Clyde FM editorial decision

[Rick Roberts 246]

 

 

I saw this posted on FF earlier. For anyone unlucky enough to have listened to Clyde SSB at all, or in the past decade in particular, this really is something else. If not unsurprising...

 

It reads like its straight from the forked-tongue of the high priest of the East End himself, Hugh Keevins.  

Edited May 21, 2019 by Rick Roberts
typo in title

[Walterbear 557]

The answer with Clyde is to not tune in. Unlike the BBC who take all our money if we watch 1 second of live telly Clyde would suffer almost immediately if their listening figures dropped of a cliff. If every Bear gave them a miss for a month the message would get through. 

Edited May 21, 2019 by Walterbear

[Rick Roberts 246]

7 minutes ago, Walterbear said:

The answer with Clyde is to not tune in. Unlike the BBC who take all our money if we watch 1 second of live telly Clyde would suffer almost immediately if their listening figures dropped of a cliff. If every Bear gave them a miss for a month the message would get through. 

Totally agree. I dont listen these days but its difficult to avoid seeing examples of the double-standards they spew out. Like the example above. 

[JohnMc 2,754]

I've got some sympathy for Clyde on this. Firstly I think we have to accept that child abuse is a very difficult subject to talk about on a sport's programme. Super Scoreboard has a wide audience age wise, that creates problems in subject matter, it's on in the early evening when children could be listening. Personally I'd turn over a programme that was discussing child abuse if my 11 year old was listening. It's not an appropriate subject and it is most certainly not an appropriate programme to be discussing it. Secondly no one on that programme is even remotely qualified to discuss the subject matter. I mean the presenters and guests struggle to say anything vaguely informative on football, what possible insight could they bring to this subject? And a phone-in on it is a horrifying thought. 

 

I understand why some people feel there's double standards being displayed. After all no one on Super Scoreboard is an insolvency or tax expert yet they were happy to discuss and comment on that for months on end. However, I think there's a huge difference between spouting ill-informed gibberish about EBTs and spouting it about a paedophile ring. For me the latter is a subject that should only be covered by the 'news' shows. Whilst it concerns a 'sports' club it's not a suitable story for sport journalists to cover. It's news story, it's a big news story, potentially a huge one. A paedophile ring operating inside one of the biggest and most successful sporting institutes in this country, apparently for decades, requires a level of investigation and analysis no sport's programme is capable of providing. I agree with those that have called for a public enquiry, that's not point scoring either. I knew boys who played for Celtic Boys Club, their families were so proud of them. Even as a Rangers supporter you recognised the kudos that came with being able to say you were good enough to play for them. Evil, evil men preyed on young boys, deceived their families, lied and abused their positions and ultimately destroyed the lives of who knows how many people. That shouldn't be allowed to simply be forgotten. 

[cooponthewing 1,139]

55 minutes ago, Rick Roberts said:

 

 

I saw this posted on FF earlier. For anyone unlucky enough to have listened to Clyde SSB at all, or in the past decade in particular, this really is something else. If not unsurprising...

 

It reads like its straight from the forked-tongue of the high priest of the East End himself, Hugh Keevins.  

Totally agree. They don’t even have to go into great detail; but not discussing it is one of the reasons it’s been covered up for 40 years. However, the scum PR dept have been pulling strings in there for years.

[Bill 13,717]

If you listen to that shit you need to accept you are also part of the problem.

[buster. 5,199]

25 minutes ago, JohnMc said:

I've got some sympathy for Clyde on this. Firstly I think we have to accept that child abuse is a very difficult subject to talk about on a sport's programme. Super Scoreboard has a wide audience age wise, that creates problems in subject matter, it's on in the early evening when children could be listening. Personally I'd turn over a programme that was discussing child abuse if my 11 year old was listening. It's not an appropriate subject and it is most certainly not an appropriate programme to be discussing it. Secondly no one on that programme is even remotely qualified to discuss the subject matter. I mean the presenters and guests struggle to say anything vaguely informative on football, what possible insight could they bring to this subject? And a phone-in on it is a horrifying thought. 

 

I understand why some people feel there's double standards being displayed. After all no one on Super Scoreboard is an insolvency or tax expert yet they were happy to discuss and comment on that for months on end. However, I think there's a huge difference between spouting ill-informed gibberish about EBTs and spouting it about a paedophile ring. For me the latter is a subject that should only be covered by the 'news' shows. Whilst it concerns a 'sports' club it's not a suitable story for sport journalists to cover. It's news story, it's a big news story, potentially a huge one. A paedophile ring operating inside one of the biggest and most successful sporting institutes in this country, apparently for decades, requires a level of investigation and analysis no sport's programme is capable of providing. I agree with those that have called for a public enquiry, that's not point scoring either. I knew boys who played for Celtic Boys Club, their families were so proud of them. Even as a Rangers supporter you recognised the kudos that came with being able to say you were good enough to play for them. Evil, evil men preyed on young boys, deceived their families, lied and abused their positions and ultimately destroyed the lives of who knows how many people. That shouldn't be allowed to simply be forgotten. 

