We'll_live_and_die
Super Moderator
I have no interest in the article but surely it should be a Prism not prison?
A Prison of Measured Time...blog update (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter Danceswithhorses
- Start date
lewys33
Well-Known Member
This is what confuses me ...... he suggest Michael should resign from KCIC/NOPM because he doesn't consider the return to the taxpayer, yet then clearly states that they want the Ricoh on the cheap. If we use the argument of the taxpayer the best thing to do now is knock the Ricoh down and sell the land to a property developer or a like. JS wont pay as much for the Ricoh as a property developer would for the land.
Obviously this doesn't help with the whole KCIC campaign, but you cannot use the taxpayer as an argument where there are completely viable alternatives to get money back for the taxpayer.
torchomatic
Well-Known Member
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
Les Reid is in the public spotlight as a journalist writing, in this instance, opinion pieces. He would be very naive to not expect those that don't agree with him, even if that is as they have misunderstood, to not react. If the abuse has taken place he should use the proper channels to deal with it, at the moment he's the one giving out abuse to people on twitter without providing any evidence to back up his claims.
As for the initial opinion piece it can quite easily be interpreted as siding more with SISU than any other party involved but as an opinion piece that is open to interpretation. If you recall when the piece was originally published, before anyone knew of the interview with Sepalla, many people were commenting, in a non abusive manner, that it was a strange conclusion and seemed at odds with the opinion of the CT up to that point.
Then we had the interview with Sepalla that was being hyped as a Paxmen-esque 3 hour grilling but turned out to be something of a damp squib. The issue most people had with the piece was not what it said but what it didn't say. Of course we don't know what from the interview hasn't been reported on but many people have asked Les if he asked questions such as who would own the new ground, did Sepalla refuse to answer any questions etc but Les hasn't responded to any of those questions. To me that indicates he either didn't ask the questions, in which case he should hold his hands up and admit it, or that anything related to the interview has to be cleared with Sepalla / SISU and if that's the case that should definitely have been reported.
As for the initial opinion piece it can quite easily be interpreted as siding more with SISU than any other party involved but as an opinion piece that is open to interpretation. If you recall when the piece was originally published, before anyone knew of the interview with Sepalla, many people were commenting, in a non abusive manner, that it was a strange conclusion and seemed at odds with the opinion of the CT up to that point.
Then we had the interview with Sepalla that was being hyped as a Paxmen-esque 3 hour grilling but turned out to be something of a damp squib. The issue most people had with the piece was not what it said but what it didn't say. Of course we don't know what from the interview hasn't been reported on but many people have asked Les if he asked questions such as who would own the new ground, did Sepalla refuse to answer any questions etc but Les hasn't responded to any of those questions. To me that indicates he either didn't ask the questions, in which case he should hold his hands up and admit it, or that anything related to the interview has to be cleared with Sepalla / SISU and if that's the case that should definitely have been reported.
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
Where is this abuse / personal attacks happening? Les keeps stating it's coming from NOPM / KCIC (he doesn't seem to be seeing a distinction between the two) but I can't see anything form them on twitter or facebook. I've tweeted him several times asking for a link to the so called abuse so I can judge for myself but he's ignoring the request.
The defamation / libel route is the one he should be taking if he really thinks there is an issue. Deal with things in a correct and proper manner, just giving abuse back is all a bit school playground and not helping anyone.
I'm not really sure how KCIC or NOPM have any impact on the local taxpayer given that we're playing in Northampton. Surely the only taxpayer that could be potentially losing out are those in Northampton?
lewys33
Well-Known Member
Would it matter if it was him or your cats left testicle? As long as the taxpayer is getting the best return.
lewys33
Well-Known Member
I don't think he is saying that they have any impact he is suggesting that they do not consider the taxpayer. Yet he isn't fully considering the taxpayer himself so I don't see how he can use that argument.
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
That's a very strange argument for him to make and would seem to be against free speach. Implies if you don't agree with a certain side you have no right to voice your opinion. surely some of those who are supporting NOPM / KCIC live locally and are taxpayers and have a right to air their views no matter if you agree with them or not.
lewys33
Well-Known Member
Nail on the head.
