Has the British media got no sense of what is right and proper? So what that Amos Adamu and Reynald Temarii were attempting to sell their votes? That's only to be expected when the tournament is worth God knows how many hundreds of millions of pounds to the host nation! What were these guys trying to charge exactly? A paltry £500,000, and the money was going to be used to build artificial pitches so was going back into the grass roots of African football anyway.
And as for poor Ismael Bhamjee of Botswana, Amadou Diakite of Mali and Ahongalu Fusimalohi of Tonga and Tunisia's Slim Aloulou, why are they being suspended? Just because they didn't dob their mates in! Outrageous!
Bloody hell, does anybody think the Yanks got the World Cup without oiling the gears with a few under the table dollars? And South Africa? The FIFA committee genuinely thought that the Rainbow Nation was the perfect nation to host the World Cup, did they? Of course, the World Cup only lasts four weeks but diamonds are forever apparently!
It's about time the media kept their grubby exposes to themselves! Well said Andy Anson for telling the BBC to keep their noses out of FIFA's business. This country isn't interested in ethics, values, integrity, honesty or fair play. Where does that get you? All we want is to host the World Cup; so what that a few dodgy Africans pocket a wedge of dosh in the process?
Does anybody believe that all the money raised by Comic Relief gets to the poor in Africa? But does that stop us from shelling out for British comics to stay in 5 star hotels in Uganda whilst appealing for us to part with our hard earned cash to help build a well that costs just £20? That's possibly less than Lenny Henry's minibar bill for each night of his stay! We don't object to that do we? But then it's one rule for us Brits and another rule for the Africans it seems!
If the BBC show that documentary on FIFA corruption, then we should withhold our license fees in protest! Unpatriotic bastards! Bloody hell, they will be telling us that Italian clubs shouldn't be allowed to bribe referees next!
24 comments:
You are so ill informed, it's unbelievable.
I am a professional journalist writing for three publications and am on the board of the National Union of Journalists and have worked at two premiership football clubs press offices before now.
Journalism is anything but arrogance or "jumped up" as you claim.
It is pure reportage, the art of relaying information.
Now Im sure you're gearing up for an ill-informed diatribe about how the media are biased / corrupt, but then you don't work in the industry.
Just like I wouldn't attack people whop like writing their own opinions on a blog every day.
Regardless of who it hurts, or what effort it affects, journalism is the objective bastian of truth, delivering news regardless of who it upsets.
It's the most incredible form in existence because we control it with moral codes and actual legal guidelines. (Which incidentally you have quite seriously contravined. I could lend you a copy of McNaes Law for Journalism if you want. Its the standard text which all professional journalists (whether on regional rags or national broadsheets must learn in order to be employable. You clearly haven't).
The expose of corruption within the F.A. is so commendable. The journalists will be rewarded professionally for the scoop and helping to remove a rotten core from our beautiful game.
It appears you would have it carry on, eating away at the underbelly of football just for the short term gains of hosting the World Cup.
It would be an honour to bring it here, and the "jumped up journalists" will play a huge factor in promoting the idea and relaying the intricate information to the public.
You also no nothing about the legal issues of defamation.
In fact you've stated a few things here that are likely to be on interest to the P.C.C. and are actually indictable offences.
You have purposely published your claim and have no legal defence for them.
You deplorable little blogger with your big words.
Awful awful post.
Stick to your opiniated rants about West Ham.
At least they won't land you with a law suit.
You may be a journalist but you don't understand irony my friend. Do you REALLY believe that I think Italian clubs should be allowed to bribe referees? DOH!
Mind you, it is a very strange journalist that uses the text spelling of "know". Who do you write for, "The Illiterate Times"?
No I write for the Financial Times, the Evening Standard and the Guardian's sport column.
Spelling in the midst of rage isn't my strong suit, just as yours isn't being funny, informative, critical or a decent writer.
And joke or not, you have still defamed many people.
Have I? Who?
Stephen please explain to me why then were three young Pakistani men exposed for the Cricket scandal or John Higgins exposed for taking a bung when the horses mouth will tell you these things happen daily? The Sun for instance printed its first 6 pages, back and front of its papers for a solid week about the cricket scandal, not that anyone cared about it, most of all the author, but purely to make us condemn these Pakistani men? That's not relaying information, that's going over the top and drilling the same information/hatred into our brains.
