JohnMc

Reach are significantly more than the Record and Sunday Mail, they're actually one of the biggest printers in the UK. Put simply Reach have printing capacity they need to fill and Rangers need someone to print and distribute their programmes. The contract printing side of Reach is quite separate from the newspaper publishing side, I'd be very surprised if anything changes in our current relationship with the Record and Mail (reach also own the Daily Mirror, Daily Star and Daily Express plus their Sunday equivalents and a raft of major local titles). Their CEO is a guy called Jim Mullen, from Hamilton, I've never met him but I don't think he's particularly Rangers friendly shall we say. I guess the club have weighed up the cost saving against the supporter anger and decided which is more important to them. Somethings never change.

Richard Gordon isn't on Go Radio, I think it's Rob McLean, easy to confuse them to be fair. As a commercial station I suspect Go Radio will endeavour to be far more balanced than BBC Scotland, if only from a revenue perspective. Alienating the Rangers support won't be good for business or please advertisers (or indeed new commercial partners...). Paul Cooney is a talented producer and despite his personal leanings Clyde's football coverage was much fairer than BBC Scotland's when he was in charge of it. I've yet to hear their new show, I see they've got Si Ferry and Barry Ferguson on so my heart has sunk already, but at some point in the coming weeks i'll give it listen. If it's to be successful it will need to appeal to us, you can't alienate the biggest club in the country's support if you're not being financed by the licence fee. You'd hope Haughey and co understand that.

With respect BD neither you nor I are black (you're not, are you? I'm going to look pretty stupid if you are) so we're not affected in anyway by this. Let's be honest, there's no chance at all of Marxism making any kind of political inroads here, (and it's laughable to suggest it could happen in America) and by supporting the club and the players I don't think anyone is going to mistake either of us for Leninist agitators. This whole Marxism thing is bewildering, we're not living in a 1960s Le Carre novel, our way of life is not threatened by Conor Goldson protesting. The Israel/Palestine thing is nonsense too. Over 70 years of superpower intervention, terrorism, war, mediation and global attention hasn't been able to resolve that part of the world, you and me accepting James Tavernier kneeling before kick-off in a friendly isn't going to bring down the Likud Party or harden the resolve of Hezbollah. But Conor Goldson is a young black man. I don't know what he's experienced in his life due to the colour of his skin, perhaps nothing, only he knows. But as a white man I feel really uncomfortable telling him his choice of protest; one that's peaceful and largely symbolic, isn't appropriate. He's not looting or rioting, he's not closing down streets or marching. He's simply using his profile and platform to maybe make people like you and I, white men who've not had to give this much thought before (well I've not, apologies if you have been involved in this in the past or present) pause to consider whether our society provides the same opportunities to everyone regardless of their ethnicity. I'm not unable to accept it means something else to others, I'm simply challenging why that is. I don't understand why it's provoking so much debate, it's largely symbolic, and I know symbolism is important, but it's unlikely to lead to wholesale change (and it's not going to lead to Marxism, I'm positive about that). I wear a poppy every year. Both my grandfathers and my father served in the forces, I was brought up with it. I learned about the horrors of WW1 at school, attended the Armistice Day service at our local war memorial with the BB every year. It's something I grew up with, culturally it's important to me. I suspect a number of people on here had a similar upbringing. When I moved to Belfast I continued to wear a poppy around that time of year. For me it was a way of honouring ordinary and extraordinary people who'd made a sacrifice I'm not sure I'd be willing to make. But for the first time I met people who'd a very different view of the poppy. Who saw it as a symbol of the British military and they'd a very dim view of the British military. So I considered it but decided to keep wearing it. I'm happy to explain to anyone concerned that I don't wear it because I supported the invasion of Iraq (I didn't), or Afghanistan, or to make some kind of political point or prove how patriotic I am (I'm not patriotic in the slightest). I wear it to remember the millions of people who died either through government misadventure, idiotic orders or trying to achieve something truly noble and necessary that has made the world a safer and better place. I'm not honouring governments or politicians, far from it. That's what it means to me, thats why I wear it. I'm confident Conor Goldson doesn't want to bring down the government in this country or in the middle east, he bends his knee and raises his arm so you and me will see him and think. That's all.