The Bear
New Member
It would be more cost-effective to sell the land without knocking anything down. Les's piece is about getting CCFC back in the Ricoh and although some stubbornly want to read it as a SISU support piece (because apparently we're all to stupid to deal with differing opinions in a rational manner) it lays out the situation both historically and currently and asks what is the best way forward for the club and the fan base as a whole. There's a big problem for some as it is written by the person who knows more than anyone about this saga than anyone else but poses questions and provides facts that don't fit in with their firmly held opinions.
The current round of name calling and general abuse is just getting in the way of moving things forward. The ultimate question looks to be if people want CCFC back at the Ricoh or SISU out and the troops are being marshalled to those positions and damn the casualties.
People forget that journalists, or proper ones anyway, are supposed to question all sides and report on as much as they can. People didn't have a problem with Les reporting on the bumbling of the FL or Fisher's latest gaffs (e.g. Seppala statue) but seem to have got their knickers in a twist because he *gasp* interviewed one of the main protagonists and *bigger gasp* confirmed their suspicions about her opinions and *complete swoon* didn't force her to agree with every single thing her detractors have ever said about her.
I've been an advocate for fan ownership & involvement in the running of clubs since the days of the FSA back in the mid-80's but the way things have gone in Coventry I can't think of a worse idea for CCFC as there are too many fans who don't want to listen to opposing views and are more interested in shouting abuse at anyone who steps out of line. That ain't democracy...
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
I don't think people have an issue with him interviewing Sepalla or even what she said. Its more the questions that as far as we know weren't asked. People want to know if they were asked and an answer refused and if they weren't asked then why.
thaiskyblue
New Member
spot on.
Skybluesquirrel
New Member
Can you send me a link? I have published all comments received as far as i am aware - except the spam of course.
The Bear
New Member
Again this comes down to how journalism works. From what I can tell, they met for about two hours. How much was on or off the record we don't know. Bear in mind that this was the first interview she's done since 2005 and I'm guessing that Les has spent a fair while trying to get it and would like to get more so there will be a certain element of gamesmanship when it comes to going full bore for the ultimate story.
They covered the new stadium financing, player registrations, selling the club, buying the Ricoh, administration and more. There's only so much you can cover in one interview and in the space allowed and, as I said before, it does seem that some people are pissed off because JS gave answers that they didn't like which is hardly Les's fault.
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
if that's the case then that's the response Les should give rather than flying off the handle. As I said if he hasn't asked the questions people wanted asked explain why if there's a valid reason such as the one you lay out. Flying off the handle and not responding to anyone that asks him about the questions he hasn't asked makes it look a lot worse than the real situation may be.
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
Some people don't listen though. That kind of explanation has been put up plenty times before, so i guess if you're him, you get tired after a while of people just SHOUTING regardless and hearing what they want to hear!
Again doesn't excuse, but does explain.
Again doesn't excuse, but does explain.
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
I wasn't aware Les had responded to people asking why he hadn't asked certain questions. Do you know where he gave the explanation would be interested to read it directly from Les so as not to misinterpret.
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
I meant on here.
Many say that kind of explanation, but despite that there's still constant ranting about SISU puppet and the like, and the explanation is ignored.
It's pack mentality, and it's pretty moronic tbh. His job's to write a narrative out of the answers he got and that he did, along with getting his top headline of freehold or nothing. Deciding beyond that is crazy talk and shows the absolute lunacy and paranoia of some people.
Now admittedly he's not helping himself just atm(!) but really, some things are farcical. As said, some were more than happy to accept his word when he was criticising the league implicitly, or giving ACL's viewpoint. His job is to disseminate viewpoints as much as anything, but as the messenger he's being shot! It's quite frankly.
Many say that kind of explanation, but despite that there's still constant ranting about SISU puppet and the like, and the explanation is ignored.
It's pack mentality, and it's pretty moronic tbh. His job's to write a narrative out of the answers he got and that he did, along with getting his top headline of freehold or nothing. Deciding beyond that is crazy talk and shows the absolute lunacy and paranoia of some people.
Now admittedly he's not helping himself just atm(!) but really, some things are farcical. As said, some were more than happy to accept his word when he was criticising the league implicitly, or giving ACL's viewpoint. His job is to disseminate viewpoints as much as anything, but as the messenger he's being shot! It's quite frankly.
lewys33
Well-Known Member
I understand what his piece is about, but on twitter he is arguing that Michael's NOPM/KCIC campaign does not take in to consideration the taxpayer. If you actually take in to consideration the taxpayer then ask yourself what is the best thing to do? Sell The Ricoh to JS at her price? Or sell to someone who will pay market value and let them do what they want with it? You cannot use the "taxpayer" argument when there are other viable solutions for the taxpayer to get their money back if not more than that of getting Coventry back to the Ricoh.
