Media Bias

  • The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss Spurs latest matches, our squad, tactics and any transfer news surrounding the club. Registration gives you access to all our forums (including 'Off Topic' discussion) and removes most of the adverts (you can remove them all via an account upgrade). You're here now, you might as well...

    Get involved!

Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports


It IS stuff like this that feeds the anti-Spurs narrative ...
Same as not ONE single 'expert' had us finishing in the Top 4 in their pre-season predictions....

They just don't rate us.... which is fine, 'cos it makes it all the sweeter when we prove them wrong!
 

Shadydan

ENIC hokey cokey
It IS stuff like this that feeds the anti-Spurs narrative ...
Same as not ONE single 'expert' had us finishing in the Top 4 in their pre-season predictions....

They just don't rate us.... which is fine, 'cos it makes it all the sweeter when we prove them wrong!

Well you gotta look at who their target audience is as well, they're not likely to garner as much interest if they put Kane and Son or anything Spurs on there because it won't get as much traction or engagement as these 3 players.

People keep saying there's a media bias against Spurs there is, it's not because they don't like us, it's because we don't hold the same amount of interest as our top 6 rivals therefore they are unable to monetise the click/shares as much as other clubs/players.

Media agenda = make money/revenue/profit, always has been, always will be.
 
Well you gotta look at who their target audience is as well, they're not likely to garner as much interest if they put Kane and Son or anything Spurs on there because it won't get as much traction or engagement as these 3 players.

People keep saying there's a media bias against Spurs there is, it's not because they don't like us, it's because we don't hold the same amount of interest as our top 6 rivals therefore they are unable to monetise the click/shares as much as other clubs/players.

Media agenda = make money/revenue/profit, always has been, always will be.
I also think United and Liverpool exert a lot of pressure on the media which we are unable to do. If article isn't just right, some lawyer will be on the phone like a shot. The PR those two run is insane.
 
Well you gotta look at who their target audience is as well, they're not likely to garner as much interest if they put Kane and Son or anything Spurs on there because it won't get as much traction or engagement as these 3 players.

People keep saying there's a media bias against Spurs there is, it's not because they don't like us, it's because we don't hold the same amount of interest as our top 6 rivals therefore they are unable to monetise the click/shares as much as other clubs/players.

Media agenda = make money/revenue/profit, always has been, always will be.
And yet we are on TV for almost as many games. I believe we had more TV picks that City for starters last year. Around 26-29 of our matches are on TV every season. #Rentfree
 
It IS stuff like this that feeds the anti-Spurs narrative ...
Same as not ONE single 'expert' had us finishing in the Top 4 in their pre-season predictions....

They just don't rate us.... which is fine, 'cos it makes it all the sweeter when we prove them wrong!
Until November nor did I, we sacked our manager as we were so clueless. Can't blame them on that one imo
 
When anyone talks about media bias I just advise anyone to look at the story of the 1950 World Cup Final (which wasn't technically the final but the deciding match) between Uruguay & Brazil.

The Brazilians were so cocky they'd win (with arguably good reason, they'd walked the tournament until that point and were at home) that the local media put a picture of the Brazil squad on the front cover with the headline "These are the World Champions").

The Uruguay captain's response was to buy a ton of copies of said paper, lay them on the floor of the dressing room bathroom and told the players to piss on them.

The result? As I'm sure many of you know, Uruguay won the match 2-1 in front of nigh on 200,000 people at the Maracana.

I'm sure many Spurs managers including Conte have used the media's overall bias against Spurs to motivate the team.
 
Last edited:
I heard an interview with Kane the other day, can’t remember where, maybe Radio 5 Live or on Sky or something, and the reporter asked him if he was feeling any pressure to score more goals next season with him having to compete with Haaland for the Golden Boot. That’s right, they asked Kane if he felt he needed to up his game to compete with Haaland as if he was the one who needed to prove anything.

Found it:

 
I see it's getting quite a bit of attention that Sancho, Saka and Rashfod got racist abuse on SoMe following the EC, while others got homophobic abuse.

What doesn't get any attention is how Harvey Elliot once abused Harry Kane (was it Mong, he called him?) and Elliot still plays. For Liverpool, needles so say.
 
What doesn't get any attention is how Harvey Elliot once abused Harry Kane (was it Mong, he called him?) and Elliot still plays. For Liverpool, needles so say.
He did call him a 'Mong'
(he even did 'the Mong voice' to make sure he wasn't misquoted)!

Dunno if it comes under media bias or not, cos it was covered at the time, more like double standards from the PL/F.A for not coming down on him like a ton of bricks... they banned him for a fortnight... Hardly setting an example, is it?
He said 'Soweee' , then they let him go on his merry little way, probably 'cos he'd just secured his dream move to Liverpool, and they didn't want Klopp gurning at them again at a tribunal!

THAT'S where the media pick up the story!
 
Well you gotta look at who their target audience is as well, they're not likely to garner as much interest if they put Kane and Son or anything Spurs on there because it won't get as much traction or engagement as these 3 players.

People keep saying there's a media bias against Spurs there is, it's not because they don't like us, it's because we don't hold the same amount of interest as our top 6 rivals therefore they are unable to monetise the click/shares as much as other clubs/players.

Media agenda = make money/revenue/profit, always has been, always will be.

Bias isn't about liking or disliking.

We just happen to be, for many reasons, the leagues main antagonist.

Pro football isn't about open, fair athletic competition anymore. There have to be gripping story-lines, drama, suspense, grand tales. It's theater. A TV-show.

For our history of last-step failures, the conduct of our owners and the constant flux of starts leaving us just when ripe, we make up a brilliant antagonist. A constant antagonist. And then there are the constant media pundit selection, always with selected ex-players who absolutely hate us.

That's not even up for discussion. For proof just refer to the media coverage of us vs. Leicester during their so called fairy-tale season.

Also, if you can bear it find the THFC twitter profile. Then find their end-of-season goal compilation with Son. Watch the goals, sound off, be happy and enjoy the football. Then watch it again, crank up the sound to full and watch it while paying special attention to the word selections and the tone of voice from the commentators for about half those Son goals, of which some are brilliant - these guys are gutted, absolutely devastated for half those goals. Not even trying to hide it.

All that shit creates a backdrop story of Spurs, as a plain, old fashioned antagonist. For there to be a winner there has to be a loser too. And they genuinely want and expect us to play the part.

That's bias.
 
Top Bottom