London Stadium Season 3 (2018/19)
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/44580900 West Ham co-owner David Sullivan is set to step in to try to sort out the impasse surrounding London Stadium.
I saw this a few days ago, but it seemed such a thin article I didn't bother commenting on it.
But in searching for something else, I see ExWHUEmployee has written:
I saw this a few days ago, but it seemed such a thin article I didn't bother commenting on it.
But in searching for something else, I see ExWHUEmployee has written:
David Sullivan is set to turn his attentions from signing players to working with the stadium contractors to help them reduce their losses and in turn enable us to take more control over what goes on there especially on match days.So I thought that would be a convenient starting point for an updated thread; ;biggrin
Comments
Shame that I've never applied to be on said list
;lol
Oooh claret carpet
;biggrin
'Which bit of "Don't publish that 'til I say so" was too complicated for you?'
Then it should be:
London Stadium: Search for sponsor of West Ham's home costs nearly £450,000
I've complained about it. Bias/attempt to present WHU in a negative light. No doubt it will fall on deaf ears. But still.
Emirates pay about £3.3m a year for naming rights on the stadium, the shirts, the loo paper...
So... he'd rather the LLDC not do anything to sell the naming rights and just hope that someone knocks on the door with a pocket full of cash to hand over?
Cue: "The LLDc is negligent in not making every effort to get the best value for the taxpayer, when they could be earning £4m a year by selling the naming rights," said Bacon, the Conservative's leader on the assembly.
I'd say the problem was they believed that, and didn't have anyone with the expertise to challenge it.
My headline as the BBC wouldn't have wanted to describe it as such. ;biggrin
(The Beeb got done separately in court today). ;biggrin
The use of West Ham in the headline was not intended to offend or display bias but to inform readers, *as West Ham are the most popular and most widely known team who use the stadium it is important to note their involvement with the stadium. If you continue to read to the bottom of the article it is stated, 'It is understood West Ham, who are preparing for their third season at the stadium, have offered to help find a naming rights partner.' Therefore the article aims to bring light to the positive actions the club are undertaking to help buying proceedings.
(My bold text... I don't agree, actually, as it isn't really germane to the point of the report, which is that the LLDC is being criticized for spending money without success.)
I suppose I should be grateful they bothered to respond. But they can't pull the wool over my eyes. ;whome
Bias can be created not only by putting stuff in/leaving stuff out, but also by where you include something. The higher up, the greater the significance within the story, and the greater impact on the reader. The last thing in a news report is the least important, and the first to get cut by an editor if the article needs shortening. Plus many readers don't ever get that far. It's a sneaky way for a writer/editor to say they represented both sides of the story .... but in reality they present the information in a way that is clearly an attempt to prejudice the reader.
*their punctuation, not mine ;doh )