Why 'Boardroom Notes' are a mis-conceived failure.

[Pugin 601]

Commentary without an element of critical analysis is of strictly limited value or interest. A lack of objectivity means 'Boardroom notes' can never be viewed as anything more than slightly repulsive spin.

The sense of self-satisfaction which permeates anything produced through a 'positive input only' filter is inevitably quite nauseating. 

We are not stupid, and we do not believe that 'Boardroom Notes' is any reflection whatsoever of serious matters discussed in the Boardroom. The very title is a deceit, and a rather transparent one. It is insulting. It feels like the idea of slick-talking graduate who has never lived life beyond a keyboard. 

If the Club wanted to improve the way it is being projected they should have invited 40 or 50 local media people into the club and had an open discussion about the insidious influence of irresponsible, untruthful and devious social media. It is social media that is poisoning the well. By this means the club could have built a bond that would have resulted in more positive coverage.

This new offering from the Club appears at a time when the local press is feeling deliberately side-lined and excluded. The Club has found a way of making itself less popular and less trusted. As an exercise of punching yourself in the face it is a real doozie. I am saddened, not annoyed. It does not bode well.

[The Real Buh 3,423]

I’ve never felt more hatred and contempt for a management structure, football and non-football.

They are an infection, a parasite.

[PurpleCanary 5,554]

9 minutes ago, Pugin said:

Commentary without an element of critical analysis is of strictly limited value or interest. A lack of objectivity means 'Boardroom notes' can never be viewed as anything more than slightly repulsive spin.

The sense of self-satisfaction which permeates anything produced through a 'positive input only' filter is inevitably quite nauseating. 

We are not stupid, and we do not believe that 'Boardroom Notes' is any reflection whatsoever of serious matters discussed in the Boardroom. The very title is a deceit, and a rather transparent one. It is insulting. It feels like the idea of slick-talking graduate who has never lived life beyond a keyboard. 

If the Club wanted to improve the way it is being projected they should have invited 40 or 50 local media people into the club and had an open discussion about the insidious influence of irresponsible, untruthful and devious social media. It is social media that is poisoning the well. By this means the club could have built a bond that would have resulted in more positive coverage.

This new offering from the Club appears at a time when the local press is feeling deliberately side-lined and excluded. The Club has found a way of making itself less popular and less trusted. As an exercise of punching yourself in the face it is a real doozie. I am saddened, not annoyed. It does not bode well.

Interesting post. As to Boardroom Notes, I don't think they are any different to the mildly spun stuff other clubs put out. I doubt many fans take them as some kind of unbiased view.

I gather that from what people say the social media can exert a malign influence. But I am not sure what the more established media could do about that, unless they abandoned independence and objectivity and veered towards being a voice of the club.

There seems to be a growing disconnect, but the main reason lies with the club. There are two elements to this. As posted elsewhere and as others have said, the club has moved from having a press office, run by someone with a print journalism background, and so with an understanding of and perhaps even sympathy for proper reporting, to an image-spinning PR department .

That is not unusual. Other clubs have similarly switched. But what Norwich City have done is to go further by inventing a non-existent breach of trust and using one or two examples of supposedly below the belt journalism to, as you say, exclude and side-line not just the supposed culprit but the local media generally.

[Davidlingfield 63]

3 hours ago, The Real Buh said:

I’ve never felt more hatred and contempt for a management structure, football and non-football.

They are an infection, a parasite.

There isn’t a management structure - that’s the problem!

[corbs 147]

Bring back Joe Ferrari

[A Load of Squit 5,120]

I like them. Much better than clubs who don't engage with their supporters.

 

[essex canary 491]

13 minutes ago, A Load of Squit said:

I like them. Much better than clubs who don't engage with their supporters.

 

Engagement or Propoganda?

[A Load of Squit 5,120]

2 minutes ago, essex canary said:

Engagement or Propoganda?

Definitely engagement.

[Indy 3,283]

5 minutes ago, essex canary said:

Engagement or Propoganda?

Depends on your view point and belief in the leadership.

Some Russian people still believe in Putin…..Even after all the criminal acts and killing innocent Ukrainian & Russians.

[essex canary 491]

6 minutes ago, A Load of Squit said:

Definitely engagement.

Really? There is a difference between talking at people and talking with them and responding interactively

[A Load of Squit 5,120]

2 minutes ago, essex canary said:

Really? There is a difference between talking at people and talking with them and responding interactively

It was posted on the clubs web site News section, which isn't interactive.

[essex canary 491]

1 minute ago, A Load of Squit said:

It was posted on the clubs web site News section, which isn't interactive.

Quite but engagement requires interaction which is why it isn't engagement.

[A Load of Squit 5,120]

2 minutes ago, essex canary said:

Quite but engagement requires interaction which is why it isn't engagement.

Why do you get to decide what words mean?

engagement

 

the action of engaging or being engaged.

Similar: Sharing.

 

Zoe was sharing information.

 

 

[essex canary 491]

7 minutes ago, A Load of Squit said:

Why do you get to decide what words mean?

engagement

 

the action of engaging or being engaged.

Similar: Sharing.

 

Zoe was sharing information.

 

 

In a Club where the 53% owners claim to be guardians on behalf of the fans, who should be shaping the information?

[A Load of Squit 5,120]

5 minutes ago, essex canary said:

In a Club where the 53% owners claim to be guardians on behalf of the fans, who should be shaping the information?

