Our bbc

[The Rocket]

8 minutes ago, whatmichaelsays said:

The job of those employees is to put rugby league (or their respective clubs) into the news agenda, ensure that there is a public demand for RL content and make it easy for the media to talk about RL and cater to that content demand. That is literally what PR and media relations is.

I`ve said this before, my sister works in the Environmental Protection Agency over here for the State Gov`t and I know they actually write articles for the various radio, print and on-line media outlets. Journo`s love it, makes their life easier and helps her Department shape the agenda and make the Gov`t look good. She has all the major journos on her phone and vice versa and are continually working on stories together.

Exactly as you say Rugby league Clubs P.R. departments should be doing. It`s all about developing relationships with the various media outlets. But you have to have the right people in these jobs, people who can develop these relationships.

[whatmichaelsays]

15 minutes ago, The Rocket said:

I`ve said this before, my sister works in the Environmental Protection Agency over here for the State Gov`t and I know they actually write articles for the various radio, print and on-line media outlets. Journo`s love it, makes their life easier and helps her Department shape the agenda and make the Gov`t look good. She has all the major journos on her phone and vice versa and are continually working on stories together.

Exactly as you say Rugby league Clubs P.R. departments should be doing. It`s all about developing relationships with the various media outlets. But you have to have the right people in these jobs, people who can develop these relationships.

Completely. There aren't that many RL journalists out there any more and news outlets, including the BBC, are relying on PA newswire feeds and internet analytics to prioritise their content resources. If RL wants to overcome that, it has to work harder to firstly create the demand for RL content and secondly, make it easier for publications to publish it. 

BBC Sport HQ is now within two hours travel time of each of the 10 UK-based Super League clubs. How many of the club's media relations teams have even offered to take out some of the BBC Sport editors for lunch?

[The Rocket]

21 minutes ago, whatmichaelsays said:

Completely. There aren't that many RL journalists out there any more and news outlets, including the BBC, are relying on PA newswire feeds and internet analytics to prioritise their content resources. If RL wants to overcome that, it has to work harder to firstly create the demand for RL content and secondly, make it easier for publications to publish it. 

BBC Sport HQ is now within two hours travel time of each of the 10 UK-based Super League clubs. How many of the club's media relations teams have even offered to take out some of the BBC Sport editors for lunch?

Relationships like that can work in a myriad of ways. If they run a feel good story every week in a magazine or weekend news paper etc.  you give them a list of `feel good stories ` to choose from, if they want gossip you can give them some thing that is not going to embarrass anyone, and if a big story is about to break they might give a call to get RL`s side of the story for a bit of damage control. etc. etc.

I was reading the other day that V`landy`s had some of the television news readers up in the Corporate box at the races the other day, That`s how you get them on side.

Obviously be harder work in your part of the world, given Leagues profile, and you have to have people with a bit of charisma in these roles. However nothing ventured, nothing gained.

 

[whatmichaelsays]

1 hour ago, The Rocket said:

Relationships like that can work in a myriad of ways. If they run a feel good story every week in a magazine or weekend news paper etc.  you give them a list of `feel good stories ` to choose from, if they want gossip you can give them some thing that is not going to embarrass anyone, and if a big story is about to break they might give a call to get RL`s side of the story for a bit of damage control. etc. etc.

I was reading the other day that V`landy`s had some of the television news readers up in the Corporate box at the races the other day, That`s how you get them on side.

Obviously be harder work in your part of the world, given Leagues profile, and you have to have people with a bit of charisma in these roles. However nothing ventured, nothing gained.

 

It is hard work - nobody should pretend otherwise - but this is exactly the sort of relationship building that other sports organisations do in order to earn coverage. 

It's easy to see, for example, the growing prominence of women's sport, the increased coverage of the NFL or any other sport that we as RL fans deem "less deserving" and dismiss it as being the result of some "woke" agenda or whatever other nonsense, but the truth is that people at the Women's Super League, NFL UK and other such bodies work bloomin' hard to make sure that it is easy and worthwhile for the media to talk about their sports. They do the relationship building, they create stories and they package those stories in a way that makes it easy for the media to tell them. 

Just emailing out press release after press release isn't good enough. 

[Oxford]

3 hours ago, whatmichaelsays said:

Those people would have a point though. 

The RFL, as well as both Leeds Rhinos and Salford Red Devils, employ PR and media relations staff.