Spot-on John !

[Bluedell 5,627]

Part of the frustration is that the subject is not being properly discussed in the mainstream press and there has been a level of cover-up going on. 

 

JohnMc makes an excellent argument for it not being included on SSB, which could be an avenue for discussion, but would more likely end up being point scoring, but Clyde are not offering a more suitable forum either, as far as I'm aware, and are therefore involved in the MSM cover-up. 

[compo 7,048]

I just thought of that old Herman Hermits hit from way back , there's a kind of hush all over the world .?

[Rick Roberts 246]

14 hours ago, JohnMc said:

I've got some sympathy for Clyde on this. Firstly I think we have to accept that child abuse is a very difficult subject to talk about on a sport's programme. Super Scoreboard has a wide audience age wise, that creates problems in subject matter, it's on in the early evening when children could be listening. Personally I'd turn over a programme that was discussing child abuse if my 11 year old was listening. It's not an appropriate subject and it is most certainly not an appropriate programme to be discussing it. Secondly no one on that programme is even remotely qualified to discuss the subject matter. I mean the presenters and guests struggle to say anything vaguely informative on football, what possible insight could they bring to this subject? And a phone-in on it is a horrifying thought. 

 

I understand why some people feel there's double standards being displayed. After all no one on Super Scoreboard is an insolvency or tax expert yet they were happy to discuss and comment on that for months on end. However, I think there's a huge difference between spouting ill-informed gibberish about EBTs and spouting it about a paedophile ring. For me the latter is a subject that should only be covered by the 'news' shows. Whilst it concerns a 'sports' club it's not a suitable story for sport journalists to cover. It's news story, it's a big news story, potentially a huge one. A paedophile ring operating inside one of the biggest and most successful sporting institutes in this country, apparently for decades, requires a level of investigation and analysis no sport's programme is capable of providing. I agree with those that have called for a public enquiry, that's not point scoring either. I knew boys who played for Celtic Boys Club, their families were so proud of them. Even as a Rangers supporter you recognised the kudos that came with being able to say you were good enough to play for them. Evil, evil men preyed on young boys, deceived their families, lied and abused their positions and ultimately destroyed the lives of who knows how many people. That shouldn't be allowed to simply be forgotten. 

You make good points and you're correct. I don't think there's any need to go through grisly details. I dont think anyone should stumble through details that upset or offend any victims.

 

However, there is a secondary layer that is more suitable for discussion. Concerning the actions of the club, its legal stance and a cover-up. From the top of my head.

- Links between  board and predators.

- Links between predators and outsiders (i.e. Bennell)

- Hiring policies.

- Comment on celtics own investigation into the boys club in the 80s.

- How many people at senior club knew?

- Fergus McCanns actions?

- Payments from club to 3rd parties.

- Public calls from club (and associates) reaching out to victims.

- ...those made no mention of police. Was any info ever passed to police?

- What did the police know and not act on?

- Did celtic contacts victims directly?

- How many non-disclosure agreements are out there?

- When and how did celtic adopt their first defence strategy? Was this a shared tactic with the CC?

- When did separate entity defence appear?

- Compare clubs actions with those in England.

- Compare Man Cities response with celtics.

- Compare case and actions with Penn State.

- Discuss whether Penn State precedents and punishments should apply to Celtic?

- What options were available to SFA?

- What options are available to SFA?

- Discuss whether member clubs should meat to discuss celtics behaviour?

- Discuss whether celtic scandal has been covered up? And by who. 

 

There's plenty scope for open and informed discussion on this. Some of this is documented fact, other points speculation and hearsay. They could get months worth of content out of this and people would want to know about it. They would if it were Rangers. Also, I'm sure Hugh Keevins could give some very accurate answers to many of those questions, if he wanted to. 

 

But there's the crux. He doesn't want to. Celtic don't want him to. To have the celtic support, and other supports, discussing that is damaging for them, which is why it is never mentioned. 

 

From what I've seen on twitter a lot of celtic fans are genuinely in denial or in the dark about it. The coverage and content for a scandal that size has been extremely limited.

 

There's also some pretty murky stuff going on to cover it up. Accounts popping up and attacking anyone talking about it, including victims. I've seen tims setting up accounts pretending to be Penn State fans. We currently have a group driving the "victims cause" in Hampden and Holyrood that are knowingly excluding victims. That group appears firmly in the "dont blame the club" camp. Call me cynical. But when millions of pound are at stake then anything goes. Including radio stations opting to limit exposure.

 

Clyde SSB, of course, have history with inconsistency. During one of the raging storms on Rangers singing nasty songs, when celtic fans were caught red handed singing sectarian songs, Keevins simply changed the subject. A change of editorial policy so to speak.