Visitor front page

[Keith]

If no apology is issued you can make a complaint to the regulatory body for newspapers and magazines here: https://www.ipso.co.uk/

Problem is, they are technically correct. It doesn't say Morecambe fans 'were' involved, however, most people would 'assume' they were because most people outside of football (and even a lot who follow it) wouldn't expect Blackpool fans to attack their own directors, they would therefore 'assume' it was Morecambe fans.

Basically, they admit in the Twitter exchange with Martin, that they got the story from the police, then just printed it front page without looking in to it any further. But they printed what the police gave to them, so 'technically' accurate. There's a world of difference between how police record an incident (i.e. who the fans were is irrelevant, only the disorder matters) and a so called journalist, who creates the story & headline.

[Gnasher]

Their story about trouble in Lancaster is quite amusing. Interviewed the doorman's mother who witnessed it all, said it's the worst violence her son has been involved in with a broken nose and blooded shirt. As an aisde, it briefly mentions he got those injuries earlier in the evening, nothing to do with Blackpool fans

[Seasider9601]

So yet again, more sensationalism and crap reporting by The Visitor, Gnasher.

[bill ding]

Picked the paper up , saw the headline ,put the paper down and walked away . There that's one reader they have lost !

[BerlinWaller]

I have not read the article but I have been reliably informed that the young lady who wrote the piece has been subjected to some "threatening" emails today. I was told a name but I have no idea who it was. I have a feeling we haven't heard the last of this.

[Sakhalin Shrimp]

Problem is, they are technically correct. It doesn't say Morecambe fans 'were' involved, however, most people would 'assume' they were because most people outside of football (and even a lot who follow it) wouldn't expect Blackpool fans to attack their own directors, they would therefore 'assume' it was Morecambe fans.

Surely saying that it was their own supporters would make the story more newsworthy.

[Westgate Wanderer]

Saw the headline today, very surprising and misleading! If there was a boycott of said rag would they really notice? The paper is going downhill rapidly! I for one will no longer be perusing this shameful lazy journalistic rag

[Keith]

Problem is, they are technically correct. It doesn't say Morecambe fans 'were' involved, however, most people would 'assume' they were because most people outside of football (and even a lot who follow it) wouldn't expect Blackpool fans to attack their own directors, they would therefore 'assume' it was Morecambe fans.

Surely saying that it was their own supporters would make the story more newsworthy.

It probably would. Problem is, they didn't know what the story was. I'd put money on it that she actually assumed it was Morecambe fans when she wrote it. Obviously contacting the club would have been too difficult? As they said in their exchange with Martin, they didn't know what had happened, they just went on the police report.

A swift retraction & apology would actually have stopped it being the story it is developing in to.

[Keith]

Screen Shot 2016-08-17 at 23.22.27.png (250.07 KiB) Viewed 671 times

Naughty Martin! Dared to question the mighty Visitor.

They said that their front page made it clear the trouble was with Blackpool fans. When Martin asked them to clarify 'where' they made it clear, they responded by blocking him!

A free press?

[Seasider9601]

Ah well.

Don't know how I'll cope now with not seeing their tweets about weight loss programmes, book reviews and Pokemon.

[Brian C]

Guess what ... My comments put on the Visitor Facebook page have now been removed !!!

[Wild Bill]

What a massive own goal by the Visitor. I suggest either a front page apology next week, or lose a significant number of your dwindling customers. Poor show.

[Duffman]

The fact they're deleting comments and blocking people on Twitter (so they can't comment) shows they're well aware of the situation and they're happy for it to run as is. Don't be surprised once the weekend has passed after unsold copies have been returned The Visitor start to backpedal.

For those wanting to make their feelings heard on Facebook, try posting a review as I don't think they have the power to remove them.

[Keith]

Don't be surprised once the weekend has passed after unsold copies have been returned The Visitor start to backpedal.

I'm not convinced. You may find such a wild headline has attracted more people to buy it than would normally. They are the ones who will have been left with a poor impression of the club because they won't know any better.

[Brian C]

Exactly Keith.
That is how this thread started, with quite a few people in work who know nothing about football or MFC asking me why MFC fans caused trouble!

[Duffman]

Don't be surprised once the weekend has passed after unsold copies have been returned The Visitor start to backpedal.

I'm not convinced. You may find such a wild headline has attracted more people to buy it than would normally. They are the ones who will have been left with a poor impression of the club because they won't know any better.

I completely agree. My point is that once the damage is done and they've sold their papers, it wouldn't surprise me if they bury a small apology on page 17 somewhere saying they got it wrong (tabloids do it all the time).

There's no way they can come back from this other than a front page apology, but let's be honest, that won't happen.

[Shrimpy]

Exactly Keith.
That is how this thread started, with quite a few people in work who know nothing about football or MFC asking me why MFC fans caused trouble!

I've had someone message me this morning saying that they are just reading about "all the trouble after the Blackpool game" in the Visitor. People who don't know otherwise are clearly thinking that Morecambe fans were involved.

[Keith]

Unless you know the Oyston/Blackpool story, you would assume it was Morecambe fans.

[Seasider9601]

I had someone ask me yesterday "how and when did a small club like Morecambe get all Billy Big Bollocks with their fans?? Kicking off at Blackpool?? You'll come unstuck."

I had to explain that in no way shape or form were Morecambe fans involved in the reported trouble in our local paper. I could tell he wasn't convinced.

Good move "The Visitor". Done a lot of damage.

[JPH]

Saw the front page in a shop window
Had to read it twice. Horrifically lazy journalism.

Our fans haven't always graced us with the best of reputations last few seasons... However it's sad when the LOCAL paper jumps to conclusions. Headlines over truth. Everyone there saw it was an internal Blackpool fued that happened to be on our property. Club is trying to increase our gate and rep. This sort of thing crushes it all.

Won't be buying again.

[Seasider9601]

Saw the front page in a shop window
Had to read it twice. Horrifically lazy journalism.

Our fans haven't always graced us with the best of reputations last few seasons... However it's sad when the LOCAL paper jumps to conclusions. Headlines over truth. Everyone there saw it was an internal Blackpool fued that happened to be on our property. Club is trying to increase our gate and rep. This sort of thing crushes it all.

Won't be buying again.

Nail hit bang on head. Perfect.

[John L]

Perhaps it would be a good idea to bring this article to the attention of club directors...

[4G63]

They commented on Facebook along the lines of 'the club should've said it was Blackpool fans when asked, instead of refusing to comment about it'.

Passing the blame for their ill-informed headline onto the club. Utterly shameful.

[Phil Anderer]

Surely it would be worth the club's while to take out a full page add in next week's Visitor, not denouncing their lazy journalism, but setting the record straight as to what happened and who was responsible. I'm not sure of the cost, but it's surely worth it to remedy the damage. I doubt the Visitor will turn down the advertising revenue, and given how sloppy they are, they'll probably not even read it and realise it's critical of them, implicitly, if not explicitly.

[Gnasher]

The fact they're deleting comments and blocking people on Twitter (so they can't comment) shows they're well aware of the situation and they're happy for it to run as is. Don't be surprised once the weekend has passed after unsold copies have been returned The Visitor start to backpedal.

For those wanting to make their feelings heard on Facebook, try posting a review as I don't think they have the power to remove them.

I don't think they're bothered. They're not based around here so they're not going to have to face anyone over this so just delete the negative posts.

I have my own problems with Johnstone Press as is obvious from my signature but nothing to do with this.