All out attack on the media

Pats726 · Feb 24, 2008

I hope there is something that can be done..I would love to have a protest such as at the Herald...esp since they were the ones who were MOST unfair..but getting points across is most important. I know Florio has debunked a great deal and there is a LOT of deep research that can be done to prove that there is a LARGE area of taping, video and OTHER practices that have gone on and STILL go on all the time. I am all for it..think something MUST be done. What and how...TBD....

Patriot_dynasty · Feb 24, 2008

The Herald is a rag, plain and simple...and it's been a rag for a long time. Most folks I know cancelled their subsription a long time ago. If there was a protest outside the Herald, they would write a slanderous story about Patriot fans and then another 5 or 6 Spygate stories.

fgssand · Feb 24, 2008

PatsFanInVa said:
Okay, here are some givens:

1) BB did not want to exaccerbate the problem during the season, either entirely for the reason he gave (distraction factor) or for that plus any other reasons. I am okay with that.

2) Since the season, BB has given more explanation, but has been customarily succinct.

3) BB has a strategy in re: the media. It appears to be very much echoed by the Pats' front office: we can not control the press we generate. We can best control promotions and the like. The team is very, very tightly controlled when it comes to "policy" through press release. Press releases will tell you the Pats picked up a new backup lineman or something, but will seldom react in great depth to media allegations.

Conclusion: It may be fun, but it is not productive, to postulate a world in which the Pats FO and BB seize on press opportunities to tell their side of the story.

Corollary: They must use this approach for a reason. We are no more privy to that reason than the various media outlets, although we have our guesses.

Corollary 2: The official Pats' position, which can be pinned on the Pats' organization, will air its point of view at the single most advantageous point in time.

Corollary 3: Fans, however, pursuing an organized agenda, are not hamstrung by any official tie to the team.

Corollary 4: Fans are also almost guaranteed to be too scattered, amateurish, and inconsistent to have any cumulative effect on the "war of ideas" out there.

To the extent that such fans are organized, and to the extent that they thoughtfully apply a PR mindset, those fans may be marginally heard.

You guys for real? It's a lot of work for a marginal voice. And one of you guys would have to go out there with your real name (I personally refuse to.)

But I'm up for an organized attempt to get a viewpoint heard. Who here's for real?

PFnV

I have no skeletons in my closet, no agenda and nothing to lose. I have no problem coming forward with real names.

Need to refine our "message".......

I seek the truth about the incidents, no matter where it ends up.

I do not think the Patriots cheated.

I do think BB stretched a rule and rather than seek clarification, continued on with business as usual.

I do not think the Patriots were / are the only ones to have done this and I do not feel the information was ever used during a game.

I do not feel sideline taping of signals is any different then stealing signals in any number of them many other ways that they have been and continue to be stolen

I am looking for fair and unbiased answers. Words I am using are not to be taken lightly, truth, fairness, honesty, facts, real sources, accuracy, integrity.

I do think Senator Spector seeks nothing more than furthering Comcasts efforts to thwart the NFL Network.

I think Matt Walsh has nothing now and never did have anything. I think he is a pawn looking for a book deal or some kind of cash money. He came along at a great time for the Senator to use him and his fairy tale on the day of the Superbowl to try to gather support for his agenda. Didn't work out for the Senator and now he looks foolish and is trying to get out of it.

OK - the wife awaits (out to dinner) and I must leave now.....Please add and change as you all see fit and let's see where this can go.

Brick · Feb 24, 2008

Do you guys honestly think that the media will take you seriously? By that I mean, they'll know you are serious about the subject but why do you think they'd care what you have to say?

Unless and until you have some mitigating and/or contributing info relative to spygate you will be viewed as nothing more that a biased, complaining fan. While "the whole world is against us" philosophy may be theraputic, it will fall on deaf ears with the media.

