. Odd, too, that he chooses to belittle the importance of and interest in R12 by seeking to portray it as just another OF squabble, the very narrative the SFA wish to set.

And, despite the article's title, he does not explain why the ad was rejected. He merely repeats the line that it didn't meet advertising codes, but doesn't explain why.

He's often made reference to the Succuent Lamb culture prevalent in SMSM, it's weird he doesn't see fit mention it's that very culture which has prompted the need for the ad in the first place.

Too weird Roy. Just too weird. :nono:
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
k3vkr
Member Avatar
The weather is fine in Majorca
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
murphio
10 Jun 2016, 08:58 AM
There really is a climate of fear in regards to what is published these days. Some might say rightly so. In years past newspapers could afford to take libel actions on the chin, it was part of the business. With ever declining sales, staff numbers cut to the bone, profits down etc etc - newspapers simply can't afford to take chances any longer when it comes to the stuff they put in print. I'm guessing the Guardian's legal department put the kybosh on this - I have been following this story very closely for a number of years and I don't understand the legal arguments. It appears to be a bit of a minefield. I am not in the least bit surprised they pulled the plug on something which is, let's face it, not an advertisement at all but more of a public statement. It is indeed sad that people have had to resort to such measures in an attempt to get the truth out but nevertheless I understand why the Guardian's legal department thought it simply wasn't worth the potential hassle.
Amazingly though the other papers who put it out past and present seemed to get it past their legal dept....

They have either been leaned on or are protecting the blue pound.. I mean all those Sevconians that buy the Guardian would be enraged after all :doh: :ffs:
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
rightsaidted
First-team starter
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
tinytim81
10 Jun 2016, 09:31 AM
I assume there can only be one of two reasons for the Guardian's decision:

1. Lots of Sevco fans are avid Guardian readers and they don't want to upset them.

2. They were concerned that there could be legal ramifications if they ran the 'ad' which as I understand it was basically just a statement.

Based on the fact option one is an impossibility I'd go with the latter.
The most likely reason is neither of your two possibles. The most likely reason the advert was spiked is that a company with a large advertising account at the Guardian (and let's not forget the Herald) leaned on them to drop it. Could have been Ladbrokes or William Hills or both. Ladbrokes is represented by Level 5 and former CEO of Hills is Ralph Topping, now chair of the SPFL. I'd have a tenner on the double.
Edit - At Paddy Powers.
Edited by rightsaidted, 10 Jun 2016, 09:45 AM.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Kingslim
69 and counting
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
tinytim81
10 Jun 2016, 09:31 AM
I assume there can only be one of two reasons for the Guardian's decision:

1. Lots of Sevco fans are avid Guardian readers and they don't want to upset them.

2. They were concerned that there could be legal ramifications if they ran the 'ad' which as I understand it was basically just a statement.

Based on the fact option one is an impossibility I'd go with the latter.
Someone else said it may have been due to pressure applied by sponsors like Ladbrokes & William Hill - Ladbrokes are Level 5 and Ralph Topping is heavily involved with William Hill.

Not sure where I read it may have been here or on twitter.

I suspect there is a masonic element to all this.

The Guardian is also owned by the Trinity Mirror group who own the DR
Edited by Kingslim, 10 Jun 2016, 09:46 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Marado
Member Avatar
I'll give you a war you won't believe.
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
remy mcswain
10 Jun 2016, 08:28 AM
Greens made wades in incorrectly. It has eff all to do with the "new" Rangers.
Are you surprised? From the newspaper that previously announced Caludio Canniga had left Dundee United to join Celtic. :lol:
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Cossy
First-team captain
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
tinytim81
10 Jun 2016, 09:31 AM
I assume there can only be one of two reasons for the Guardian's decision:

1. Lots of Sevco fans are avid Guardian readers and they don't want to upset them.

2. They were concerned that there could be legal ramifications if they ran the 'ad' which as I understand it was basically just a statement.

Based on the fact option one is an impossibility I'd go with the latter.
Both Wrong
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
DealsFor.me - The best sales, coupons, and discounts for you
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Celtic Football Club Discussion Forum · Next Topic »
Add Reply