Desperate U-turn won't solve great Herald fiasco

Only three weeks after the fiasco that saw The Herald Executive editor apologise for one writer, who promptly said he had nothing to apologise for and then jettison another one who tweeted her solidarity, the management at the group have decided on an unexplained U-turn.

But then, much has been unexplained since Group Editor Magnus Llewellin tweeted, “It's

Shredded: The Herald titles' reputation

complicated,” and his side-kick, Barclay McBain – allegedly a former NUJ representative sent a message to all staff warning that freedom of speech on social media would not earn their good graces.

For those lucky enough to have been cloistered away from the strangeness that occurs when the Scottish media intersects with Scottish football, the much admired/reviled Graham Spiers questioned the will of some directors of the identity thieves calling themselves Rangers to tackle the most obscene guttural utterances of their loyal hordes of follow-followers.

As evidence, he cited little other than the fact that the club is conspicuously doing nothing about it and a direct communication from a senior Ibrox figure indicating that some of the ditties currently considered criminal are in keeping with the values of the club. (Any ironic reference is mine, rather than that of Spiers.)

Facing a legal threat that “could not be defended” and – Llewellin insisted – no commercial pressure whatsoever, the editor buckled, misrepresenting one of the most high-profile writers in Scotland.

He then torpedoed a column by the, normally publicity-shy, Angela Haggerty for tweeting solidarity with Spiers, whining that she had undermined that false apology.

It cannot be often that England rugby internationals feel fascinated by Scottish football but, for this, Brian Moore described Llewellin as “spineless” in what could be described as a cowardly stab in Llewellin's invertebrate back.

Sunday Herald editor Neil Mackay “fought hard”, capitulated, Tweeted that he was washing his

hands of the affair and then posted a picture of a glass of wine, which we can presume he then promptly sent the same way as the rest of his bottle.

Mackay (r) challenging Llewellin (l) as McBain watches

There was justifiable outrage that the “free” press was so easily cowed into becoming self-censoring in the face of intimidation and the shredder was plugged in for the last hint of respectability for two once-honoured news titles.

In a difficult newspaper environment, one in which the Independent has already announced the end of its “paper” edition, management face many challenges. However, The Herald and Sunday Herald have faced more than most.

A catastrophic independence referendum campaign during which The Herald was often accused of doing the bidding of the Scottish Labour media office, saw much of the remaining confidence that the title had retained lost.

In contrast, The Sunday Herald was riding the crest of a wave, largely due to then editor Richard Walker's stewardship of the paper and winning the support of a large proportion of Yes voters. The transition to Mackay's editorship has not been a smooth one, with plummeting figures as the title seems to have lost its way.

Would Walker have remained in post as one of the writers he picked was axed? It's hard to say but for all the “nice guy, great friend” defences of Mackay, he can have done little to instil fearlessness in his team.

“These people have families and mortgages,” was the defence. Quite – as do the many public figures who are routinely called on to resign for misdemeanours unfitting to their positions.

The fury that greeted the stranding of Spiers and Haggerty was justified and yet, the decision to reinstate the former-editor-of-a-well-known-Celtic-fan's-book should not be expected to bring readers flocking back – she had far more defenders of her rights than admirers of her writings.

Haggerty has faced appalling online abuse from certain sections of Scottish society (and indeed Mackay called on all Scottish men to defend her about a fortnight before leaving her high and dry) but Llewellin is as likely to salvage his titles through his reverse-capitulation as a soldier waiting for reinforcements without realising that the war is over.

Spiers, in the meantime, has been emboldened to explicitly defend the truth of his original piece. Curiously, this does not seem to have been met with the “indefensible” defamation action that had Llewellin hearing things going bump in the night.

Whether or not that calls into question the veracity of Llewellin's claim that no commercial pressure was involved is a matter for sheer speculation.

The future can be predicted with greater certainty. Haggerty's reinstatement will be welcomed but that will neither inspire any renewed confidence in the integrity of the Herald titles, nor a slowing of the decline in their sales.

With a paper-free future surely looming, it will perhaps dawn on Llewellin that what has settled over the titles is not the dust from the stramash, but a layer of ashes.

--

Incompetent SFA challenge fans to boycott the game

Physical embodiment: The SFA

'Understanding' is a two-way process. To be effective, an organisation needs to listen to the opinions of those with whom it deals and not solely provide information. Issuing a barrage of propaganda is not enough in today's open society.

