Anything to declare?

[Efcjake]

Quis custodiet ipsos custodies?

 

[Gladystweet]

Had us believing it was a 'new dawn'

I'll be honest mate, I never read papers, online or otherwise. I don't do any social media, so am not privy to any news, gossip etc. I actually depend on GOT for my info. Ok, some of it is utter jarg and is probably from Twitter etc, but there are those with sensible heads who normally put "groundbreaking" rumours straight in the bin for me.
As for Jim the tit white, I switch stations as soon as I hear his voice. I won't lie, he had me for a bit, more due to the fact that I wanted to believe than anything else.

 

[COYBL25]

I'll be honest mate, I never read papers, online or otherwise. I don't do any social media, so am not privy to any news, gossip etc. I actually depend on GOT for my info. Ok, some of it is utter jarg and is probably from Twitter etc, but there are those with sensible heads who normally put "groundbreaking" rumours straight in the bin for me.
As for Jim the tit white, I switch stations as soon as I hear his voice. I won't lie, he had me for a bit, more due to the fact that I wanted to believe than anything else.

Spot on, no sign of the Mosh fraud on the Jim White show, now that he's been rumbled and fat heads been sussed as a pub team manager

 

[leslad]

Why bother using social/other media like the Echo when the club already has Facebook, Twitter accounts and an official website to disseminate up-to-the-minute information?

Why not employ people to do a proper PR job properly, instead of using agents a la the Echo? Surely people would believe the club's official channels over any other anyway.

That's what doesn't make sense to me. Unless I don't understand properly, surely the amount of turnover a premiership football club gets it shouldn't need agent stooges, it can (should) be transparent to its fans. In the case of Everton, they're used to disappointment anyway!

The club could also generate greater viewership for advertising and marketing by actually keeping the fans in the loop.

@orly enjoyed the article/essay was well written and enjoyed the weasel stuff too.

 

[Efcjake]

Good evening mein frandels.

Over the summer, a number of you kind folk, either as hunted Weasels or Weasel Hunters, took part in the Weasel Index. It was a light-hearted, satirical look at the reasonably new industry of the 'In The Know' persons, turbo-charged by the advent of mass social media. With the exception of one misunderstanding beyond the forum, it was generally taken in the manner in which it was intended.

The whole point was - can we trust the Everton-themed information we are receiving? Should we accept it without knowing the "source"'s full motivations? And ultimately, does it really matter?

I'm not going to start naming names again (and I've been asked not to specifically) and this is not by any means an article of accusations. I have no doubt whatsoever that anyone mentioned coincidentally below is first and foremost an Evertonian. But are they a conduit for the club's own social marketing strategy, willingly or unwillingly?



Over the summer, Goodison Park hosed a number of kick-around friendlies. This one linked above was one of the first of the summer; beyond the celebrity boxers and the SportsPesa directors, there are a number of Everton Twitterati names and, rather surprisingly, the (at that time) Everton editor for the Liverpool Echo. Nothing here is itself shocking - a few regulars making up the teams - but the basic question is: would these social media accounts, ostensibly independent of club oversight or editorial, have been invited if they had taken a negative stance in their podcasts, articles and blogging? Once you have a chance to ping it into the back of the Street End net, living that teenage dream of momentous glory that didn't involve Kelly Brook, are you going to do anything to harm the chances of your invite back?

'Kelly, wonderful two minutes there but I must say, dreadful mattress and the wallpaper could do with a fixer-upper in here'

or

'Kelly, 30 seconds of heaven, fantastic coffee by the way, how about next Thursday?'

So does this matter? Do we care whether our Everton mass media (and it is unavoidable, like Fox News, the BBC website and FaceBook - if you're looking for some Everton action you're going to encounter the big Everton beasts that roam the social media safari) is perhaps influenced by the club in a grace and favour manner? How many times after a big defeat or setback was Tim Cahill wheeled out for some positivity? Pointy Phil telling us after selling all our strikers (plus ca change) one summer that it meant the squad was close-knit, together, more chances for a youngster? After a heavy defeat, did we really need to see Tom Davies (socks mercifully under trousers) doing some samba dancing? Do you feel like you are being manipulated and do you care?

My view is that we should at least be wary as we've been here before. Caveat Lector , even in the Wild West days of late 2011. If you read this thread http://www.nsno.co.uk/forums/index.php?topic=15350.150 and been around for a while, you may remember the infamous Ian Ross (former comms man at the Club) having a chain of emails leaked. At one point, apparently CEO Robert Elstone drew up a list of individuals "who can say good things about us include (and you know these
far better than me)":



I've removed some of the names here, particularly the Supporters Club leaders, good people who even at the time felt they were unfairly seen as patsies. But what is important here is that the Club felt they could lean on these individuals, and that supporter feeling was being manipulated or at least steered in a way that discouraged a fully robust debate. And you can see why; there's a ravenous desire for fresh, to-the-minute transfer and team news, for the hint of stadium progress fresh off the press, that drives people to the big social media figures, and they need that exposure for more listeners, more clicks, more engagement.

Should editorial oversight from the club be declared? Should the Echo have a 'Chinese Wall' *vomits onto self* that means they can say what they like, when they like, and runouts on the hallowed turf be damned?

Sometimes there are no sinister machinations and for your aural pleasure, you can listen to a couple of Everton supporting frandelinos talking about Everton. Try that here https://www.grandoldteam.com/forum/threads/listen-grandoldteam-podcast-16-09-17.99008/ .

Do you feel like you are being manipulated and do you care?

Yes, of course the club is doing whatever it can to control messages to the public involving them. Every organization of a large enough size will want to do that.

