Archive for the ‘Media’ Category

FBL-ENG-PR-CHELSEA-MOURINHO

What are press conferences for?

We know what they are. The anodyne Wikipedia definition is clear enough:

A news conference or press conference is a media event in which newsmakers invite journalists to hear them speak and, most often, ask questions.

One could argue that in the Age of Newspapers, press conferences provided real value to the public. After all, most households once subscribed to a single paper with its own staff of writers, editors and reporters. This made it imperative for each news organization to send their own reporter get quotes, ask questions, and file a unique story by deadline. It wasn’t redundant to have forty guys covering the same presser, because most readers had access to a single source.

It’s hard to say exactly when this began to change, but television certainly played a part. On January 25th 1961, US president John F Kennedy became the first president to hold a live televised press conference. Kennedy’s decision to read a prepared statement on the Congo and take questions from assembled reporters on TV wasn’t just a public service; as the 1960 debate with Republican presidential candidate Richard Nixon demonstrated, Kennedy looked awesome on television, and that apparently mattered a great deal to voters. The press conference was a way for the president to be calm, assertive, knowledgeable, decisive, presidential.

Luckily for the press, this wasn’t a one-sided deal. In return for offering a potentially flattering platform to public officials, press conferences gave reporters an opportunity to ask prodding, uncomfortable questions, catch their subject in a lie, and try and best represent the views and concerns of reading/viewing public. The press corps got to play the part of the loyal (and rarely not-so-loyal) opposition. Press conferences became an elaborate game of one-up-man-ship, a quid pro quo arrangement which allowed democracy’s major players to look good doing their jobs.

This isn’t to say they were suddenly no longer a means to hold public officials accountable, but any actual truth to emerge was accidental to the main event: the Performance.

These Performances were, for a long time, justified because they still ostensibly provided the public with valuable information and kept public officials accountable. For a long time the media were still regarded as Fourth Estate, the last line of accountability from those in power. But with the increasing politicization and stratification of news organizations in a digital age of self-publication and live news, public trust in the media is eroding, and with it, respect for the purpose and importance of the presser.

Take for example the recent drugs scandal in Toronto involving the mayor. Large scrums of reporters insist on repeatedly asking him questions on drugs allegations they know he will not answer, and then report on this failure as “news.” This makes for okay television perhaps, but doesn’t have any purpose except to let partisans on either side draw their own obvious conclusions (“They mayor isn’t giving the liberal media the time of day,” “He’s stonewalling because he’s guilty”). Increasingly, the actual reporting takes place on the sidelines with an army of unnamed sources, an indication that many in power don’t feel any compulsion anymore to give honest answers to reporters.

In football, or sports in general, the press conference is even more removed from its original purpose. Witness Jose Mourinho’s performance today. A handful of accredited journalists attend and “live-Tweet” the proceedings in real time. There is little pretense to gleaning any interesting information from the new Chelsea manager, except for a few tidbits on player acquisitions. There are no questions on tactics. Most of the reporters ask about his priorities, his problems at Real Madrid, his ability to work with Abramovich again.

Mourinho’s answers don’t exactly jump from the page. When he first arrived at Chelsea, he called himself the Special One. Now he calls himself the “Happy One.” RT, please. How does he feel returning to a club from which he was sacked by Roman Abramovich? Well no, Mou says, he wasn’t sacked. His priority is winning trophies. He will make Chelsea champions again. He won’t play favourites with his former players. He will try to help out John Terry. He regrets not being able to face Sir Alex Ferguson once more. He didn’t damage Spanish football. He selected the players he wanted at Real Madrid based on merit.

The banal answers to broad questions didn’t matter though, because the press conference was really about celebrating/denigrating Mourinho’s personality. One reporter wrote that his “bravado” was “toned down,” and “the swagger subdued.” Another pointed out how he made a point of repeating he was “very calm” and “very relaxed.” The obvious subtext here is whether Mourinho can maintain ‘self-control’ or work on “repairing” his relationship with Roman Abramovich (the man who just hired him as manager), as if these were the things which Chelsea’s future success under Mourinho most depended on.

In the end beyond this armchair psychoanalyzing that will be forgotten in a week’s time, we learn absolutely nothing. In fact, the entire purpose of the exchange seems obscure. This is sports of course; it’s hard to tell most of the time if anyone has anything of interest to say to anyone ever. The logical question here might be, why bother? Surely asking if a manager who’s losing games is also “losing the dressing room” is a pointless exercise?

I think the answer is press conferences work best once reporters put off airs and understand that they’re an extension of football as entertainment. The tabloid press, with all their earnest, idiotic questions on wives as distractions or the desire to win seem to get this best. Beyond that, the press conference might eventually be transformed into a moment for various reporters to ask incredibly specific questions for their own targeted article, the wider public be damned.

We’ve reached peak presser, in other words. It’s hard to know where we go from here, but anywhere away from the po-faced notion that some public service is being provided by these events would be a good start.