CrazyDave · Feb 24, 2008

Boycott the Herald.

jmt57 · Feb 24, 2008

Message to the Media

It seems to me that there are two or three ways that Pats fans can defend the team. The first would be for all of us to follow the talking points presented by Hardboiled, fgssand, and some of the others whenever and wherever the incident (national and out of town internet, talk radio, newspapers, etc.) is brought up in a biased manner intended to smear the Patriots. Present your points the way a defense lawyer would; don't get emotional, don't reduce yourself to name calling and avoid the "everybody does it" line as mentioned previously. In addition, be prepared with a response for the expected accusations that are seen over and over again - e.g., "if it didn't help them why did the Patriots continue to videotape?" "The Patriots were caught cheating, therefore the Super Bowls are tainted", and the other often convoluted cause and effect theories. Maybe somebody here at patsfans.com can put together a list of the most common lines with an appropriate response for each one, so we can all be prepared to defend ourselves in a civil and intelligent manner.

The second approach would be to avoid listening, watching, or reading any of these articles. Television, newspapers, magazines, radio, and web sites are all businesses seeking to maximize their profits, just like any other business - even though they portray themselves as wholesome purveyors of truth that can not be swayed by money. The story still has legs because of the large amount of interest by their consumers (all of us, the sports fans of America). Every time a new article is published in a newspaper or on the internet, the story is debated between Pats fans and Pats haters. If all the Pats fans stopped reading and defending the team, the amount of interest would go down, as there would no longer be a debate. I know this sounds like a somewhat risky tactic because it would then appear that the entire nation would be in full agreement to crucify BB and the Pats, but if the Pats haters had nobody to respond to, then the quantity of their posts would drop significantly. As the number of posts, page views, calls in to radio stations, etc., decreased, then the media would look for a new story to get those numbers back up.

There is actually a third approach, but it is not one that I think we could effectively employ; that is to go on the offensive. For example, when any writer or politician says something negative about Scientology, their group digs up dirt on that person, even if it means having to frame them in a set-up. Obviously anonymous fans on a message board have neither the organization nor money to pull that off. Another tactic we could use would be to tell advertisers of products on the most biased shows that you are boycotting their product due to the reckless reporting and smear tactics of (fill in the blank-) Easterbrook, Tomasse, etc. It's not going to mean anything if one or two people do it and is generally ineffective unless you have a large organization behind you (AARP, NAACP, a union, etc.), but it might get their attention if a few hundred people said something.

PatsFanInVa · Feb 24, 2008

My thoughts:

1) Refine message to simple points/a shared agenda (everybody seems on track in that direction, it's the most natural part of doing this, since we are all about discussion in the first place.)

2) Name your group and establish "what you want."

3) Be up front that it's a fan group, but make it clear it's not a bunch of numb-nuts. Be obsessive about documentation of claims. Be conservative about the extent of claims. Be simple about what action is urged.

4) One possible model: something like "Patriots Fan for Accuracy in Media". The goal would be to provide accurate facts for media outlets, to counter inaccurate "background" in news stories, etc. The goal is never to "go after" one outlet or another. It is to provide accurate information to those outlets that will have that info.

5) Fggsnd, this is where having a "name" comes into play. Credibility means having named individuals, contact info, etc.

6) Possible resources/actions: You would definitely want to have a launch event. Possibilities: local sports bar? Other venue ideas? If you are able to put together an event, you need to (of course) contact all local media you can haul in. That's the first immediate "blip" which you hope becomes a more major blip.

- Accompany this "launch event" with a press release.

- Have a web-site established where fact sheets can be downloaded, the mission of the group is elaborated, and resources are linked.

- Provide opportunity for "membership" or a petition-signing drive (?) These "advocacy" steps might or might not yield any bang-for-the-buck. Think very carefully before going "mass movement". First of all, a mass movement that never get very big is embarassing. Secondly, you may get a problem with "loose cannons." But if you get to the point where you can use the "membership" to back statements (i.e., "PFAM represents over 100,000 Patriots fans concerned that....") it could catch the eye of a reporter more than a collection of media critics.