I don't think you can equate Rangers with Formula 1. FIFA equate to Formula 1, Rangers are a car in it. Of course the club have an option. Not everyone feels like they're being railroaded into this BD, many, many people have looked at this and can see the merits of it and accept the sentiment it makes. Judging by Stewart Robertson's statement earlier it suggests the board are comfortable with this. Conor Goldson has told you what the phrase means to him and why he's using it. If that's still not good enough explanation for you I don't know what else to say.

I disagree with those who think this is just posturing and won’t make any difference. It might not make any difference to a 45 year old who supports Britain First and thinks Tommy Robinson should be the PM but it might make a 16 year old who perhaps hasn’t really thought about these issues properly give it some consideration. Modern day footballers have a platform, they do have influence. I went to see Rangers play West Brom at Ibrox in a pre-season friendly, Google tells me it was almost exactly 37 years ago. West Brom had a number of black players and it was the first time I’d seen a black footballer live and I suspect that was the case for many in attendance that day. West Brom’s black players were subjected to boos, jeers and abuse throughout the match. All around me people made jokes about them, shouted to our players to be ‘careful in case they had spears’ that type of thing. The abuse was actually quite good humoured, people thought they were being funny, indeed lots of people were laughing so they were being funny. This wasn’t a naked display of white power, it was an example of what was still socially acceptable in Glasgow at the time. Mocking an opposition player because of the colour of his skin was largely okay in 1983, nobody thought they were really doing anything wrong. I certainly didn’t, I laughed along like everyone else. I know if West Brom were to play us today there wouldn’t be much abuse of their black players, at least not for the colour of their skin. That’s not just a change in our crowd, that’s a societal change, something that’s gradually brought us to this point. Black Lives Matter is the next step along that road. We now have black players, we didn’t then. Some of those players are heroes to our support, they are revered by us, there is no question they are accepted whole-heartedly by our support. When we see them the only colour we see is blue. So when they decide to tell us something we might find uncomfortable or think doesn’t apply to us, perhaps we should pay them the courtesy of listening and trying to understand. I don’t think that’s a big ask. I’ve never voted for a political party where I agree with everything they stand for or hope to achieve. I look at who I think most closely mirrors my views, or I feel will do the best job. There’s always something I won’t agree with though, sometimes it can be a fairly fundamental thing too. But good is better than perfect. That’s the case with most things in life I’ve found. A level of compromise is required to move forward. I lived in Belfast when the Good Friday Agreement was negotiated and agreed. That was a very hard pill for many, many people to swallow but it brought about a serious reduction in murder and terror that had become a way of life for decades. People are alive today who wouldn’t have been otherwise. Northern Ireland is not perfect, or even fixed, but it’s a hell of a lot better today than it was when I first went there and it is slowly, in its way, making progress. I really don’t think it’s hard to accept the message that black lives matter and differentiate it from other things that some wrap up in it. I don’t understand how anyone can function if they’re unable to make compromises, particularly for something that doesn’t really have any impact on them or their lives.

To get things slightly back on topic I notice the management and players of both sides 'took a knee' prior to both the Lyon and Nice matches. As far as I can tell cultural Marxism hasn't managed a full coup on Edmiston Drive quite yet, but no doubt it's only a matter of time now. The defunding of the police on the other hand is well underway. Funding is down over 16% in the last decade. Those arch-Marxists David Cameron, Teresa May and Boris Johnston need watched I tell you, soon you won't even be able to say you're English anymore. For what it's worth, as is their democratic right, quite a number of people on social media, who certainly seem to be Rangers supporters at first glance, posted their disagreement with the club's official Twitter and Instagram accounts posting pictures and accompanying hashtag. It's worth noting though that the post on Instagram attracted 29,860 'Likes' and on Twitter over 7,500, the highest of any posts from the club during the tournament, including goals and interviews with players. Maurice Edu, our former player and an African American, felt moved to comment on the club's original post and then replied to some of those criticising the club or taking issue with the 'black lives matter' message. Conor Goldson has also felt the need to address some of the posts and comments left by supporters on this subject from his personal account. Both are worth reading. As I said earlier in this thread if this is important to a number of our players I've no problem with our club supporting it. It doesn't threaten my identity or my understanding on how a democratic society should function. Being serious for a moment I was saddened to read Forlan's Sisters post about his recent health. Sepsis is a horrible and very dangerous condition and I hope you are feeling better now and receiving the correct treatment. Clearly Gaffer and FS have experienced challenges during the last few months and I know they aren't alone. I hope we are all able to enjoy better times very soon.