Yeah yeah meta jokes are so 2011. Still, there are so many good previews floating around today that it would be pointless for me to add any more muck to the slop pile of raw speculation. But I can use my flawless reading skills to good use and point you in the direction of what’s pretty effing good.

Brian Phillips does his thing for Grantland

“It’s like playing Galaga. Remember Galaga? You could nab every power-up in the game, you could clear level after level, but those aliens were going to keep munching their way toward you forever, like a typewriter ribbon that never ran out. (Remember typewriters?). Bayern is the endless loop of aliens; Dortmund is a kid who’s only got so many quarters. You can root for the kid, but be realistic.”

Jebus Murphy Phillips! The whole thing is basically as good as this, and it includes some nice Robben jokes. Actually some of the better you’ll read between now and tomorrow.

STV Previews the Champions League final

Three good, smart blogger dudes chit-chatting together and being smart and stuff. With thick Scottish accents. Also, STV: figure out how to allow others to embed your wonderful content!

Michael Cox with a preview that may actually have some basis in reality

It centres around whatever Robert Lewandowski is capable of doing:

“…Bayern will almost certainly have more clear-cut goalscoring opportunities than Dortmund. If Jurgen Klopp’s side are to record an unlikely triumph, they will have to depend upon ruthlessness in the final third.

Fortunately, up front Dortmund have Robert Lewandowski – second-top goalscorer in the Bundesliga, and a striker who demonstrated his incredible goalscoring potential with a brilliant four-goal haul against Real Madrid in the semi-final first leg.”

In any case, the appraisal doesn’t look good for Dortmund. Reus and Lewandowski haven’t been linking up well recently since Goetze’s departure, which may explain a bit of their shit league record since Mario picked up his injury.

Paolo Bandini remembers Arrigo Sacchi’s 1989-90 Milan

Sometimes the best thing is to put the wonderful history of the European Cup in relief. There is no better example of a team defined by success in Europe than Sacchi’s side and their romp in the 1990 final against Steaua Bucharest. It also contains a historical titbit I hadn’t heard before on how the Italian military assisted TV crews after a strike in Spain almost led to a TV blackout (plus ça change I guess).

The DT 2013 Champions League Final Companion

The Commentator Talking points are spot on, the player points are awesome, but what Brooks nails here, as ever, are his Getty photo selections. Behold, a master at work.

Merry Christmas, Twitter!

Merry Christmas, Twitter!

Chris Waddle, the former footballing semi-great, has opened his gob and the social media machine is now attempting to destroy him with Tweets. Anyway, this is the reason:

“I would say he has been a good player, I wouldn’t put him down as a great,” Waddle, 52, told BBC Radio 5 Live.

“You can go down a list of footballers since the Premier League and I don’t think David Beckham would probably be in the first 1,000.”

Considering there are over 500 players currently registered in the Premier League as of writing, this would put Beckham considerably far down the historical list. I’m quite excited as I’m certain this implies Martin Laursen is better than David Beckham.

Anyway, this would be piss in a bucket save for the fact that Mr. Waddle is employed as a media person by both ESPN and BBC Five Live. Most of us suffer under the naive impression that pundits are meant to help inform the football-liking public about the sport they’re watching.

I think we can all say with confidence that placing Beckham out of the top 1000 best Premier League players of all time isn’t very informative. However, the reason Counter Attack is even clackity-clacking over this is because it’s a good reminder that television pundits aren’t hired to inform, but to aggravate, and thereby draw attention.

You weren’t thinking about Chris Waddle yesterday, were you? Or even most if not all of 2013? And now you are. The end.

So I don’t want to pick on this guy, because countless people have said this kind of thing before in regard to football. But in this particular case, the announcer…Martin Tyler he ain’t. It’s a lot of broken-voiced screaming over an admittedly crazy result. But this isn’t exactly different than what Gus Johnson has managed in the past.

To that end, I would love, love, love to set up an experiment featuring two announcers—let’s say Tyler and Johnson— make the same remarks word-for-word on the same sporting event. Then you’d show both it to two sets of neutral American sports fans. Better yet, two sets of US Ivy League college kids. And then get them to rate it out of ten or something.

My hunch is that they would instinctively rate the British accent higher. Which is a long-winded way of saying American announcing is just fine the way it is. Who for example is as good in British sports as Vin Scully?

157248046

There was a bit of a hullabaloo in local media circles when Toronto Maple Leaf Iced Hockey team player Phil Kessel didn’t talk to the media one day and a lot of newspaper beat guys lost it a little. The Maple Leafs site Pension Plan Puppets nails the dynamic really well here. The point here is that the media may not be making the best use of their access to players:

That presser-fed formula is really what we’re talking about: interview scrums that generate easy quotes, but not interesting ones. Lazy narratives, rather than valuable ones. But beyond tearing down the shoulda-been-obvious, I was wondering what makes sportswriters worth following – how can an author avoid rehashed, mealy content?