I am dissapointed in Les because he didnt ask the questions we wanted the answers to. Not the answers Joy gave. For example check the comments on the blog .........
Last edited:
The Bear
New Member
I'm not Les so I can't really speak for him. What I am saying is that he's been getting pretty nasty abuse and some unfair criticism for doing his job. As a CCFC fan and sometime KCIC/NOPM protestor I want to know as much as possible and am not going to stick my head in the sand when it comes to opposing or alternative views and, from what I can see, Les is objecting to the 'shoot the messenger' approach of people who don't like to hear alternatives.
The problem with football politics is that certain people approach it with the same mentality as they do supporting their team; this is my side and this is where I will stay for life no matter what. Works well for being a supporter but horrible for having a debate about what's going on behind the scenes.
Astute
Well-Known Member
He is paid to be impartial. He isn't paid to have a go at people like Michael for having views different to himself.
singers_pore
Well-Known Member
I haven't seen any real abuse of Les. I have seen a lot of criticism of his "grilling" of JS and I have seen that he responds extremely poorly to that criticism by making ad hominem attacks on the people who have sent messages.
If Les really has received thousands of messages of support from other fans (as he has claimed), then I don't know why he is getting so upset about a few hundred people posting criticisms of his work on here and on the Prison of Measured Time blog.
If Les really has received thousands of messages of support from other fans (as he has claimed), then I don't know why he is getting so upset about a few hundred people posting criticisms of his work on here and on the Prison of Measured Time blog.
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
He's not, certainly not!
The media is never 'impartial', the media imparts a viewpoint for people to agree or disagree with. When conducting an interview it's arguably to filter the information given in a readable form...
But then he's done that, and see the abuse he gets for that!
he may as well come out with full-blown opinions!
lewys33
Well-Known Member
you are missing the point. He has been asked why he didn't ask certain questions people wanted to know the answer to. He has not given a clear answer as to why he didn't or even if he did but didn't get an answer?
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
I'm not missing the point, you're all demanding something which is ludicrous, and shooting the messenger for no reason!
lewys33
Well-Known Member
Please tell me how it is ludicrous for a Journalist to ask questions which we want answers to in an interview?
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
You're refusing to listen, so I'm out. It's been put up often enough how it works, but it doesn;t seem to suit your agenda to accept not everybody is out to get you.
Some people are just doing their jobs ffs.
lewys33
Well-Known Member
I really do not get your point. But if you are out that is fair enough. I just feel if he made it clear there would be no need for all of this. Whether it be:
He didnt ask for reason A (possibly too scared to ask)
He ran out of time
He did ask but did not get a relevant answer (therefore did not publish it)
Cheshire Sky Blue
New Member
Interesting clarification. What I am not sure about is if Les was aware of this and other facts before the interview. If not, he went half prepared. If he had prepared well enough in advance he could have challenged JS on certain key points. That would have been fantastic to read and if she would have stonewalled an answer then at least we would have known and come to our own conclusions. I don't want Les coming to conclusions on behalf of his readers on a proportion of the facts. Just want the facts, nothing but the facts.
I have a concern now that when Les does a piece on CCC / ACL that is critical, he will have reduced credibility even though I am sure there will be things to be critical of. Come on Les, we the folk of Coventry have a very limited voice. We need trusted people in the media (written & spoken) to be stronger and more challenging. I think I can appreciate how hard that can be, but it is what is needed.
Cheshire:
The post that you quoted contains nothing new. I was merely repeating what I have said on a number of occasions. You ask whether Les knew it: I don't know. It depends on how thoroughly he has researched the history of this saga, I suppose. It also depends, I assume, on what he feels is important for people to know as his piece is inevitably limited by space as well as his knowledge and understanding. So, he could have known it because I have said and Fisher has said it. Whether he thought it of any importance is for him to say: presumably not. Presumably it was for this reason that he did not include the statement from ACL that he had requested before his "opinion piece" the previous Friday.
Any time a journalist writes an "opinion piece" it has to be read as just that. This does not devalue the piece it just informs the reader in an open and honest way the stance that the writer has taken. Just as probably everyone would know where Farage is coming from when he talks about Europe, so we know where Les is coming from when he writes about the CCFC/Sisu/Ricoh saga. He would deserve criticism if he tried to pretend that he did not hold such strong views. There is no pretence, he says openly and honestly where he stands.