So good they named them twice. Or something like that. I never use 'Glasgow' when referring to us, we're The Rangers, every other Rangers is defined by their subsequent relationship to us. That said I did enjoy it when UEFA used to call us simply 'Glasgow' during Champion's League draws and matches back in the 90s. It really annoyed some our fellow citizens, that's never a bad thing. Speaking of fellow citizens I was raised in the north of the city and knew quite a few Partick Thistle fans growing up. Everyone I knew simply referred to them as 'Thistle', there was no need for 'Partick' to be said, who else could we have been referring too after all. But i've noticed this has changed over the years and now hear many in the media describe them as 'Partick', it's something that sounds so wrong to my ear.

Well now, this thread's taken an unexpected turn since I last visited. So if Covid 19 is a global hoax, who is behind it and why? I lost a friend to Covid 19, he didn't have any underlying health issues beforehand, his death was sudden and shocking. Three other family friends also died of it, they were older and did have underlying health issues. They all lived in the same small town, two in a care home, and the virus swept through taking the lives of a number of older people in a short space of time. I guess I'm struggling to accept it doesn't exist or is in fact just your normal winter flu. But I'm fascinated to see your workings on this @Gaffer and trying to remain open-minded. You're not stupid so you must understand why posts as incendiary as yours have created reactions ranging from disbelief to anger. No one likes being called a fool, and that's what you're inferring we all are. I'm fairly cynical and hold a high degree of scepticism towards politicians but even I'm struggling to accept Boris Johnson and his cabinet and advisors are covering up thousands of deaths, ruining the economy and upsetting millions of voters on purpose and that he's managed to get Nicola Sturgeon and the Irish Taoiseach in on it with him.

Oh, I think if we took some strong stance against supporting black players right to protest for example the broadcast partners wouldn't be happy with us.

Jeez, BD you're grumpy this morning! I'm delighted to read that you've never found class a barrier in your life, others will have different experiences. With only one UK Prime Minister this century not attending a private, fee paying school at some point (the only one who didn't was Gordon Brown and he wasn't elected) I'd suggest the class system remains in place. That's not to say social mobility doesn't exist. If you extrapolate Rangers supporting Jermaine Defoe, or any of our players, use of the statement 'Black Lives Matter' as supporting defunding the police or having any interest in Middle Eastern politics I'd say you're mistaken. On some subjects I describe myself as conservative, on others as liberal, this doesn't mean I support either of the parties that carry those words in their name. Likewise I'm entirely comfortable with the phrase Black Lives Matter and the sentiment behind it, without it conferring my support for anything else they might espouse. It's possible to support organisations without agreeing with everything they say or do. When I lived in Belfast a couple of decades ago now it amused me to see the Israeli flag flown from lamp posts in Loyalist areas of the city. I'm fairly certain it was solely as a response to the Palestinian flag being flown in Republican areas. If one side said 'black' the other side had to say 'white', that's how it was. I've seen the Star Of David flag at the occasional Rangers match too, as I'm sure you have. I suppose if it becomes a big topic here, something the population and the support become involved in it's inevitable the club will become involved on a superficial level at least. But no, it's not something I'm in a hurry for any of us to get involved in. I can only speak as a man. My rather flippant remark was meant to highlight how far football toilets have come in 40 years, not who uses them. In all honesty I struggle with the 'trans debate', it's so niche and irrelevant to my day to day life, I also don't think I'm alone in that. On balance I'm yet to be convinced a biological man should freely use female only facilities, particularly if it makes females uncomfortable. That's my view just now, it might change as I learn more about the subject, or it might not.