The job of those employees is to put rugby league (or their respective clubs) into the news agenda, ensure that there is a public demand for RL content and make it easy for the media to talk about RL and cater to that content demand. That is literally what PR and media relations is. 

Complaining about a perceived "bias" at the BBC, or whatever else you think this is, is complaining about things that the sport cannot control - and it's a waste of time. The much more effective solution is to put the microscope on things that the game can control. 

I'm afraid that's so far off the mark I nearly didn't reply.

I have a picture of those RLPR/Media people communicating to Aunty and another showing them connecting with newspapers

 

[whatmichaelsays]

18 minutes ago, Oxford said:

I'm afraid that's so far off the mark I nearly didn't reply.

I have a picture of those RLPR/Media people communicating to Aunty and another showing them connecting with newspapers

 

What's your point here? That the RFL / Leeds Rhinos / Salford media teams are doing everything right, providing the BBC with "impossible to ignore" stories that there is a huge public demand for, but the BBC are simply choosing to ignore them? If that is your argument, I don't think it's me that's "so far off the mark". 

We're competing with so many other sports for attention, there are fewer and fewer RL-dedicated journalists around and what resources for sports reporting do exist are heavily motivated by internet traffic and engagement metrics. The sport simply has to adapt to that reality and it starts with spoon-feeding the media with content that they can't afford to ignore, whilst at the same time creating a bigger and bigger audience that demands RL content to make it worth the media's while.  

If you want to try and make the argument that RL, as an entity, is doing that and that the BBC is ignoring it for some other reason, then you really ought to show your working. 

I go back to that point that RL needs to focus on what it can control. Even if there is an anti-RL bias at the BBC or in the commercial press (and I don't think that there is), RL simply needs to overcome that. If RL content can offer the media real commercial value and value to their audiences, that is a justification for those publications to overcome that bias. They'd have a financial motivation if there was a demand for RL content and it was easy provide it. 

The reason why there is wall-to-wall coverage about the knee surgery appointment of some bloke in Liverpool this morning is because that content, however banal, has commercial value. RL content on the other hand, even about one of our flagship events, just doesn't have enough value - that's what needs to change and only the sport can make that change. 

[Oxford]

15 minutes ago, whatmichaelsays said:

What's your point here?

Really!

[whatmichaelsays]

15 minutes ago, Oxford said:

Really!

I mean, all you did was post some dumb pictures so, you know, help me out a bit. 

What is it I said that was "so wide of the mark?" 

Is it wrong to say that RL needs to work harder to make its content more desirable and easier for the media to talk about if it wants to earn more media coverage?

[Oxford]

17 minutes ago, whatmichaelsays said:

I mean, all you did was post some dumb pictures so, you know, help me out a bit. 

What is it I said that was "so wide of the mark?" 

Is it wrong to say that RL needs to work harder to make its content more desirable and easier for the media to talk about if it wants to earn more media coverage?

Well has fun seems just as wide of the target here's a simple repost

Imagine the most beautiful desirable thing you can that will come with added cash now if that was RL the London Middle class media would take a detour round Chicago Illinois to avoid seeing it, visiting it or admiting it has value.

Or as Adam Hills put who would've thought any sport could have less coverage than disability sports?

 

[gingerjon]

4 minutes ago, Oxford said:

Well has fun seems just as wide of the target here's a simple repost

Imagine the most beautiful desirable thing you can that will come with added cash now if that was RL the London Middle class media would take a detour round Chicago Illinois to avoid seeing it, visiting it or admiting it has value.

Or as Adam Hills put who would've thought any sport could have less coverage than disability sports?

 

You almost wilfully have to have been avoiding the rugby league family contextualised coverage that Rob Borrow and his fight against MND has been getting to write balls like that.

[Oxford]

Just now, gingerjon said:

You almost wilfully have to have been avoiding the rugby league family contextualised coverage that Rob Borrow and his fight against MND has been getting to write balls like that.

Give over, be your age the Rob Burrow stuff and support for him has been magic and using that as either an answer or repost to what I'm saying has alway been the case and will continue to be when that's over is illogical and misdirected.

[whatmichaelsays]

12 minutes ago, Oxford said:

Well has fun seems just as wide of the target here's a simple repost

Imagine the most beautiful desirable thing you can that will come with added cash now if that was RL the London Middle class media would take a detour round Chicago Illinois to avoid seeing it, visiting it or admiting it has value.

Or as Adam Hills put who would've thought any sport could have less coverage than disability sports?

