-
Re: 10 Questions for Beveridge
Originally Posted by
Remi Moses
Gotta say credit to the unmade bed, he at least did some investigating into Beveridge.
Can someone inform the Age we have appointed a new coach .
You wouldn't we'd appointed someone with their coverage
The Age wouldn't report it because we had appointed a man as the coach.
Officially on the Bus-wagon
-
Re: 10 Questions for Beveridge
[QUOTE=azabob;412951]I'll bite, not sure if you are serious, but isn't it always published in alphabetical order?
-
Re: 10 Questions for Beveridge
Originally Posted by
F'scary
The Age wouldn't report it because we had appointed a man as the coach.
???
No idea what that means. Are you suggesting the Age footy team is so ideological they insist on a female coach. If you are that's stupid, if not nevermind.
-
Post Thanks / Like - 0 Thanks, 1 Likes
-
Re: 10 Questions for Beveridge
Originally Posted by
F'scary
The Age wouldn't report it because we had appointed a man as the coach.
Hmmm odd comment
Least there not cheerleading Jimmsy like the Herald - tabloid rag
-
Re: 10 Questions for Beveridge
Originally Posted by
GVGjr
Does any one know why we apparently have a problem with the media?
I'm not aware of any issues with the media.
Also found this an odd claim when heard recently.
Can't recall exactly which footy media figure espoused this just now, but the claim is apparently one of access, or lack thereof.
Examples cited being short, sharp highly stage-managed club-media interactions, the club making only one person available at many of such interactions, instructing players to avoid public comment, etc.
If true, I've nothing against the club running a tighter ship but it's an interesting tendency for a traditionally media-starved club.
Evidently some of the hacks find it galling.
BORDERLINE FLYING
-
Re: 10 Questions for Beveridge
Find it a very strange comment in the article to suggest that bulldogs supporters aren't getting as much info via the media as other clubs fans do.
Via the bulldogs app in particular, as well as website and member comm's - I get more information about the club on a weekly basis, by double, in the last 2 years than ever before. The videos and player and coach interviews are great.
Obviously the 'relationship with the media' question must be related to individual journo's not getting the inside info or access that THEY want - and therefore have an axe to grind. I'm more than happy to be seeing and reading things direct from the club - than journo's quoted unnamed sources and writing speculative articles.
-
Post Thanks / Like - 0 Thanks, 2 Likes
-
Re: 10 Questions for Beveridge
Originally Posted by
Ozza
Find it a very strange comment in the article to suggest that bulldogs supporters aren't getting as much info via the media as other clubs fans do.
Via the bulldogs app in particular, as well as website and member comm's - I get more information about the club on a weekly basis, by double, in the last 2 years than ever before. The videos and player and coach interviews are great.
Obviously the 'relationship with the media' question must be related to individual journo's not getting the inside info or access that THEY want - and therefore have an axe to grind. I'm more than happy to be seeing and reading things direct from the club - than journo's quoted unnamed sources and writing speculative articles.
Well put and couldn't agree more.
The social media team that the dogs have put in place are doing a great job. loving the twitter photos from this mornings first session.
-
Re: 10 Questions for Beveridge
Originally Posted by
hujsh
???
No idea what that means. Are you suggesting the Age footy team is so ideological they insist on a female coach. If you are that's stupid, if not nevermind.
Originally Posted by
Remi Moses
Hmmm odd comment
Least there not cheerleading Jimmsy like the Herald - tabloid rag
No, no, no. "a man" as opposed to a big name like Thompson.
Officially on the Bus-wagon
-
Re: 10 Questions for Beveridge
Originally Posted by
F'scary
No, no, no. "a man" as opposed to a big name like Thompson.
Ah then I probably agree with you