So say none other that the Chartered Institute of Public Relations as a footnote to their definition of what their organisation is all about:

“Public Relations is about reputation – the result of what you do, what you say and what others say about you.

“Public Relations is the discipline which looks after reputation, with the aim of earning understanding and support and influencing opinion and behaviour. It is the planned and sustained effort to establish and maintain goodwill and mutual understanding between an organisation and its publics*.”

It is a definition that seems to have passed over the Scottish Football Association's heads at high altitude. But then PR is under the direction of the Communications department, which is headed by Darryl Broadfoot.

Broadfoot always seemed a strange choice for such a wide-ranging role. Having worked his way up – with some assistance – to being Chief Football Writer at The Herald, Broadfoot's path to success was one more appropriate to pre-1980s Britain, eschewing university for a much-sought-after job as a teenage “copy boy” at the title.

He was, by all accounts, well-liked – grafting, doing as he was told and giving no one around him an inferiority complex. His football affiliations were well-known by his workmates, which may well have facilitated a close working relationship with David Murray.

But he did as well as could reasonably be expected of someone with his abilities and some might say he deserved praise for that, though few would accuse him of self-sacrifice in the name of journalistic integrity. He was also the man who referred to the “Greek Sagas” and had a brief but infamous association with Michelle McManus, meaning that to the football-supporting public, he was something of a figure of fun.

At that time he seemed incongruous at The Herald but little did we know that his was the shape of things to come with Chris Jack and Matt Lindsay following in his footsteps.

There was little, then, to suggest that he was in any way suited to heading a major department in the national sport's governing body where modern, outward-looking, strategic communication was a key requirement.

It could even be said that only an organisation that would put the likes of George Peat, Gordon Smith and Campbell Ogilvie at its head would be so backward as to appoint a friendly football writer who had paltry education, no qualifications and a very limited relevant skill set.

To communicate with all the SFA's publics, they turned to someone who had spent his entire career with one newspaper, much of it with wiser heads looking over his shoulder.

Is Broadfoot promoting “goodwill and understanding”, in the CIPR's sense of the words? Could anyone say that the SFA enjoys a strong reputation? Or would it be more accurate to say the the Association transmits a “barrage of propaganda”?

The report from John Clark at the Scottish Football Monitor of his meeting with Broadfoot and Alan McRae makes astonishing reading.

First, the President of the SFA is apparently deemed incompetent to answer any of the most pertinent questions put to him. Let's be clear – the Head of Communications may sit in on an interview and occasionally butt in, should the interviewee drop a clanger that requires clarification.

It is not his job to speak for his boss because, quite simply, the boss is supposed to know better than anyone what his organisation is doing. The PR may handle routine press inquiries and briefings but could you imagine, for example, if Alastair Campbell didn't consider Tony Blair capable of outlining Labour Party policy?

There is only one time when such tactics are used and that is when obfuscation or shooting down dissent is required. And that is when the organisation knows it is not on solid ground in its dealings.

Perhaps even more remarkable than Broadfoot's comment, “for the purposes of this meeting, I am the SFA,” which apart from the hubris is a clear indication of McCrae's perceived competence, is what Clark attributes to him about football supporters' concerns being heard:

“Mr Broadfoot opined that the future would show whether Scottish Football supporters were really concerned about the old club/new club debate, if huge numbers turned their backs on the game.”

There, in a nutshell, is the SFA telling fans that if they keep buying tickets they will be ignored. Only by turning their backs on the game will the issues begin to be addressed.

It is rare for any organisation to challenge its own customers to abandon it but that is exactly what the SFA, through Darryl Broadfoot has done. It is over to the fans to respond.

*(“Publics' are audiences that are important to the organisation. They include customers - existing and potential; employees and management; investors; media; government; suppliers; opinion-formers.)

--

Stokes lack of ambition befuddles Matt Lindsay

Befuddled: Blame Stokesy

In a world of austerity and belt-tightening, many in Britain are staring at uncertain times.

A cruel Tory government is launching a relentless attack on the poor and vulnerable, with the bedroom tax and hacking cuts to support services bringing misery to many.

But there's always someone worse off, so they say, and at present that someone appears to be Matt Lindsay.

Matt's a curious chap in that his writing is often surprisingly upbeat. Vying in healthy competition with his close colleague, Chris Jack, he has had a laudable tendency towards (royal) Blue Sky thinking, admittedly mostly when predicting halcyon days at Ibrox. (Giving succour to the suckers, you might say).