 

Adam Hill's point is true because Adam Hills is literally the only person involved in RL who is actively trying to promote the sport in parts of the media that RL doesn't otherwise reach. Disability RL is a great story and yet, for some reason, Adam Hills is the only person who seems to want to tell it. Thankfully, he has a platform to tell that story.

But that's my point about how little is done (and/or how ineffective what is being done is) by the people on RL payrolls to earn media coverage for this sport.

The BBC doesn't hate RL. It really doesn't. BBC Sport isn't even based in London any more. But nor is the BBC the sport's PR agency. It does not have a duty, beyond the obligations in it's charter, to promote RL disproportionately to the level of public interest that exists for the sport.  

The problem is that RL doesn't make it worth the media's while to dedicate time, resource and column inches to RL in the way that many other sports - sports that we often think we deserve more coverage than - does. That is something that RL, and RL alone, can fix if it wants to.

If RL content made money for The Telegraph, if their readers demanded it and if their advertisers wanted to reach people who like RL, then The Telegraph would cover it. Don't blame a bias when the problem is so, so much closer to home. 

[Oxford]

4 hours ago, whatmichaelsays said:

The BBC doesn't hate RL. It really doesn't. BBC Sport isn't even based in London any more. But nor is the BBC the sport's PR agency. It does not have a duty, beyond the obligations in it's charter, to promote RL disproportionately to the level of public interest that exists for the sport.  

I'm pretty sure I've never said Aunty hates TGG. It's simply and only that its indifference and condscension toward RL are so endemic and marked that SL would need billions to overcome them. No one is expecting the Beeb to do PR for our sport just to treat it like it does any sport that has a fairly significant following and excellent viewing figures. Those two factors fly in the face of it's a northern sport that no one else is interested in. So I'm asking for the sport to get what it should. Instead we are ensured that it'll be kept as enclave material in spite of those viewing figures and the spread of the game that belies that the SL Show should be shown when and where it is. If the interest isn't there why does aunty keep signing up for RL internationals, World Cups and the Challenge cup? Media organisations don't have a PR responsibility as you say but they do have a responsibilty not to represent geographical and cultural bias. It's as if we're not license holders like real people.

[whatmichaelsays]

1 hour ago, Oxford said:

I'm pretty sure I've never said Aunty hates TGG. It's simply and only that its indifference and condscension toward RL are so endemic and marked that SL would need billions to overcome them. 

I'm sorry, but this is just nonsense. 

It doesn't take "billions" for RL to earn media coverage. What it takes is a PR and media relations strategy that puts RL on the news agenda. 

We do get the coverage we deserve because, frankly, the media understands the audiences that they reach. They understand the types of content their audiences respond to and the content that sells papers, puts bums on sofas and gets clicks. 

The Super League show is not shown nationally because the appetite for it is not there nationally. The way to solve that is not to moan about BBC "bias' or "indifference",  but instead to increase the demand for Super League nationally. If you're relevant, if you appeal to new audiences and you have something that people demand, you make that "indifference" very expensive for the media. 

It doesn't take "billions" to do that. It takes a strategy that gets more people demanding RL, puts RL on the news agenda and makes it harder to ignore.

[Oxford]

9 hours ago, whatmichaelsays said:

I'm sorry, but this is just nonsense. 

Well Michael, it's only nonsense if you miss the point of Aunty's culture and the points of view that eminate from it.

Quite clearly. although you reply you don't wish to discuss it. However, and for those that do, the beeb is not biased in the sense that they have anything against RL and their coverage at it's best and the SL show are clear evidence of this. The idea that there is no appetite for the SL show outside the heartlands is barely tested by Aunty's programing. In the same way as their political stance leaves them open to accusations from left and right they're not neutral just centrist. That affects how they report as much as who they employ and how they set about making decisions. The idea that SL clubs are not doing their media duty so they're to blame is to deliberately ignore the geographical effect and therefore the cultural make up and decision making viewpoints of decision makers. You have to look at the difference between Aunty's RL coverage before the advent of Sky to understand this fully. The Beeb's good points when it comes to RL are nothing but the direct result of the existence and interest  and positive output shown by Sky.  They had to up their game and they have but that has a ceiling and always will have.

[whatmichaelsays]

I don't think I'm missing anything about the BBC culture. I just don't think that the BBC culture is, in 2020, what you seem to be implying it is. We've come a long way from the days of Steve Ryder, John Inverdale and Des Lynam reluctantly fronting the Challenge Cup coverage. The BBC pulls it's talent from a much broader spectrum of society than it used to. It's not that long ago that someone like Mark Chapman would have found it very difficult to hold the position that he does at the Beeb.

