Chelsea i media
Chelsea är bara ett exempel på hur fördomar slås fast genom medierna och hatet får fotfäste. Men det finns trots allt de som reagerar på de engelska mediernas framfart.
Mediedebattören Greg Michael väljer att angripa problemet med ett förhållningssätt som kan tyckas mycket pro-Chelsea. Det är det också. Men det är inte mindre tänkvärt för det. För den engelska pressen är i dag så genomsyrad av schablonmässig subjektivitet inte bara i krönikor utan också i rent nyhetsmaterial.
Det blåser snålt på toppen. Och det ska det göra. Ett kritisk förhållningssätt mot eliten, i det här fallet Chelsea, är en självklarhet, liksom att granskningen är mer omfattande just med anledning av att det handlar om eliten. Men massmedial pöbelmentalitet har blivit politiskt korrekt, att förbise fakta likaså. Chelsea är bara ett exempel.
"Another season, another witch-hunt. Already the English press is sharpening its blades for the latest dagger thrusts at Chelsea FC in general, and Jose Mourinho and Roman Abramovich in particular.
There was a time (truly) when a newspaper's most senior sports writers were respected for their knowledge and wit and could be expected to take a broad view, via articles of an informed nature, well-researched and expertly presented. We should demand nothing less from today's scribes, but have now come to expect something very different. The humour has been replaced by cheap sarcasm, the impartiality by brazen partizanship, the facts traded for cheap gossip, speculation and snide innuendo.
Perhaps it is as much the fault of readers that the writers now tread such a narrow, hostile path. A genuine, widespread demand for fair, even-minded football journalism would no doubt contribute to a raising of standards in Fleet Street and beyond. But the majority of readers presently seem content to have their newspapers peddle unsubstantiated, distorted and brazenly untrue articles, so long it is at another team's expense. They lap it up and editors are only too pleased to give them what they want. After all, only so many people support Chelsea Football Club. Why not give the vast majority of readers, who support other clubs, a daily diet of Chelsea-bashing? Why not?
Actually, there are plenty of reasons why not. Journalistic integrity for one. Accuracy for another. Good old-fashioned honesty for another.
The number of articles that are expressly designed to taint Chelsea FC and its owner and management are too legion to comment on individually. Suffice to say, any rumour, any accusation, any slander, any unsubstantiated gossip, is eagerly jumped upon by any number of controversy-minded journalists and their editors who, by repeating the make-believe over and over, give substance to what is mostly malicious gossip.
Already, Chelsea have been tried and condemned in the court of public opinion for tapping-up certain Leeds youngsters. It matters not a jot that a certain Ken Bates has an axe to grind with Chelsea, and that not a word of his accusations has been proven. But note that it is not just the downmarket tabloids that make merry with this kind of title-tattle; the so-called "respectable" papers are already including it in their list- -of-Chelsea-sins articles as they pave the way to another season of CFC baiting.
What do they hope to achieve? To drive Mourinho out of English football? To push Roman Abramovich to despair in the hope he sails away for good? For every claim of Chelsea misdeeds and each example of why the wealth of this club is bad for the game, there is a counter-argument. Often, a very good one too, but it will fall on deaf ears because scandal sells while everyday truth can be rather boring.
Jose Mourinho cannot open his mouth without his every word being distorted beyond recognition. Everything is translated to be a "mind game" and more often than not, is misquoted and tarnished with ludicrous headlines that bear no semblance to what was actually said. Context is deliberately and maliciously ignored and the ladies and gentlemen of the press, who behave so humbly and agreeably at press conferences, rush back to their desks and manipulate and bend every word to suit their agenda.
This is not what the art of reporting is about. Many will argue that Mourinho is no fool when it comes to manipulating the media himself. If so, why is it he has such awful press? Could it be that no matter what he says, whether smart or stupid, it will be subject to anti-Mourinho press treatment? Gone are the days when reporters would ask straight, tough questions face-to-face. Today, they ask seemingly trivial questions like "Who do you think is the best of Chelsea's challengers," and simply wait to distort any answer they are given. If a Chelsea player dives, it is a scandal of gargantuan proportions. If Steven Gerrard cheats similary in front of a worldwide audience, nothing is said. How can Mourinho expect to get fair treatment from such a warped media as this?
Roman Abramovich suffers no such problem at press conferences. He is never likely to be found at one. But that doesn't stop the non-stop complaints about his affect on football in England and just about every other country one can name.
But let's get something straight. Roman Abramovich has brought to football the biggest privately-held financial windfall in the history of the game. He is bringing players to the Premier League who would otherwise be plying their trade far from these shores. Fans at Reading, Portsmouth and Watford will have the pleasure of watching magnificent stars such as Shevchenko and Ballack performing at their stadium this season. This is no thanks to the press or Ken Bates or other snipers. It is 100% the work of Mr. Abramovic and his employees.
As for the nonsense written about Chelsea's wealth destroying the game, who is complaining? Arsene Wenger of Arsenal? The same man whose team now demands an extortionate price for a fullback, simply because the potential buyer has the means? It is not Abramovich who inflates the prices, but the greedy clubs who smell an opportunity to get paid over the odds. Should Abramovich buy second-best for his team, simply because certain sharks are grossly inflating the prices for any player he wants to buy?
Hundreds of millions of pounds are being put into the game by Abramovich, much of it going to clubs who gleefully accept the cash. But no-one can say Chelsea are ripping off buyers who come, cap in hand, to buy their players. For all the talk of Chelsea losing money on player transfers, it is never said by the press that it is Chelsea who are asking fair and reasonable prices for their players, and other clubs who are not. Has Chelsea been bad for the game? Ask Newcastle. Did Chelsea bleed them dry when they asked for Duff or Parker? Which club was more responsible for inflating the price of Damien Duff? Chelsea or Blackburn?
Liverpool's Rafael Benitez continually talks of Chelsea's riches and complains that the Premier League playing field is not level. Yet most Premiership teams cannot remotely compete with the wealth of the Anfield club. Do you hear those smaller clubs complaining that Liverpool is destroying the game because they have so much more cash than West Ham or Manchester City? Should Liverpool not take part in the FA Cup because an opponent might have one percent of their wealth? Does Liverpool not have an enormous financial advantage over Maccabi Haifa, their current Champions League opponent? Should the Haifa manager complain that the playing field is uneven? Did people complain about the advantages offered to Liverpool for decades by way of their football pools connection? Did reporters pontificate that this was an unfair advantage?
It is important that a few people give thanks for the arrival of Roman Abramovich. For every complaint by the Arsenal, Liverpool, West Ham and Manchester United fans among the men and women of the press, there should be one fair-minded writer who can lodge a valid counter argument. I count myself as one of the latter. Long may Roman Abramovich remain in football. He is a godsend to the Premier League and already other entrepreneurs are following his example and investing bigtime in our game. Will the press harangue Aston Villa if their new billionaire owner gives them a couple of hundred million to buy players? Will they try to drive the new owner out of the game?
It's time the press woke up to the fact that Abramovich, Mourinho and Chelsea deserve some credit, rather than the nasty, unprofessional and shameful witch-hunt they are indulging in. No-one is perfect, and if Chelsea step out of line, they should be duly taken to task. But right now, the people who have stepped furthest out of line are working in the guise of reporters and editors."