But in recent days Matt seems to have been turning lemonade back into lemons – and, not for the first time, Anthony Stokes is prompting the disharmony.

Stokesy, it seems could “start a fight in an empty hoose” but he has exceeded all previous expectations by creating conflict in the inner sanctuary of Matt's comfortably-furnished mind.

A mere fortnight ago, he was on fine form, lauding Mark Warburton's capture of two players from Accrington Stanley and mentioning a whole clutch of Celtic failures to boot.

This was Matt in his pomp. Sycophants have come and gone, tilting for his crown but Matt shows a deftness in his lionising of the club currently calling itself The Rangers, urging those with a less nuanced appreciation of the game to recognise the unique qualities of lower-division football.

Stokes:All mouth - no ambition

But in a matter of days, the bachal that is Stokes and Ronny Deila somehow contrived to upset the cart leaving Matt floundering under a deluge of them apples that he clearly doesn't like at all.

On Friday, he was citing Ronny's decision to loan Stokes to Hibs (after agreeing terms with at least two other clubs) as causing “Rangers concerns”, noting “the striker could help to prevent Rangers from winning promotion to the Premiership”.

“The switch has been queried by many in Scottish football,” he wrote without naming anyone who had queried the move outside his own swivel chair, “because Hibs are currently vying with Rangers, who are just five points clear in the second tier table with 16 games remaining, for a place in the top flight.”

Scurrilous stuff and the fact that other clubs should be allowed to strengthen their squads to challenge for the Championship title, is indeed cause for concern.

By today, Matt had found a new one of his not insubstantial broadsides to deliver. The fact that Stokes chose his former club suggests to Matt that Ronny: “had good reason to harbour misgivings” about Stokes.

“The fact the 27-year-old decided to go to a lower league club which is situated within a short commute of his West Lothian home leaves him open to accusations that he lacks ambition and a desire to resurrect his career,” Matt thwacked, apparently forgetting that Championship football is where its at and where the UK's most prolific goalscorer-cum-penalty-taker has his stamping ground.

“Is O’Neill going to be bowled over if he scores against Alloa or Dumbarton?” Matt asked, seeming to have forgotten that victories over such clubs have appeared to have got Matt very excited indeed in recent memory.

In questioning the ambition of a player choosing the Championship Matt sails dangerously close to the rocky waters of denigrating players at other lower-division teams.

Matt concluded that success or failure for Stokes would be disastrous for Deila: “But he is in a no-win situation here. If Stokes does shine at Hibs – and he started his time there in an encouraging fashion at the weekend when he came off the bench and scored in a 3-1 victory over St Mirren at Easter Road – it will give ammunition to those who maintained he should have been featuring all along at Celtic.”

But, something about the flimsiness of that barb seemed to suggest that our esteemed sportswriter had lost heart.

It is difficult to see how this can end well for Matt. Perhaps Michael O'Halloran will yet leave St Johnstone to sign for a Championship club and that might cheer him.

But, of course, much will depend on O'Halloran's ambition.

--

The curious case of The Herald's low-key Rangers exclusive

Newspapers exist to deliver the news. That is a simple truism. Throughout the industry, there is an unending competition to beat rivals to the punch - to be "first with the news". And what newspapers or any news media crave most of all is the exclusive - the story that no one else has.

So you might think that when a newspaper gets first sniff of a story relating to an event that is to be the subject of a parliamentary debate that day, that they could be relied on to "big it up" - to shout it from the rooftops.

It is curious, then, that Tuesday, 8 March saw just such a story appearing in a paper but delivered in such a low-key manner as to almost send it flying below the Scottish football radar. In fact, if it wasn't for Celtic cyberspace, you might have missed it altogether. Other papers have yet to run with it, presumably because they can't establish the facts.

With the "shame game" still vexing pundits and politicians alike, days after the Chief Executive of the SFA had cited specific instances of unacceptable behaviour from Rangers players El Hadj Diouf and Madjid Bougherra, and with Celtic and Rangers set to discuss the events at Holyrood, The Herald almost apologetically whispered that they "understood" the players were in the clear with the SFA.

The Herald had information that no other paper seemed to have and yet chose to devote a mere 162 words to relaying the potentially explosive news that the abuse of the referee and inflammatory behaviour referred to by the SFA's Stewart Regan was considered a closed case with referee Calum Murray "reporting 'no additional misconduct' in his paperwork, the referee, at least, is content that both players were dealt with sufficiently at the time".