The Super League show is a regional programme because RL is a regional sport. We have club leaders on record as saying that is what the sport is and that it is their ambition for the sport for it to stay that way.

Do you honestly believe that the BBC hasn't done the analysis to see how RL content is consumed outside the heartlands? Do you honestly think they have no idea how many people in the south watch it's CC coverage or how many homes beyond York's and Lancs stream it on iPlayer? 

Again, BBC Sporr is headquartered in the heart of RL land. We have more geographic ability to influence the BBC Sport editors than ever before. We're just not using it. 

I don't expect RL to compete with the Premier League when it comes to media coverage. I just expect it to compete with something other than itself and some fictitious sense of (however conscious) bias. 

[JohnM]

The BBC was formed in 1922. Are people saying that in the intervening 98  years, our game has been run by people unable to persuade them to give us proper coverage? Or that for 98 years the BBC has conspired to deny us the oygen of publicity?

I'm no admirer of BBC News and Current Affairs, but I do think that they have improved their coverage of the game in recent years.

[RP London]

2 hours ago, Oxford said:

Well Michael, it's only nonsense if you miss the point of Aunty's culture and the points of view that eminate from it.

Quite clearly. although you reply you don't wish to discuss it. However, and for those that do, the beeb is not biased in the sense that they have anything against RL and their coverage at it's best and the SL show are clear evidence of this. The idea that there is no appetite for the SL show outside the heartlands is barely tested by Aunty's programing. In the same way as their political stance leaves them open to accusations from left and right they're not neutral just centrist. That affects how they report as much as who they employ and how they set about making decisions. The idea that SL clubs are not doing their media duty so they're to blame is to deliberately ignore the geographical effect and therefore the cultural make up and decision making viewpoints of decision makers. You have to look at the difference between Aunty's RL coverage before the advent of Sky to understand this fully. The Beeb's good points when it comes to RL are nothing but the direct result of the existence and interest  and positive output shown by Sky.  They had to up their game and they have but that has a ceiling and always will have.

That is clearly not true.. The BBC can monitor who is downloading the programme and from where through iplayer and other services, therefore they can see where the appetite is coming from and can change programming to fit that.. the wonders of modern technology. it was one of the reasons for knocking BBC3 on the head and putting all that on line.. they then take the best bits of it and give it a go on bbc1 at certain times to test how it goes.

the BBC is constantly testing these sorts of things with the technology it has, if there is a reason to then test further they do. 

[RigbyLuger]

The BBC can show the Super League Show on a Sunday night. They choose not to.

[Oxford]

1 hour ago, RP London said:

That is clearly not true.. The BBC can monitor who is downloading the programme and from where through iplayer and other services, therefore they can see where the appetite is coming from and can change programming to fit that.. the wonders of modern technology. it was one of the reasons for knocking BBC3 on the head and putting all that on line.. they then take the best bits of it and give it a go on bbc1 at certain times to test how it goes.

the BBC is constantly testing these sorts of things with the technology it has, if there is a reason to then test further they do. 

Missing the point as everyone else who argues this that the SL show has only been first showing in the North ( out of the way and late night) then next day when everyone's at work nationally. Whereas, I don't expect a primetime slot surely even RL fans can deduce from this what's going on, what's happened consistently and what will continue to be the case.

[RP London]

6 minutes ago, Oxford said:

Missing the point as everyone else who argues this that the SL show has only been first showing in the North ( out of the way and late night) then next day when everyone's at work nationally. Whereas, I don't expect a primetime slot surely even RL fans can deduce from this what's going on, what's happened consistently and what will continue to be the case.

it depends whether you want to look at it with "hidden agenda conspiracy theory" specs on or not to be honest.. 

 

[Oxford]

1 hour ago, RP London said:

it depends whether you want to look at it with "hidden agenda conspiracy theory" specs on or not to be honest.. 

 

It's as much a hidden agenda as colour blindness is wilful neglect!

 

[RP London]

8 minutes ago, Oxford said:

It's as much a hidden agenda as colour blindness is wilful neglect!

 

what?

[Oxford]

3 minutes ago, RP London said:

what?

Well is colour blindness just wilful neglect?

[RP London]

22 minutes ago, Oxford said:

Well is colour blindness just wilful neglect?

no...