7) and probably most importantly: compile a list of the most important reporters in Boston and National media. Find the best way to contact the outlet(s) in question about your launch event. Again, this may be an alert that your press release is available (with a link to web site.) Keep any communication short and sweet, and rely on the press release to fill out what is being said.

8) For local media, call people who know people. I know some here know Shalize Manza-Young (sp?) w/projo journal. It is possible she'll be your only slam dunk. If others have contacts, leverage them.

9) After initial push: The group would want to respond, in a measured way, to every breaking story that puts forward or repeats discredited or distorted information. each such reply should be accompanied by a similar press release, with similarly ambitious distribution.

What can "members" do?

- They can write letters to the editors of their local paper, urging appropriate action from their own Senators, in the event Specter gets anywhere

- They can monitor and respond to web-sites (such as ESPN) when a real inaccuracy is found

- In each such case, they could link back to the group web-site, for the "fact sheet" on given subject matter.

- Again, "members" can very easily become loose cannons and detract from the group's credibility. For media, cred is huge - you want to be a resource, not a collection of screaming fans. Maybe some term other than "members" is necessary, so people could use our resources without being termed as group representatives.

Pretty involved, I know... Where to start?

- Collect all the "talking points" mentioned earlier, and distill into fact sheets. Remember, you are going for credibility. Your real target is the media member. Your real purpose is to provide easily verified information, not to trot out yet another "half truth," from the other side.

Example: Fact Sheet on the actual videotaping rules (or "bylaws"), and known violations of those bylaws (i.e., the Jets example, the Dolphins example, the Jimmie Johnson statement, etc.) Source every statement.

Example: Fact Sheet on Specter's backers. We've heard over and over that Comcast and its lawyers have been his biggest campaign backers. Source this statement.

- determine the other Fact Sheets to be written. Get them on-line as pdfs housed on a website.

- determine some "mission statement"

- begin work on a media contact list, a launch release, and a launch event.

Are chunks like this worth biting off? Man, it is a lot. It is only possible with a lot of cooperation and a lot of elbow grease, and some really good "salespeople" types.

Am I crazy?

PFnV

JoeSixPat · Feb 24, 2008

Brick said:
Do you guys honestly think that the media will take you seriously? By that I mean, they'll know you are serious about the subject but why do you think they'd care what you have to say?

Unless and until you have some mitigating and/or contributing info relative to spygate you will be viewed as nothing more that a biased, complaining fan. While "the whole world is against us" philosophy may be theraputic, it will fall on deaf ears with the media.

As long as the facts speak for us, then Yes.

Again, the only reason ProFootballTalk and other publications are currently running stories documenting the many many instances of teams "cheating" is because of the fans here who have done the work to dig up and maintain the relevance of those news items.

There's an incredible number of ignorant righteous fans for other teams that are going to be shocked to read how their teams have "cheated" for the last 50 years.

PatriotsReign · Feb 24, 2008

PatsFanSince74 said:
you're right. the patriots options were limited. putting that aside, the major problem is that the patriots allowed this to be characterized as "cheating" from the very beginning, so the discussion was always framed in terms of how badly the pats had "cheated."

even though they alone knew all the facts, the patriots never controlled the story. in fact, the media firestorm allowed the story to take on a life of its own.

even though we don't know all the facts about what the patriots might or might not have said, nonetheless, a more effectivet response would have included the following. (while there's no guarantee how effective this approach might have been, and while there certainly would have been some bad moments, the overall outcome would have been at least a little better for the pats and certainly couldn't have been any worse than it turned out.

the development and communication of a clear "Patriots position" on all aspects of taping, from which there would be no deviation unless the facts demanded it. as far as i know, the only thing that the pats have ever said about spygate is that they apologized to their fans and recognized the league's right to fine them.