Surely 'equality' is about equal access to opportunity rather than forced distribution of wealth? In a country like the United States there can be little doubt that the colour of your skin has a direct impact on the opportunities you are given. This sits uncomfortably with the 'American Dream' narrative that's so important to many there as well as the belief that 'anyone' can 'make it' and the whole "give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses" idea that's so intrinsic in American culture. That's how I've always understood it anyway. I don't think that idea is as set in the DNA of our culture here though. Class has always been a much bigger barrier in this country and it's fairly colour blind. While plenty of people from modest backgrounds have found success in various fields in the UK the concept is not as important in our culture as in some other countries. Anyway, back to Rangers. Sport is one of the areas where you will see black people have high profiles and success. In our current culture being good at sport brings not only wealth and profile but also a platform. I think that's why many black sports men and women feel the need to speak about political matters, there is an unseen pressure on them to use their profiles that equivalent white sport's people perhaps don't always feel. As football is the highest profile sport in this country footballers have the biggest platform. The current Rangers team has a far higher percentage of black players in it than the support does. That's not racism, simply that the black population of Scotland is less than 1% and it's smaller again in Northern Ireland, the two main areas we draw our support from. So, in all honesty, 'black issues' aren't high profile among our support or indeed in our country. You could argue the black players at our club and the club as a whole should keep out of these topics, after all what have they got to do with us? But then if these subjects matter to them perhaps we should encourage them to speak about them, to teach us, to help us understand what being a young, black man in 21st century Britain is actually like. I've almost no insight into that. I've a lot of respect for Jermaine Defoe. Not only is he a talented footballer but he's an impressive human being as well. He's a consummate professional who has made sacrifices to ensure he's made the most of his talent. He's also demonstrated empathy and enormous responsibility for others. His friendship with the terminally ill child Bradley Lowrey seemed genuine and heartfelt and his use of his profile to help that boy and raise awareness and money for his condition and others like him was exemplary. So if Jermaine Defoe wants to use his profile this time to raise awareness of racism in society, I'm okay with that. I think that's a good thing. If that involves 'taking a knee' or wearing an armband or some other symbolic gesture that might make someone like me, who has known very few black people and gives the subject little time, pause for thought then I suspect that can only be a good thing. If the club want to support him in this I'm okay with that too, if some, or all, of his teammates want to join in then I'm pretty relaxed with that. It won't change the world, but it might help enlighten some of it. As for politics and football not mixing I tend to disagree. Football clubs used to be a reflection of the communities they came from, we certainly were. This is hardly new. I read an obituary of Jack Charlton at the weekend and was reminded of the money and time he gave to striking miners during the 80s, Robbie fowler was fined once for wearing a T-shirt in support of striking Liverpool dockers and recently Pep Guardiola was reprimanded for wearing a label badge raising awareness of issues in Catalonia. Most modern football clubs want to keep sponsors and broadcasters on side and so tend to take a very corporate view of 'politics', fearing a backlash or criticism if they make a misstep. Rangers will be no different I suspect. They'll follow the mood and media narrative and take their lead from that. Forgive my cynicism. As someone who started watching football when many ground's idea of a toilet was a wall with a trough at the bottom and which by half time was ankle deep in urine the idea that we're speaking about toilets for trans people is almost amusing. I suspect the club will wait for the politicians to deal with this and legislate one way or another. As we're responsible for voting for them that feels like a wise move.

They've got a limited broadcast area, these things are licensed. It'll be similar geographically to Radio Clyde if that helps.

Yeah, he's a bit too Unionist and Royalist for my tastes as well (winky face) I can't claim to know him but I have been in his company a couple of times. I once saw him outbid everyone at a charity auction to get the 'Rangers' lot much to my surprise. As far as I know he's not presenting any of the shows.

