Page 1 of 2

Paranoia? Or simple truth?

PostPosted: Thu Aug 01, 2013 11:01 am
by john@staustell
Dear SSN

I was rather hoping the anti-City/pro-United bias on SSN would ease over time, but if anything it is getting worse.

For the last 3 seasons City have had the league's best defence. Yet when there is an article about a player 9 times out of 10 they are shown scoring against City - today it is Steven Caulkner. Often it is Rooney - who gets the honour of having 2 goals shown against City (never any other teams). This is just clearly aimed at showing City in a bad light.

Last night City beat AC Milan in the AUDI cup, they actually put 5 past them in half an hour. This was headline news on the ticker on BBC main news at breakfast. On SSN barely a mention - Pellegrini was interviewed briefly 'after City's friendly victory over AC Milan last night' - nothing on the well-used ticker. By contrast, a friendly between United RESERVES and Crewe was last week was reported in full technicolour. Of no public interest whatsoever.

I see you recently put up subscriptions yet again so could I suggest you use the extra money to hire some editors who can create programmes without such constant bias, or contrastingly hire some City-biased chaps so we can have alternate bias as the week goes on?

Regards

Re: Paranoia? Or simple truth?

PostPosted: Thu Aug 01, 2013 11:08 am
by Foreverinbluedreams
Dear John,

SSN understands your frustration and too put it bluntly we don't give a fuck. We are a broadcaster whose target audience is made up of mostly dirty Rag bastards, therefore it's in our best interest to pander to their desires.

Yours not giving a fuck,
SSN

Re: Paranoia? Or simple truth?

PostPosted: Thu Aug 01, 2013 11:09 am
by dick dastardley
its good but your pissing in the wind mate!!

Re: Paranoia? Or simple truth?

PostPosted: Thu Aug 01, 2013 11:21 am
by london blue 2
It's spelled byast.

Re: Paranoia? Or simple truth?

PostPosted: Thu Aug 01, 2013 11:25 am
by Nigels Tackle
sky didn't have the rights to show highlights of last night's game....

Re: Paranoia? Or simple truth?

PostPosted: Thu Aug 01, 2013 11:42 am
by sandman
london blue 2 wrote:It's spelled byast.


Am I missing some joke here?

Spelt
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/spelt

Biased
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/biased?s=t

Re: Paranoia? Or simple truth?

PostPosted: Thu Aug 01, 2013 12:34 pm
by freshie
london blue 2 wrote:It's spelled byast.


Only if you can't spell correctly

Re: Paranoia? Or simple truth?

PostPosted: Thu Aug 01, 2013 1:12 pm
by littlebig
Did you send that John? If so then fair due's

Re: Paranoia? Or simple truth?

PostPosted: Thu Aug 01, 2013 1:18 pm
by carl_feedthegoat
It is the simple truth mate , if we play like we did in the first 35 minutes of yesterdays game then we will win the prem and the tabloids can go fuck themselves.

Re: Paranoia? Or simple truth?

PostPosted: Thu Aug 01, 2013 1:37 pm
by Risby
If you did send that, let us all know what fuck-you response they reply with.

I wouldn't hold your breath on anything worthwhile though.

Until Golem screws up and they lose 'their' title, I can't see SSN changing their editing pattern. Even when they do, I can't imagine it will be to city's favour.

I do think Pellegrini will help our profile though amongst the media as he seems in control and calm. He seems more approachable than Bob and won't give them anything to milk or wind him up with.

Re: Paranoia? Or simple truth?

PostPosted: Thu Aug 01, 2013 1:40 pm
by phips
who cares

Re: Paranoia? Or simple truth?

PostPosted: Thu Aug 01, 2013 2:01 pm
by Original Dub
phips wrote:who cares


Not fucking you anyway.

Re: Paranoia? Or simple truth?

PostPosted: Thu Aug 01, 2013 2:07 pm
by Slim
Original Dub wrote:
phips wrote:who cares


Not fucking you anyway.


Now now, you leave the soccer fan alone, he's only been supporting since City were an alternative so he could seem unique and better informed than the mass of sheep in the US. Alternative for the sake of alternative, the hipster way.

Re: Paranoia? Or simple truth?

PostPosted: Thu Aug 01, 2013 2:26 pm
by Foreverinbluedreams
Slim wrote:
Original Dub wrote:
phips wrote:who cares


Not fucking you anyway.


Now now, you leave the soccer fan alone, he's only been supporting since City were an alternative so he could seem unique and better informed than the mass of sheep in the US. Alternative for the sake of alternative, the hipster way.


The hipster way

http://youtu.be/o_5uVdy5YmA

Re: Paranoia? Or simple truth?

PostPosted: Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:21 pm
by phips
You swear like what Sky Sports covers or doesn't cover matters..it's not the be all end all of news reporting. It doesn't matter. More press coverage isn't necessarily a good thing.

Re: Paranoia? Or simple truth?

PostPosted: Thu Aug 01, 2013 4:02 pm
by Peter Doherty (AGAIG)
Dear sky, when the TV rights to the Premier League next come up for auction I hope they go to the Disney Channel, as it is less of a Mickey Mouse outfit than yours.

Hope you all have painful and protracted deaths,

An admirer.

Re: Paranoia? Or simple truth?

PostPosted: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:03 pm
by Beefymcfc
Dear Sky United,

Remember that 130 notes that you used to collect from my bank every week, well it will still be a memory until you sort your shit out you dirty scum sucking wankers.

Peace-out.

Re: Paranoia? Or simple truth?

PostPosted: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:56 pm
by freshie
phips wrote:You swear like what Sky Sports covers or doesn't cover matters..it's not the be all end all of news reporting. It doesn't matter. More press coverage isn't necessarily a good thing.


It does when they are the sole broadcasters of most of the matches in England

Re: Paranoia? Or simple truth?

PostPosted: Thu Aug 01, 2013 8:35 pm
by gillie
I bet tonights result is on the SSN ticker.

Re: Paranoia? Or simple truth?

PostPosted: Thu Aug 01, 2013 8:36 pm
by london blue 2
Their yellow ticker isn't showing our result at the moment, byast cunts.