a full press avail for Belichick at the beginning in which he stayed seated until he had answered everyone's questions. then, no further word from bb. becasue he remained silent, except for his statement on the night of the fines, the media has been able to paint him any way they want and never in a flattering light.

the immediate designation of one patriots spokesperson, probably jonathan kraft, who would handle media questions, be available to the talk shows, etc. this would have been a very tough job, but silence proved to be worse.

daily or regular "talking points" e-mailed to all members of the media and pats supporters putting out the patriots side of the story.

the creation of an informal network of senior advisors/supporters who would be available to the media to defend the pats at all times. maybe jim brown, coach johnson and two or three others.

selective off the record, "deep background" interviews given to members of the media who were neutral or well-disposed to the patriots.

You make some great points here. Yes, the Patriots should have taken a more aggressive role in controlling the media spin right from the get-go.

But you got me thinking. Why can't we send emails to the Krafts telling them it's not too late to make a stand? Many of you have convinced me that attacking the media may not be the most efficient tactic. So why don't we plead with the the Krafts to stop standing still and taking shots? It's time to make a stand.

I'd love to hear some comments on this from people familiar with the business aspect of an NFL franchise.

PatriotsReign · Feb 24, 2008

PatsFanInVa said:
You guys for real? It's a lot of work for a marginal voice. And one of you guys would have to go out there with your real name (I personally refuse to.)

But I'm up for an organized attempt to get a viewpoint heard. Who here's for real?

PFnV

Sorry I missed this PFIV! I am for real and will contribute/help in any way I can. What better way to show my support of my beloved Patriots?

Game on!

fgssand · Feb 24, 2008

PatsFanInVa said:
My thoughts:

1) Refine message to simple points/a shared agenda (everybody seems on track in that direction, it's the most natural part of doing this, since we are all about discussion in the first place.)

2) Name your group and establish "what you want."

3) Be up front that it's a fan group, but make it clear it's not a bunch of numb-nuts. Be obsessive about documentation of claims. Be conservative about the extent of claims. Be simple about what action is urged.

4) One possible model: something like "Patriots Fan for Accuracy in Media". The goal would be to provide accurate facts for media outlets, to counter inaccurate "background" in news stories, etc. The goal is never to "go after" one outlet or another. It is to provide accurate information to those outlets that will have that info.

5) Fggsnd, this is where having a "name" comes into play. Credibility means having named individuals, contact info, etc.

6) Possible resources/actions: You would definitely want to have a launch event. Possibilities: local sports bar? Other venue ideas? If you are able to put together an event, you need to (of course) contact all local media you can haul in. That's the first immediate "blip" which you hope becomes a more major blip.

- Accompany this "launch event" with a press release.

- Have a web-site established where fact sheets can be downloaded, the mission of the group is elaborated, and resources are linked.

- Provide opportunity for "membership" or a petition-signing drive (?) These "advocacy" steps might or might not yield any bang-for-the-buck. Think very carefully before going "mass movement". First of all, a mass movement that never get very big is embarassing. Secondly, you may get a problem with "loose cannons." But if you get to the point where you can use the "membership" to back statements (i.e., "PFAM represents over 100,000 Patriots fans concerned that....") it could catch the eye of a reporter more than a collection of media critics.

7) and probably most importantly: compile a list of the most important reporters in Boston and National media. Find the best way to contact the outlet(s) in question about your launch event. Again, this may be an alert that your press release is available (with a link to web site.) Keep any communication short and sweet, and rely on the press release to fill out what is being said.

8) For local media, call people who know people. I know some here know Shalize Manza-Young (sp?) w/projo journal. It is possible she'll be your only slam dunk. If others have contacts, leverage them.

9) After initial push: The group would want to respond, in a measured way, to every breaking story that puts forward or repeats discredited or distorted information. each such reply should be accompanied by a similar press release, with similarly ambitious distribution.

What can "members" do?