I do care because they have misled us before and will do so again to suit the organizations needs before the supporters. Supporters have less influence each year as our proportional contribution to the club's revenues dwindles in the face of rising TV and marketing sources of revenue instead.

Should editorial oversight from the club be declared?

Is that necessary? Anyone who is clued in knows that the only way you get a direct quote out of the club is if you play by their rules.

We're all so cynical these days most of us don't believe it unless it is bad news anyway.

 

[Gladystweet]

Why bother using social/other media like the Echo when the club already has Facebook, Twitter accounts and an official website to disseminate up-to-the-minute information?

Why not employ people to do a proper PR job properly, instead of using agents a la the Echo? Surely people would believe the club's official channels over any other anyway.

That's what doesn't make sense to me. Unless I don't understand properly, surely the amount of turnover a premiership football club gets it shouldn't need agent stooges, it can (should) be transparent to its fans. In the case of Everton, they're used to disappointment anyway!

The club could also generate greater viewership for advertising and marketing by actually keeping the fans in the loop.

I used to ring 'clubcall' mate. Sometimes for longer than was healthy. Sat there, listening to an endless loops of nothing news. Then get giddy when the opening sentence had changed. Normally turned out to be someone was getting back to fitness.

You knew where you stood in those days, there was nothing to say, so the club said nothing.
Dems were the days.

 

[LouReedwalkonthewildside]

I'll be honest mate, I never read papers, online or otherwise. I don't do any social media, so am not privy to any news, gossip etc. I actually depend on GOT for my info. Ok, some of it is utter jarg and is probably from Twitter etc, but there are those with sensible heads who normally put "groundbreaking" rumours straight in the bin for me.
As for Jim the tit white, I switch stations as soon as I hear his voice. I won't lie, he had me for a bit, more due to the fact that I wanted to believe than anything else.

Same here mate, when he comes on sky on transfer deadline day, I scurry to find the remote to get him off before he opens his mouth.

 

[Efcjake]

Why bother using social/other media like the Echo when the club already has Facebook, Twitter accounts and an official website to disseminate up-to-the-minute information?

Why not employ people to do a proper PR job properly, instead of using agents a la the Echo? Surely people would believe the club's official channels over any other anyway.

That's what doesn't make sense to me. Unless I don't understand properly, surely the amount of turnover a premiership football club gets it shouldn't need agent stooges, it can (should) be transparent to its fans. In the case of Everton, they're used to disappointment anyway!

The club could also generate greater viewership for advertising and marketing by actually keeping the fans in the loop.

@orly enjoyed the article/essay was well written and enjoyed the weasel stuff too.

Why bother using social/other media like the Echo when the club already has Facebook, Twitter accounts and an official website to disseminate up-to-the-minute information?

Because then they can communicate their message to you without you knowing the true source of the information and the intent behind it.

Why not employ people to do a proper PR job properly, instead of using agents a la the Echo? Surely people would believe the club's official channels over any other anyway.

Because sometimes the club wants plausible deniability, which they would lose if it comes directly from them. Introducing an agent gives them the option to distance themselves from the fallout of how a message is received.

 

[Gladystweet]

Same here mate, when he comes on sky on transfer deadline day, I scurry to find the remote to get him off before he opens his mouth.

Well I wouldn't go that far...







*just uses the mute button in case Natalie makes a welcome appearance*

 

[leslad]

Why bother using social/other media like the Echo when the club already has Facebook, Twitter accounts and an official website to disseminate up-to-the-minute information?

Because then they can communicate their message to you without you knowing the true source of the information and the intent behind it.

Why not employ people to do a proper PR job properly, instead of using agents a la the Echo? Surely people would believe the club's official channels over any other anyway.

Because sometimes the club wants plausible deniability, which they would lose if it comes directly from them. Introducing an agent gives them the option to distance themselves from the fallout of how a message is received.

Cheers! Now I know why I work as my day job with maths/numbers and not PR / politics / law!

 

[leslad]

I used to ring 'clubcall' mate. Sometimes for longer than was healthy. Sat there, listening to an endless loops of nothing news. Then get giddy when the opening sentence had changed. Normally turned out to be someone was getting back to fitness.

You knew where you stood in those days, there was nothing to say, so the club said nothing.
Dems were the days.

Ignorance is bliss, sometimes.

 

[Carlito]

Let the record show that my blog, which recently spiked as high as 18 views, retains its integrity, as I paid for my Goodison run out myself.

Let the record also show that I scored twice from midfield, and was likened to a young Frank Lampard.

Please let it be stricken from the record that it was my mum who said it.

 

[LouReedwalkonthewildside]

Well I wouldn't go that far...







*just uses the mute button in case Natalie makes a welcome appearance*

Forgot about Natalie!

 

[Gladystweet]

Forgot about Natalie!

WHAT???

 

[Efcjake]

Cheers! Now I know why I work as my day job with maths/numbers and not PR / politics / law!

A perfect example of this concept in action is this article from the Echo last year: http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/everton-need-bide-time-transfer-11527466

This talks about us having a 100 million quid transfer budget.

Did we spend 100 million quid? No.

Supporters were not too pleased that their expectations had been met but they couldn't throw it back at the club because the information did not come through their official channels and so there's nothing to be done but grumble.

Now, do you think the Echo and the Trinity Mirror media group just decided to tell that lie and stick to it? Or is it more likely that the club wanted to generate some hype and good feelings for the new owner while fueling season ticket sales?

Plausible Deniability and everyone except us was a winner. Trinity Mirror gets to sell their papers and generate clicks, Everton gets everyone feeling good about Moshiri and drives up season ticket sales on the back of those expectations.

We get misled.