The author “Bower Power” goes on to suggest three pretty reasonable alternatives to the current “quote-and-go” approach that marks the current approach: timeliness, analysis, and unique insight.

I think the issue here isn’t really with those “damn lazy reporters,” but with the entire mode of newspaper reporting described by PPP above. This is the culture of, there is a match—go write a report about it in the newspaper, and include quotes for colour. It basically presumes the Internet still doesn’t exist, and if it does, it’s just a bunch of nerds wanking off to stats.

To be fair, I think a lot of the better, seasoned beat guys are moving away from this approach, even if some of their editors are not. But sometimes you wish they might move a little quicker, you know?

Here’s why, and this will likely fall under the “analysis” category. I’ve witnessed Kristian Jack doing his thing lately at Toronto FC matches, and it’s really cool to watch. He doesn’t sit in the press box with a laptop counting the plays. Instead, he wanders all around BMO Field taking countless photos and making notes. And then he’ll sit it in on the post-match press conference and ask a very specific question to the manager, often outside the conventional line of questions that usually involve “Ryan, tell us about the last minute goal.”

Finally, he’ll fly out to do approaches with the players, as he did with Tim Cahill for this incredible post on how the LA Galaxy and former Evertonian attacking mid prepares to defend set-pieces as well as use them to pivot into attacks.
Read the rest of this entry »

114179162

The statement. And now the Fisk:

In relation to the information announced for the kick-off time of The FA Cup with Budweiser Final, The FA would like to highlight that 5.15pm is a regular kick-off time in the football calendar.

Well, it depends by what you mean by “regular.” It’s regular in the TV-dependent Premier League, and usually involves one of the bigger names so as to make the audience share worthwhile. Also, love The FA Cup with Budweiser, because it makes one imagine the prize is an FA Cup filled to the brim with Budweiser.

This time was agreed with major stakeholders and broadcasters and has been used across the game for a number of years for televised matches.

Major PR misstep here. What fan is going to read this and say without sarcasm, “Well, so long as it’s been approved by the stakeholders and broadcasters. I’m just a person who pays to go to football matches, and is essentially the heart and soul of everything that football is about.” An idiot.

In terms of transportation, a small percentage of Cup Final fans use the method of train travel.

Additional coach services which National Express are running, including directly from Wembley Stadium, mean there are more options for fans returning north after the game from Wembley on Saturday 11 May.

Now many on Twitter have pointed this out already…”method of train travel”?

“Hey Dave, how are you getting to London this weekend?” “I’m practicing the train travel method. It’s 60% effective, I know, but it’s about getting the timing right.” Also, notice there is no clear alternatives offered under the “more options” sentence. And no source on the “small percentage” of fans using the train.

The kick-off time is unchanged from last year and this allows more football fans around the country to watch The Cup Final in its entirety.

The domestic viewing figures for last year’s FA Cup Final, shown on ITV and ESPN, recorded a combined peak in-home audience of 11.7m people in the UK.

This was the highest peak viewing figure The FA Cup Final has achieved under the current TV deal and a higher audiencee than that of Bayern Munich v Chelsea in the UEFA Champions League Final.

Again, no comparative source offered here. How much larger was the audience share compared to the last 3:00 PM kick-off? And is this isolated for other factors? Moreover, fans of the two clubs would watch the final if it was on 7:00 PM. So is it morally imperative neutrals get a chance to watch? Is the FA’s mission to improve ratings philanthropic in nature? No, the figures amount to more money, and the money is going to paying off Wembley debt, with a bit going to football clubs and such.

Also audience is spelled wrong, but only enormous, tedious trolls point out minor spelling mistakes on the Internet.

144314290

So NBC announced their gargantuan plans for Premier League broadcasts next year, which includes a bajillion games, a bunch of MOTD knockoffs, and a part-time Gary Lineker. Richard Deitsch has all the pertinent details over at SI:

Stateside fans of the Premier League expect matches to be available over-the-air, and NBC Sports said its initial schedule will include 154 games on NBC Sports Network, 22 games on other NBC Universal channels and 20 games on NBC. There will be 184 games airing on Premier League Extra Time and 76 Spanish-language broadcasts on Telemundo (10) and Mun2 (66). There are plans to air more than 600 hours of original and weekly studio programming on the NBC Sports Network. NBC said it will air 30 hours of original Premier League programming weekly.

“Our goal and No. 1 objective is to be true to the sport,” NBC Sports executive producer Sam Flood said.

Said Premier League CEO Richard Scudamore: “Fundamentally, this is a market of huge interest to our owners. The plans these guys have are a big step for us.”

There will be reams written about what this means for US soccer’s soul, competition with MLS, etcetera etcetera. But to my mind the best sense of the future of cable television is the photo captured by Jonathan Tannenwald:

758822848

That’s right: relegation battle football on E! One can imagine cable gradually disappearing leaving only PPV sports behind.