|
|
Post by lympstonegas on Aug 21, 2023 17:22:24 GMT
For everyone who has criticised JB over his subscription channel , watch this YouTube clip from 59 mins on & you might see things a little differently. Amazing, I hope the usual JB haters come out and apologies for the crap they’ve spouted about him over it. I’ve largely stayed away from commenting but read plenty of negative post about Barton having a subscribed Twitter account, the majority of it has been over the top so I’m really hoping they can eat some humble pie and openly apologies about it Cracking idea and even better cause. So glad JB has addressed this issue now. So his only intentions were to support a fellow professional who has hit hard times. Hope this is posted on OTIB. |
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Aug 21, 2023 17:40:22 GMT
Quite right. But this is JBs fault from the beginning. He didn’t communicate thoroughly what his plans were and then started dropping club news behind his paywall. A simple video, like most YouTubers do explaining that all proceeds were to Nick this year and half the fanbase may have gotten on board with it. To be fair he has always said proceeds from that paywall would go to charity he just didnt mention Nick. Cant see it makes any difference as its for a good cause either way and as he said it silences the boring retards who jump on his every post with wife-beater etcsure that's the case with Gasheads and it's only his Rovers related tweets he's hiding behind the pay wall, if he's worried about getting those comments then why doesn't he put his whole twitter account behind a pay wall or is he worried he'll lose most of his 2.8m followers if he does that? |
|
|
|
Post by bobbyjones on Aug 21, 2023 17:46:05 GMT
Agree again, I am now getting frightened by this.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Equaliser on Aug 21, 2023 17:46:21 GMT
Gosh it’s gone quiet in this thread since that YouTube vid was posted. Nice when perspective is given 👍🏾 Quite right. But this is JBs fault from the beginning. He didn’t communicate thoroughly what his plans were and then started dropping club news behind his paywall. A simple video, like most YouTubers do explaining that all proceeds were to Nick this year and half the fanbase may have gotten on board with it. He explained the money was going to charity in the very same post that announced the subscription service in the first place 4th July, 5 weeks ago! ,not sure he could have said it any clearer or sooner. People as usual read what they chose to read (again) 👍🏾  |
|
|
|
Post by bobbyjones on Aug 21, 2023 18:00:26 GMT
HIS CHOICE WHICH IS WHAT. COULD IT BE WIFE ABUSE. GOOD ON HIM IF IT IS.
|
|
|
|
Post by gonzales on Aug 21, 2023 19:05:13 GMT
HIS CHOICE WHICH IS WHAT. COULD IT BE WIFE ABUSE. GOOD ON HIM IF IT IS. You alright pal? |
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Aug 21, 2023 19:15:20 GMT
Quite right. But this is JBs fault from the beginning. He didn’t communicate thoroughly what his plans were and then started dropping club news behind his paywall. A simple video, like most YouTubers do explaining that all proceeds were to Nick this year and half the fanbase may have gotten on board with it. He explained the money was going to charity in the very same post that announced the subscription service in the first place 4th July, 5 weeks ago! ,not sure he could have said it any clearer or sooner. People as usual read what they chose to read (again) 👍🏾 What's so hard for you to understand he's not putting all his "content" behind the pay wall just his Rovers related tweets, reading between the lines it looks likes he's having a battle with the BP as I can't imagine many other "media outlets" have much interest in his Rovers related tweets. |
|
|
|
Post by gashead1981 on Aug 21, 2023 19:37:08 GMT
Quite right. But this is JBs fault from the beginning. He didn’t communicate thoroughly what his plans were and then started dropping club news behind his paywall. A simple video, like most YouTubers do explaining that all proceeds were to Nick this year and half the fanbase may have gotten on board with it. He explained the money was going to charity in the very same post that announced the subscription service in the first place 4th July, 5 weeks ago! ,not sure he could have said it any clearer or sooner. People as usual read what they chose to read (again) 👍🏾 “A considerable amount of the money going to charity” is not the same as I’m donating all of it to Nick Anderson. Like I said, had he been a bit more clear right from the off, and not just send that tweet and then the very next thing say who were signing before the club announce it there would t be such the furore. But it wouldn’t be Bristol Rovers like without it being poorly communicated. |
|
|
|
Post by axegas on Aug 21, 2023 19:40:49 GMT
I couldn't care less about him selling his tweets, good for him. Even better if it's for Nick Anderson, that's awesome.
But leaking Rovers info to paying subscribers doesn't sit right for me, especially when they aren't done deals.