The post that you quoted contains nothing new. I was merely repeating what I have said on a number of occasions. You ask whether Les knew it: I don't know. It depends on how thoroughly he has researched the history of this saga, I suppose. It also depends, I assume, on what he feels is important for people to know as his piece is inevitably limited by space as well as his knowledge and understanding. So, he could have known it because I have said and Fisher has said it. Whether he thought it of any importance is for him to say: presumably not. Presumably it was for this reason that he did not include the statement from ACL that he had requested before his "opinion piece" the previous Friday.
Any time a journalist writes an "opinion piece" it has to be read as just that. This does not devalue the piece it just informs the reader in an open and honest way the stance that the writer has taken. Just as probably everyone would know where Farage is coming from when he talks about Europe, so we know where Les is coming from when he writes about the CCFC/Sisu/Ricoh saga. He would deserve criticism if he tried to pretend that he did not hold such strong views. There is no pretence, he says openly and honestly where he stands.
Sky Blue Kid
Well-Known Member
The Bear...Because some comments weren't published and personal attacks were made against Les Reid. The first paragraph goes into the whole 'Less Read' idiocy and ends with allusion to the idea that he is supporting JS's points of view. There's a good case for defamation &/or libel and bloggers in general really need to wise up to the reality of publishing laws in the UK.....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................Just where is there a "allusion to the idea that he is supporting JS's points of view. There's a good case for defamation &/or libel" When he can quite clearly be quoted on Twitter as saying ACL/CCC should sell to SISU...He certainly can't be accused of "Leaning towards ACL/CCC can he?
Cheshire Sky Blue
New Member
That's a nice and generous response PWKH. What I will say is that if Les has an opinion that is supported by facts, then that is fine. But if he avoids asking question or pursuing answers that may suggest that his current thinking is wrong, or to avoid having to amend his theories then that is bordering on deceitful. I don't believe he is deceitful, just in error.
Last edited:
Cheshire
I was going back to edit the post: it was a shame that he was unable to use the statement that he had requested from ACL in his article on Friday. It would have helped him if he had wanted to put some balance in his piece. Rather than say that ACL was silent, which was what he wrote, he could have printed the statement which said that ACL was open to any business proposition that Otium wanted to put. He used it, sort of, in his account of the interview Seppala gave him, but he had re-written it for some reason, although he still used it within quotation marks. For the record this is what ACL had said: “ACL has always been prepared to negotiate a deal to allow the Sky Blues to play at the Ricoh Arena. We have made all the running thus far offering two very generous deals which were rejected by Sisu. We will now wait for the club to make their best offer to return to play in Coventry.”
I was going back to edit the post: it was a shame that he was unable to use the statement that he had requested from ACL in his article on Friday. It would have helped him if he had wanted to put some balance in his piece. Rather than say that ACL was silent, which was what he wrote, he could have printed the statement which said that ACL was open to any business proposition that Otium wanted to put. He used it, sort of, in his account of the interview Seppala gave him, but he had re-written it for some reason, although he still used it within quotation marks. For the record this is what ACL had said: “ACL has always been prepared to negotiate a deal to allow the Sky Blues to play at the Ricoh Arena. We have made all the running thus far offering two very generous deals which were rejected by Sisu. We will now wait for the club to make their best offer to return to play in Coventry.”
Cheers PWKH. So, it looks as if the ball is in Sisu's court. As the majority of us suspected. Sounds to me very much like the £400,000 and £150,000 rent offers for whatever division. I wonder?
To me Les Reid's talk with Joy Seppala was hugely disappointing. He just did not ask the important questions. Her family and religious beliefs were not relevant. It was a let down. He needed to be Jeremy Paxman, instead he was Terry Wogan.
To me Les Reid's talk with Joy Seppala was hugely disappointing. He just did not ask the important questions. Her family and religious beliefs were not relevant. It was a let down. He needed to be Jeremy Paxman, instead he was Terry Wogan.
jaytskyblue
New Member
Les Reid has stated many times that he IS impartial. His twitter interactions for months, latest meltdown, reaction to that blog and opinion piece tells the lie to that. He is anti CCC and does very little analysis of Sisu and their record despite them being our owners.
Just my opinion of course.