- They can write letters to the editors of their local paper, urging appropriate action from their own Senators, in the event Specter gets anywhere

- They can monitor and respond to web-sites (such as ESPN) when a real inaccuracy is found

- In each such case, they could link back to the group web-site, for the "fact sheet" on given subject matter.

- Again, "members" can very easily become loose cannons and detract from the group's credibility. For media, cred is huge - you want to be a resource, not a collection of screaming fans. Maybe some term other than "members" is necessary, so people could use our resources without being termed as group representatives.

Pretty involved, I know... Where to start?

- Collect all the "talking points" mentioned earlier, and distill into fact sheets. Remember, you are going for credibility. Your real target is the media member. Your real purpose is to provide easily verified information, not to trot out yet another "half truth," from the other side.

Example: Fact Sheet on the actual videotaping rules (or "bylaws"), and known violations of those bylaws (i.e., the Jets example, the Dolphins example, the Jimmie Johnson statement, etc.) Source every statement.

Example: Fact Sheet on Specter's backers. We've heard over and over that Comcast and its lawyers have been his biggest campaign backers. Source this statement.

- determine the other Fact Sheets to be written. Get them on-line as pdfs housed on a website.

- determine some "mission statement"

- begin work on a media contact list, a launch release, and a launch event.

Are chunks like this worth biting off? Man, it is a lot. It is only possible with a lot of cooperation and a lot of elbow grease, and some really good "salespeople" types.

Am I crazy?

PFnV

Awesome PFnV....thanks for the help. Funny, the people we are all ready to execute (mediots) are the very people we need in order to get our message out (we would be a sort of clearinghouse for "truth") and get them to do their jobs by trying to show them the way toward looking onto what we have learned about all of this.

In essence, we must be very respectful to everyone and try to gain some credibility by sourcing everything we write up so we can be looked upon as knowledgeable and viable.

You have shown us a rough blueprint and it will mean a heck of a lot of work to get this off the ground and try to make some headway. I think if we can just get going a little, if we can demonstrate good faith and be believable, and genuine, we just may find all kinds of "help & information" coming our way from "unidentified sources" and "moles" ready to help. Who knows....

Let's see how many people are really and truly interested in devoting the kind of time & resources (monetary as well as with one's connections).

I am a busy guy but I can start things off by saying - I am one fan interested in trying to get us recognized as "Patriot truth seekers: and I would be willing to pitch in and find the time.

Who is in this with me?? Pats Fans unite!!

PatsFanInVa · Feb 24, 2008

Okay the way I see it, Reign and Fgs, and Hardboiled, if you're "in," the first move is to collect the basic "lore" we see here, and see how much we can source. Then we should put them together into a few fact-sheets.

A few more "editorial" hands will probably be required, so let's also start another thread to bring these all in. Remember the ground rules: it's best to get together the facts with very little speculation, such as "if so-and-so knew such and such, before...." We want cold hard facts like "What the rules say," and of course the historical info from this year backward, on different uses of videotaping. We'll also want to have an easily available link/reference to the historical "general spying" article that's floating around here.

I'll establish said thread now. Please weigh in, Reign, Fgss, Hardboiled, and encourage others to bring sourced tidbits of knowledge into the thread.

The sooner we can get content knocked out, the sooner we can move on to the harder work of making this available and known.

I'm busy too, but I figure I can spend the time I generally spend here avoiding real after-work work to help get this off the ground!

See you there,

PFnV

All out attack on the media

Pats726

Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal

Patriot_dynasty

Practice Squad Player

fgssand

PatsFans.com Supporter

Brick

Practice Squad Player

CrazyDave

In the Starting Line-Up

jmt57

Moderator

PatsFanInVa

PatsFans.com Supporter

JoeSixPat

Pro Bowl Player

PatriotsReign

PatsFans.com Supporter

PatriotsReign

PatsFans.com Supporter

fgssand

PatsFans.com Supporter

PatsFanInVa

PatsFans.com Supporter

Similar threads