And Stephen, perhaps if you exercised a little more care when reading, and understood when a tongue is glued firmly inside the cheek, you might not fly into a rage in the first place. I support Panorama 100% in exposing corruption in FIFA; your argument is with Andy Anson who has called the BBC unpatriotic, not with me.
Crikey TIS, I agreed 100% with exposing the corruption in cricket. I was at Lords when we put together that record eighth wicket stand and felt cheated afterwards, when I learnt about the spot fixing. I love cricket and want the game to be 100% clean!
Hangg on, "pure reportage"? No apostrophe in football clubs' press offices? Wrong your / you're? No apostrophe in I'm? No apostrophe in McNae's? No comma between awful and awful? Your (you would spell it you're!)sub editor must love you Makely!
Hang on, Hanng?
I agreed with the exposure, but why only When they played England. If they cared about the sport they would expose corruption in a game between Zimbabwe and New Zealand for example? And the exaggeration was incredible, front and back pages that both reported the same crap.
Fair enough. Same with the Telegraph stretching out the MPs' expenses scandal to maximise sales over an extended period. Interesting that our TVs were full of 9/11 programmes this year. That's fair game for commercial exploitation already.
As for the Media being ethical, well what about the relationship between Blair and Murdoch? Ethics? Cobblers!
Seems amazing that a journalist writing for the Guardian, Financial Times and Evening Standard could get the true meaning behind the blog so wrong. I must make a note not to read any of those papers again. One does expect a journalist to truly understand a situation and not fly into some kind of misunderstood rage and report on an incorrect context.
Here we go, the populist Rupert defense for the anti-media brigade.
I undertsand you're clutching at straws with your grammatical pedantry, I take ALOT more care on the submission of work than I do writing on the wall of a two-bob blog by an opinionated auteur.
If your tongue was in the cheek then it has to be funny or critical.
I hate bloggers because they right for themselves not to an audience altruistically.
I'm naming you in this weeks feature about this very subject which will be in the Evening Standard.
Enjoy the free publicity.
As for the other fella.......No comment required.
Either this Makely fella is having a laugh and trying to out-do you in the irony stakes or he is simply wrong and horribly deluded.
Journalism is objective? Journalism is the simple relaying of facts? What utter hogwash.
If that's so, why have more than one newspaper? Surely they should all be saying exactly the same thing? No, that's right - we but the newspaper that most closely reflects our own views of the world or, if we're particularly informed we sometimes buy the newspaper that reflects views diametrically opposed to our own so that we can see how the other side is thinking!
Anyway, HF, those of us that visit this blog on a regular basis do so because we understand your obvious use of irony and humour. Keep up the good work, old chap!
Well said T.I.S!
LOL A lot is two words you moron Makely! And bloggers "write" they don't "right"! Look forward to seeing my blog in The Evening Standard too! Think I might WRITE to your editor and suggest you go back to school where our Headmaster can teach you some basic spelling rules!
ive just seen on the west ham news now website that west ham are putting upton park up for sale. its a sad day but we have to leave to compete with the top teams imo.
HF, took you a long time to revert to your usual "moron" slight. Not sure Stephen's poor use of grammar classifies as stupidity nor does it mean he is mentally retarded for his age. So once again please use the correct words when being critical, he may be illiterate or even suffer from dyslexia (admittedly odd for a journalist) I think your statement classifies you as more of the moron, as usual I might suggest.
2233, the point is that he is CLAIMING to be a journalist and yet he can't spell basic high frequency words. It's a bit like Spector claiming to be a footballer!
And my point was, not being able to spell does not make someone a moron! But using the word with the frequency you do, does!!
I understood the point you were trying to make because I am not a moron. You, however, do not seem capable of understanding my point which, I guess, makes you a moron. Anyway, I'm off to bed. Tell me, WHY did you spend 2 hours on this blog tonight? Get a life mate. I've been out for a delicious curry after a few beers whilst you have been on here! Did you enjoy Children in Need? Night.
Stephen Makely??
For such a renowned journalist (bizarre, considering you have absolutely zero sense of irony) it's rather strange, don't you think that Google has no record of anyone of your name working with or related to, any publication you've mentioned.
Except for apparently being the name of someone who won a holiday through the Evening Standard some years back.
You could have at least have chosen a name of a real journalist... (was 'anonymous' becoming a tad boring?)
Obviously you're someone with too much time on his hands.
Well researched albertrand.
Post a Comment