Go Radio, a digital station with a greater Glasgow broadcast footprint, was taken over by (Lord) Willie Haughey and (Sir) Tom Hunter last year. They've fairly big plans for it, plans that have been hampered by the Covid lockdown, but are now finally being rolled out. They see sport, specifically football, as being key to the station's growth and success. They're investing in 'talent' and production people and, if rumours are to be believed, have their eye on securing commentary rights for SPFL matches. Apart from the co-owners having deep pockets they also have excellent connections at Hampden, having helped fund the purchase the stadium from Queens Park a couple of years ago, so getting a sympathetic hearing might not be hard for them, plus the game is desperate for money so any new revenue is likely to be very welcome. I understand they see the dynamic between Rangers and BBC Scotland as providing an opportunity for them to attract listeners. The 'talent' I've heard mentioned doesn't suggest this is going to be some kind of Rangers love-in, but if it at least provides live commentary of matches and interviews with our manager and players it might be very welcome. Time will tell.

I read recently that one aspect of 'no crowds' has been the removal of 'home' advantage. Apparently the presence of a partisan and noisy home support has a bigger affect on professional footballers than was first thought. In theory, with us facing a trip to Parkhead in the first round of matches, this might be of benefit to us. Swings and roundabouts of course as 50,000 at Ibrox must have had an affect on visiting sides in the past, so taking that away might even it out a bit too. Indeed, for a significant number of domestic away fixtures we're hardly in the minority in the ground, so perhaps this won't be of much benefit to us.

I can't speak for Castore but I suspect they've experienced a significant number of production challenges during the last few months. Covid 19 has led to a number of clothing production plants closing completely and on reopening not only have they huge back-logs to clear but doing so with fewer staff due to shielding and social distancing issues as well as supply chain disruption. Again, I don't know for sure if this applies to Castore, but most clothing manufacturing for the UK market is done in Bangladesh. Not only are their issues in transport and import currently but the supply chain into clothing manufacturing has been badly hit too. A lot of fabric, thread, elastic etc is manufactured in China, their lockdown has badly hit the entire garment industry. If Castore are struggling to meet demand it's not a huge surprise and they should probably be cut some slack under the circumstances. With second, third and goalkeeper kits still to be launched far less leisure wear, tracksuits etc I suspect they'll do well to have product ready for the Christmas market, probably still the most important time of the year for retail.

Isn't Donalda MacKinnon a 'Hearach' 26th? I believe she is. A one time pupil and teacher at the Nicolson in Stornoway too. Her husband is Seumas MacInnes. Donalda is a lovely person for what it's worth. I expect the Sport department will feel the squeeze too and will need to make cuts. Whether that will be anything tangible the average listener will notice I doubt, but I expect there will be a few more freelancers on the roster in the coming months.

Why don't you read what I've posted in this thread Stevie and see if you can figure out the answer to that yourself.

PR has a reactive and proactive element to it. For the proactive side I feel a large part of it should be about rebuilding the influence a club the size and importance of Rangers should have. That needs to start with the SFA and the SPFL and UEFA. We should also look to have very strong relationships with the main sponsors, potential sponsors and broadcast/media partners for the various leagues and competitions we play in, ultimately they hold a lot of clout so should be a main focus for us. Follow the money, always follow the money. Secondly we should be looking to at least punch our weight politically and in greater civic society. That will require forming relationships with individuals and organisations within those realms. We’ve not been good at that for a while now, we need a very different strategy to what has gone before to see any improvements in this. In my experience politicians hate surprises and like to be be seen to have influence and be in the know. Facilitate that as much as we can, build relationships on a personal level and on a corporate level, no matter how unpopular that might be with some supporters. Thirdly the media. Whether we like it or not they influence and shape opinion. Anyone who thinks there are no Rangers supporters in the Scottish media is very wrong. There are also a number of people who are not Rangers supporters but are professional enough to do their jobs well. Without the media it is harder to build influence with sponsors for example. So somewhere along the way compromise needs to be found. Reactive PR generally requires excellent relationships with the media. For a football club negative PR tends to come from player or supporter behaviour. Having the ability to manage or control to some extent how that’s reported is essential. I think it's all very well keeping Rangers bloggers and podders onside, and they do have influence with the support, however whether we like it or not mainstream media hold far more sway with sponsors and governing bodies, we need them, for now at least. That’s my 20 minute PR strategy. Edit - to achieve that you need people who know the landscape and know the personalities in it. Ideally they've done some, or all of it before somewhere else. These people exist.