Equally intriguing is the name of the reporter, Martin McMillan. You may have read Martin's name on many a low-key match report and minor story. What a scoop for a reporter whose work is otherwise mundane. But you won't see McMillan on TV or hear him on radio.

Why? Because he doesn't exist. The name Martin McMillan is what is known as a house byline, a name of convenience added to stories, usually supplied by outside agencies or taken straight off the wires (streamed agency reports), to make it appear to readers that actual reporters are delivering news. It is a common practice in the industry and almost every title has them.

But if a news agency had such an exclusive, you would be reading about it first on the back page of one of the better-paying tabloids such as the Sun or the Daily Record. So we can rule them out as a source.

That leads us to speculate as to why the paper might deliver such a story without inviting full attention to it. Any journalist on the sports desk would want to put their name to that particular scoop, claiming the kudos for their investigative work.

Of course, it could be that the story is couched in such ambiguous terms, using terms like "Herald Sport understands" because they can't "stand the story up" - in layman's terms, verify it. But printing a story that just might be true doesn't sound like the approach of the Herald.

Could there be another reason? Could they be sacrificing the splash to protect the source who had presumably delivered the details of the referee's report in breach of his or her contract at the SFA?

Who could possibly be in the inner sanctum of the SFA with a strong connection to the Herald Sports desk?

• SFA Communications team

--

EXCLUSIVE: McGeady story sparks tension at crisis-hit Herald

EXCLUSIVE

Only one winner between old guard and ‘Young Turd’

It was the story every sports journalist had been waiting for. Known only to an elite few who browsed the internet from around 9pm on Saturday, The Herald’s Monday edition exclusively revealed that an incident had taken place shortly after Celtic’s draw with Hearts (originally described as a defeat in the newspaper story).

Having caught the rest of the recycled paper part of the industry on the hop, Herald Chief Sportswriter Hugh “Scoop” MacDonald seemed to have scored a coup for his team-mates.

However, we can exclusively reveal that the result has been internecine tension at the crisis-hit Herald.

An impeccable source, speaking on condition of anonymity said: “Darryl is fizzing. I mean how else can you describe the bubbles from his mouth and nose. He feels let down by Hugh.
“He always thought of Hugh as a kindly uncle who would offer professional guidance, try to teach him a bit of punctuation now and then and make constructive suggestions, such as what he should write and how he should write it.
“Then Hugh goes and breaks the only news story The Herald has turned up in the last three years and doesn’t even let Darryl share a byline. You’d have to ask if there’s an agenda.”

Emotions are running high at the troubled title, which has announced that almost all of its editorial staff are at risk of redundancy, prompting some to fear for their jobs.

Our source said: “We all expected Hugh to walk but now it seems that he has notions of breaking news stories before he goes. That can only undermine the rest of the sports desk staff.”

However, we can also reveal that Chief Football Writer Broadfoot, known as “Bombscare” due to his tendency to lose concentration at the most crucial times, is unbelievably one of the highest-paid members of staff at the paper. Said our mole: “He kept getting pay rises to ‘keep him happy’. He even got a rise in return for turning down a transfer to Record PM. It was all very Bobo Balde.”

Now the battle lines have been drawn and it seems that a parting of the ways is imminent but our source revealed that Broadfoot has good reason to worry:

“The trouble is that Darryl has burned a lot of bridges. It all started when he started dating pop stars like Michelle McManus. She seemed to have gone to his head.”

Now, however, having fallen out with predecessor Jim Traynor, the man who once tried to sign him for the PM, Broadfoot’s options are limited. He could theoretically remain at the Herald on reduced terms and conditions or try his luck elsewhere. However, it is thought that his lack of proficiency in English may be a handicap. A move to the internet has not been ruled out.

Both camps seemed to have passed the point of no return last night, with a reconciliation unlikely.

A source close to Broadfoot was recently heard to say: “MacDonald’s values are from the last century. [Darryl] has revolutionised sports journalism with his unique big-page-red-top style. [Darryl] can get exclusives any time I want. No less than a Knight of the Realm has assured [him] that I can have as many stories as I want.”

Friends of MacDonald said he was upset by developments.

“Hugh is adamant he has done no wrong. He was given the story by a guy – we’ll call him Mr M – on strict conditions: ‘Don’t let that wee turd Broadfoot anywhere near it.’ What else could he do?”

It now appears that Broadfoot is having his tantrum in public, ruining the story with clumsy prose. Ultimately, whoever wins, The Herald will be the loser from this undignified spat.

The Herald declined to comment officially.





--