SPOILER alert. I, a sports journalist, am going to defend the media. Well of course. But, I think, with good reason. Hear me out.
Now, I am self-aware enough to know that those in my profession are generally about as popular with the football public as an outbreak of verrucae, and just as mildly irritating too. But even if you do think of the football press as an annoying appendage on the sole of the sport’s foot, we do at least serve a purpose.
I have heard that contention being questioned in the days since Celtic took the step of banning journalists from the BBC and PLZ Soccer from the second unveiling of Brendan Rodgers. Why should the press get access anyway? What do they do for us? With club media evolving and the fan media sector getting ever stronger, why should the club put up with people who criticise them, the manager, or the board?
Well, for that very reason. When the occasion demands it, they will not only question the club, but criticise it too.
Both club media and particularly fan media serve their own legitimate purpose. Club media is informative, but is obviously going to be fawning in tone, and asking only club-approved questions.
Fan media has a certain degree of independence, and increasingly these days, access to press conferences. But again, there is obviously a natural bias to both their coverage and their questions at times.
That isn’t a criticism, with some of the content being produced by fan outlets often leaving traditional media outlets in the shade. Their tactical analysis in particular, given how much they themselves are invested in their team and the time they invest into covering it, can be excellent and full of detail you simply wouldn’t get elsewhere.
But what happens when things go awry at a club? When the fans are demanding answers on any number of potential issues that may arise which otherwise would not be addressed?
I wrote a similar article on this subject a few years ago when Rangers were on their crusade against the press under the pugnacious direction of then media manager David Graham. And I am still steadfast in the belief that the people who miss out most in such situations – even though they may not see it that way – are the fans.
I am not for one second suggesting that Celtic’s actions last week are in the same ballpark as what went on in those years of £25k access charges at Ibrox (a situation that has vastly improved in recent times despite criticism of the team and the club in the media), but it is a dangerous first step along that road when commentators on the game are ostracised for expressing critical views.
If you disagree with that assessment, fair enough. I know not everyone views the pressmen here as a pack of Jeremy Paxmans, even though I know many of them through personal experience to be highly skilled interrogators and people of great integrity.
And Celtic, who for full disclosure, I (think I) enjoyed a good relationship with during several years on the club beat, are perfectly entitled to allow whomever they like into their club events. Particularly if they feel they have been subjected to consistently unfair coverage.
Was that the case though in these instances? As far as I can see, the bans seem to have come about because two columnists – BBC chief sportswriter Tom English and the famously Celtic-hating Peter Martin of PLZ – expressed some views on the conduct of the returning Celtic manager and the way he left the club last time around. Views, I think it is fair to say, that huge swathes of their own fanbase also hold.
Martin, it might be argued, overstepped the mark a tad with some of the specifically Rodgers-related opinions expressed on his on social media, writing: “Some people have short memories. Player revolt, tedious football, European humiliation and a man declaring his love while working his ticket out of the club. #historylesson.” Was that really enough to warrant a ban for Martin’s organisation, though?
I am not privy to any other details, so I do not wish to be unfair to Celtic by assuming there isn’t more to it. A statement from a Celtic spokesperson on the BBC ban alluded to ‘a number of issues with the broadcaster that have yet to be addressed,’ for example. But as a regular consumer of football news from both outlets and both journalists, I haven’t picked up on any overtly anti-Celtic rhetoric, consistently or otherwise.
In trying to look at this from the Celtic point of view rather than indulging my own obvious pro-media biases, there is a compelling argument for the club to resolve this situation too. While many fans may be willing to give up on the club being covered in mainstream media outlets, and on those outlets themselves, their myriad sponsors perhaps would not be so keen.
So, everything points to these rows being resolved in short order, and I certainly hope that will be the case.
There is so much for Celtic fans to look forward to with the return of Rodgers, a brilliant coach, and the irony here is that the vast majority of the coverage around the club has been hugely positive of late as a result of their previous success, and the likelihood of what is to come having secured such an appointment on the back of Ange Postecoglou’s departure.
I also hope though that these bans don’t discourage others from speaking out and holding Rodgers or the club to account if the situation demands it, for fear that any criticism could lead to their press passes being revoked.