Just my opinion.
|
|
|
|
Post by seanclevedongas on Aug 22, 2023 15:32:04 GMT
I couldn't care less about him selling his tweets, good for him. Even better if it's for Nick Anderson, that's awesome. But leaking Rovers info to paying subscribers doesn't sit right for me, especially when they aren't done deals. Just my opinion. Hi did say in his next interview he has to be careful because he got into trouble for announcing it |
|
|
|
Post by baggins on Aug 22, 2023 15:41:33 GMT
HIS CHOICE WHICH IS WHAT. COULD IT BE WIFE ABUSE. GOOD ON HIM IF IT IS. Find a decent comment, then find the caps lock key. |
|
|
|
Post by gashead1981 on Aug 22, 2023 18:38:56 GMT
HIS CHOICE WHICH IS WHAT. COULD IT BE WIFE ABUSE. GOOD ON HIM IF IT IS. Find a decent comment, then find the caps lock key. Then the logout icon. |
|
|
|
Post by oldie on Aug 22, 2023 19:29:43 GMT
I couldn't care less about him selling his tweets, good for him. Even better if it's for Nick Anderson, that's awesome. But leaking Rovers info to paying subscribers doesn't sit right for me, especially when they aren't done deals. Just my opinion. From a legalistic viewpoint surely any content relating solely to the football club is the intellectual property of the club? No employee should be able to generate income from that property, surely? Whatever the stated intentions of that income. I have never known a situation where that is not true. |
|
|
|
Post by gulfofaden on Aug 23, 2023 4:48:30 GMT
No, he's not. He's a true Gashead who dislikes JB enormously. Which is his perogative and fair enough. I don't agree with him on that as personally I'm not keen to moralise on people, based on news and media reports - written - or fabricated - by, er, journalists. I note that Private Eye has pinpointed half a dozen claims in the Sun's reporting on Huw Edwards which were totally inaccurate. I saw a YouTube video recently tracing the decline and demise of journalism since Murdoch bought the Sun. I rather like JB's decision. So, You decry journalism but then go on to quote Private Eye and YouTube? . One of the massive liberating forces of this century has been the decreased stranglehold journalists have on the depiction of world events and narrative. I’ll give you an example you will probably relate to Oldie. Back in the 80s my parents were Labour Party activists and most of my earliest memories were going on demos for striking miners. According to many (including my dad) the police rushed the lines and the miners/activists started pelting them with things. The BBC aired it the other way around: they showed people pelting the police and then the police rushing the lines. In this day and age, this couldn’t happen as citizens would have immediately posted the truth to social media. To me, and many others, the words and reporting of people on YouTube and social media are worth more than paid journalists. Indeed, anything coming from the mouth or pen of a journalist should be viewed with intense suspicion. They have an extremely long track record of lying. A little logo and a middle class drawl, and some decent prose from their oxbridge education doesn’t make anything more or less valid. The legacy press is dying. It’s virtually only people over 60 now who take any notice of terrestrial TV or newspapers. They’re a busted flush and don’t forget this includes Murdoch’s stuff so that benefits you too. There’s been an intense last ditch effort to keep their ground through the “fact checking” nonsense. Painting anyone who’s not towing the line as extremist and dangerous. |
|
|
|
Post by phillistine on Aug 23, 2023 6:40:25 GMT
I couldn't care less about him selling his tweets, good for him. Even better if it's for Nick Anderson, that's awesome. But leaking Rovers info to paying subscribers doesn't sit right for me, especially when they aren't done deals. Just my opinion. From a legalistic viewpoint surely any content relating solely to the football club is the intellectual property of the club? No employee should be able to generate income from that property, surely? Whatever the stated intentions of that income. I have never known a situation where that is not true. i have known thousands if not millions of examples - every single photograph taken is intellectual property which is owned by the person who pressed the shutter button regardless of the subject or where it was taken. This includes every single photograph taken in the Mem regardless of who took it or whether they were being paid to do so. The fact that the Photographer chooses to hand over ownership under contract is down to them. It is not a million miles away to believe that every single tweet belongs to JB and remains his property to do with as he wishes. The question of course is whether he is breaking the rules of employment confidentiality by disclosing in a public arena information that he was made party to during the course of his employment is a different matter. He could probably successfully argue that part of his job is to promote the activities within the football club and that is what he was doing. This would surely generate ill will if a dispute arose particularly if the funds are going to Nick Anderton. Just let it go - its something and nothing |
|
|
|
Post by kruger on Aug 23, 2023 6:49:46 GMT
Find a decent comment, then find the caps lock key. Then the logout icon. then never login again |
|
|
|
Post by putterbishopston on Aug 23, 2023 7:01:34 GMT