We'll see. Hope I am.

I don't see the PR function being used for building bridges with other clubs. That's done at Director and coach/manager level, and if we wanted to do that we could with the people we've got now. The PR function can be used to build bridges, or at least influence, with media, politicians, supporters, local community, UEFA and other groups and organisations with the ability to help the club. But, as Frankie, and others, have eloquently explained, there's not much appetite for that among a good percentage of the support. This is not the first time I've held an unpopular opinion on Gersnet!!

Look, let me be clear, I have nothing against David Graham and genuinely wish him every success in the new role, and I mean that. If my comments on this thread have been read as criticism of him then let me apologise and clarify. This is a messageboard for fans to get things off their chest and waste some time, I'm under no illusions at all that I have any influence, nor do I want any. I, perhaps mistakenly, view this is place as a chat among friends (or at least acquaintances). I think Rangers PR strategy has been flawed for a long time and I'm not convinced our PR strategy is changing in the direction I think it should. I expect the head of PR or Communications (or whatever the title is) will have input into our strategy but ultimately it'll be decided by our board and they'll be tasked with delivering it. For that reason I think David Graham has been chosen because the board feel he'll be good at delivering the strategy they've decided on. So, to be clear, it's the strategy, not the individual, I have issue with. As I've said in both posts before this one I expect the strategy will be popular with a good percentage of the support. The replies on this thread already testify to that. No one likes us, we don't care, is, for me, a terrible PR strategy, but it's what I think we're going for. I could be wrong, I'm simply guessing like everyone else. Again, I genuinely wish David Graham all the best.

It's a guess based on 20 years working in Northern Ireland and a career in professional communications. Delighted if I'm wrong.

I think you have to acknowledge the post he's taking up in all this and why that matters. He's not been appointed the head of catering, or finance or head of facilities management, he's been put in change of PR and so he'll be in daily contact with the media, so we have to expect the media to take an interest in him and question his background. This man's job will involve working with, and managing, the media. In the same way eyebrows were raised when Traynor got the gig so they're being raised now. Does no one think that's worth considering before it's written off as the work of bigots? A question for you, who is head of PR at Parkhead, or Aberdeen, or Hibs? Or indeed at Man U or Liverpool? I guarantee most of us have no clue and that's how it should be. Good PR is accomplished below the surface and away from the spotlight. Supporters have (rightly) complained about our PR for years, and that's because it's not been managed at all well. PR is a skill, and for an organisation as high profile as Rangers working with a large local media demanding content and access that requires experience and know-how. I'm not sure how being a local councillor in Belfast gives you any of that. My concern is Mr Graham sees us a stepping stone on his way to getting a chance to stand in a safe seat for his current employers. Having a couple of years at Rangers on his CV won't do his chances of that any harm. Employing someone who is closely associated with any political party was always going to cause a stir. Politics is polarising, even more so than football. Whatever party he'd represented he'd have drawn criticism from some. Having lived in Northern Ireland I never felt the DUP were any good at PR, indeed I felt they were pretty poor at it, the only group I can think of worse than them at PR was/is the Orange Order. I doubt Mr Graham was personally responsible for that to be fair but it's the background he's coming from. Anyway, my concern over this appointment isn't that he's an Orangeman or must support most of the DUP's policies, some of which are anathema to me, he's entitled to his own views whatever I might think of them. No, my concern is the direction this suggests we're taking as a club PR wise. At a time when I think the club needs to be building bridges and making friends, I fear Mr Graham's skills lie in the opposite direction. I suspect many of our support won't share my concerns, and that this appointment is being made with them in mind. Fine, but in my opinion that's a very short-sighted strategy. Rangers remain toothless in influencing Scottish football and indeed greater society, I don't see how this appointment will address that.

Appointing someone with this background suggests to me this is a war footing. It signals no attempt is being made to speak to anyone but our own support, and even then perhaps not all of them. I suspect that will be popular with a number of vocal and influential supporters. With a share offer mooted it probably makes sense to to keep the support largely onside and encourage a siege mentality. For me though this smacks of short-termism and will not address the very real PR issues we have as a club.