I said 'sharing'.

[essex canary 491]

1 hour ago, A Load of Squit said:

I said 'sharing'.

Indeed but my response was about shaping.

How many other clubs would have their Head of Non-football matters briefing on player injuries or constantly chaperoning the Sporting Director?

A higher priority post AGM should surely be to give a detailed briefing to the 97% of shareholders who were not in attendance and the substantial number of supporters, paying the highest charges in the EFL. who have never had an opportunity to be shareholders.

It is obvious where the Club could make some off field cuts.

[A Load of Squit 5,120]

1 minute ago, essex canary said:

Indeed but my response was about shaping.

How many other clubs would have their Head of Non-football matters briefing on player injuries or constantly chaperoning the Sporting Director?

A higher priority post AGM should surely be to give a detailed briefing to the 97% of shareholders who were not in attendance and the substantial number of supporters, paying the highest charges in the EFL. who have never had an opportunity to be shareholders.

It is obvious where the Club could make some off field cuts.

So you've conceded that you made up that definition of engagement.

Thank you.

I have no interest in your interpretation of what was a factual post on the Canaries web site News section.

[Monty13 2,229]

1 hour ago, A Load of Squit said:

It was posted on the clubs web site News section, which isn't interactive.

It also isn’t news.

[A Load of Squit 5,120]

3 minutes ago, Monty13 said:

It also isn’t news.

How would the permanently disgruntled have reacted if they had created a special section for Boardroom Notes?

 

 

[essex canary 491]

5 minutes ago, A Load of Squit said:

How would the permanently disgruntled have reacted if they had created a special section for Boardroom Notes?

 

 

Why don't they do exactly that and place a comprehensive set of AGM minutes rather than the 179 words that this website suggests has been their total output on the matter thus far?

[A Load of Squit 5,120]

10 minutes ago, essex canary said:

Why don't they do exactly that and place a comprehensive set of AGM minutes rather than the 179 words that this website suggests has been their total output on the matter thus far?

AGM minutes are meant for the Shareholders.

Have comprehensive minutes from any company ever been published for the general public?

[Monty13 2,229]

11 minutes ago, A Load of Squit said:

AGM minutes are meant for the Shareholders.

Have comprehensive minutes from any company ever been published for the general public?

Is this a serious question?

First Google result was this tiny little company called Microsoft.

https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/Investor/events/FY-2022/2021-Annual-Shareholder-Meeting

[wcorkcanary 4,329]

47 minutes ago, A Load of Squit said:

So you've conceded that you made up that definition of engagement.

Thank you.

I have no interest in your interpretation of what was a factual post on the Canaries web site News section.

His interpretation of ' for life' is pretty odd too.

[A Load of Squit 5,120]

4 minutes ago, Monty13 said:

Is this a serious question?

First Google result was this tiny little company called Microsoft.

https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/Investor/events/FY-2022/2021-Annual-Shareholder-Meeting

Everyday is a school day.

I don't ever recall NCFC publishing comprehensive copies of the minutes of an AGM, there has always been a summary.

[essex canary 491]

32 minutes ago, A Load of Squit said:

Everyday is a school day.

I don't ever recall NCFC publishing comprehensive copies of the minutes of an AGM, there has always been a summary.

So what would be the problem with doing that even if the circulation goes wider than the shareholders? Note also the age warp re the shareholders.

For that matter why not publish comprehensive Notes of all Board meetings regarding issues that impact fans.

If the fans genuinely are the Club clearly the right thing to do. True Transparency would be king.

 

[A Load of Squit 5,120]

3 minutes ago, essex canary said:

So what would be the problem with doing that even if the circulation goes wider than the shareholders? Note also the age warp re the shareholders.

For that matter why not publish comprehensive Notes of all Board meetings regarding issues that impact fans.

If the fans genuinely are the Club clearly the right thing to do. True Transparency would be king.

 

Maybe you should ask the club what their reasons are, you're wasting your time asking me I don't make these decisions.

[TIL 1010 4,718]

4 hours ago, corbs said:

Bring back Joe Ferrari

Can''t believe i am agreeing with this but Joe would have seen where this was heading ages ago and advised the board accordingly and acted to put an end to this ridiculous situation.

[PurpleCanary 5,554]

50 minutes ago, TIL 1010 said:

Can''t believe i am agreeing with this but Joe would have seen where this was heading ages ago and advised the board accordingly and acted to put an end to this ridiculous situation.

Yes, he would have, although that is not to say the board would have accepted his advice. But this is the point I have made about the switch from a genuine press office, with an old-school trained journalist, to a PR department with a mission to burnish the club’s image.

[essex canary 491]

3 hours ago, Monty13 said:

It also isn’t news.

Indeed. Just recycling at exorbitant cost.

[essex canary 491]

3 hours ago, PurpleCanary said:

Yes, he would have, although that is not to say the board would have accepted his advice. But this is the point I have made about the switch from a genuine press office, with an old-school trained journalist, to a PR department with a mission to burnish the club’s image.

Burnish, Burn? Presumably Joe ensured the fans got a detailed AGM Report provided by Archant at NIL cost to the Club. Now an expensive Media Department that doesn't do it.

No wonder the ticket prices are high. Let's hope our American friend gets his teeth into this soon and bites deep.