I couldn't care less about him selling his tweets, good for him. Even better if it's for Nick Anderson, that's awesome. But leaking Rovers info to paying subscribers doesn't sit right for me, especially when they aren't done deals. Just my opinion. From a legalistic viewpoint surely any content relating solely to the football club is the intellectual property of the club? No employee should be able to generate income from that property, surely? Whatever the stated intentions of that income. I have never known a situation where that is not true. Hallelujah, Spot on, It is so very, very wrong, biggest pity is that a vast majority cannot see it. |
|
|
|
Post by bluegas on Aug 23, 2023 7:02:50 GMT
So, You decry journalism but then go on to quote Private Eye and YouTube? . One of the massive liberating forces of this century has been the decreased stranglehold journalists have on the depiction of world events and narrative. I’ll give you an example you will probably relate to Oldie. Back in the 80s my parents were Labour Party activists and most of my earliest memories were going on demos for striking miners. According to many (including my dad) the police rushed the lines and the miners/activists started pelting them with things. The BBC aired it the other way around: they showed people pelting the police and then the police rushing the lines. In this day and age, this couldn’t happen as citizens would have immediately posted the truth to social media. To me, and many others, the words and reporting of people on YouTube and social media are worth more than paid journalists. Indeed, anything coming from the mouth or pen of a journalist should be viewed with intense suspicion. They have an extremely long track record of lying. A little logo and a middle class drawl, and some decent prose from their oxbridge education doesn’t make anything more or less valid. The legacy press is dying. It’s virtually only people over 60 now who take any notice of terrestrial TV or newspapers. They’re a busted flush and don’t forget this includes Murdoch’s stuff so that benefits you too. There’s been an intense last ditch effort to keep their ground through the “fact checking” nonsense. Painting anyone who’s not towing the line as extremist and dangerous. One thought GoF - maybe we shouldn't blame journalists. What about editors? Newspaper owners? Often too close to politicians and with their own agenda. As for the BBC - clearly open to political pressure. I've had experience. |
|
|
|
Post by gulfofaden on Aug 23, 2023 7:25:16 GMT
One of the massive liberating forces of this century has been the decreased stranglehold journalists have on the depiction of world events and narrative. I’ll give you an example you will probably relate to Oldie. Back in the 80s my parents were Labour Party activists and most of my earliest memories were going on demos for striking miners. According to many (including my dad) the police rushed the lines and the miners/activists started pelting them with things. The BBC aired it the other way around: they showed people pelting the police and then the police rushing the lines. In this day and age, this couldn’t happen as citizens would have immediately posted the truth to social media. To me, and many others, the words and reporting of people on YouTube and social media are worth more than paid journalists. Indeed, anything coming from the mouth or pen of a journalist should be viewed with intense suspicion. They have an extremely long track record of lying. A little logo and a middle class drawl, and some decent prose from their oxbridge education doesn’t make anything more or less valid. The legacy press is dying. It’s virtually only people over 60 now who take any notice of terrestrial TV or newspapers. They’re a busted flush and don’t forget this includes Murdoch’s stuff so that benefits you too. There’s been an intense last ditch effort to keep their ground through the “fact checking” nonsense. Painting anyone who’s not towing the line as extremist and dangerous. One thought GoF - maybe we shouldn't blame journalists. What about editors? Newspaper owners? Often too close to politicians and with their own agenda. As for the BBC - clearly open to political pressure. I've had experience. I’m sure there are good ones but I just feel they are old news. Try and find me one who doesn’t spin everything. Journalists help shape public narrative to support a war which killed half a million in Iraq on a pack of lies. They have such an appalling track record, I read what they say and continually try to analyse why they are reporting this, what have they missed out, who has told them to omit things. It’s a very dirty game. I turned off all terrestrial TV and major newspapers years ago. I meet people and hear them go off on one about some new supposed moral panic or big issue and it’s so patently obvious they’ve just read something or heard something and now are all amped up on it. Ignore it and concentrate on your own life is my motto. You will waste your life away being manipulated if you hand your perception of reality away to someone else. Go to source yourself and make your own mind up. And that’s where social media comes in. |
|
|
|
Post by seanclevedongas on Aug 23, 2023 8:35:29 GMT
From a legalistic viewpoint surely any content relating solely to the football club is the intellectual property of the club? No employee should be able to generate income from that property, surely? Whatever the stated intentions of that income. I have never known a situation where that is not true. Hallelujah, Spot on, It is so very, very wrong, biggest pity is that a vast majority cannot see it. I think the vast majority just don't care, (I put myself in that bracket) |
|
