Know Thine Enemy: From a long weekend in the Untold Media Trenches « Untold Arsenal: Arsenal News, supporting the club, the players and the manager
Untold Arsenal on Twitter @UntoldArsenal
KNOW THINE ENEMY: FROM A LONG WEEKEND IN THE UNTOLD MEDIA TRENCHES
by bob
Though it’s been hard to shake the “In X-Cesc” soundtrack in my head, news of Gervinho’s 3-match ban proved just enough to fast-track me back into exposing how some journos spun our first match.
For full disclosure, the Guardian has been my news paper of choice. That said, I find its current Arsenal coverage a very different kettle of fish. Indeed, its writers’ spins on Saturday’s match amount to an un-flagged case of sharpened cleats up. And though the Guardian’s coverage is subtler and more educated than say, The Sun’s (cough), their clever wordsmithery proves just as one-sided by treating Arsene as their personal piñata.
As I see it, Guardian Arse-beat is currently a continuum of writers, ranging from relatively fair-minded to openly hostile: that is, from Jacob Steinberg and David Hytner, to Louise Taylor and Kevin McCarra, to Barney Ronay, Alan Gardner, Richard Williams and, most hostile, Paul Wilson. All are clever, informed, football-savvy wordsmiths. And, whoever is the paper’s Football Editor (yet to be determined), there’s a shared set of talking points and complementary omissions. In general, there’s now an entitlement to undermine Arsene himself, as this media watch will show.
Pre-match
On August 5, Alan Gardner helped set the tone with this: “Udinese may be known as the little zebras but they’ll provide a stern test for Arsène Wenger’s My Little Show Ponies.” Glib and table-setting, his way-too-young-to-succeed talking point would be repeated like a mantra from the pre-match period and continuing through the match into this very week.
On August 12, Louise Taylor chimed in with this bit of field work: “Arsène Wenger’s mood, hardly mellowed by painfully slow goodbyes from Cesc Fábregas and Samir Nasri, has been further darkened by logistical disruptions. When the Arsenal manager discovered his team’s intended hotel on Tyneside was hosting a Geordie wedding party he switched the booking to a less conveniently situated property in Durham City.” Taylor’s anthropological factoid was a symptom of the current campaign.
The Guardian’s Sports Blog of August 12 was accompanied by a very grey photo of Arsene, set against a very grey backdrop. Grey on grey, if you catch the visual intention.
Richard Williams helmed this Sports Blog, which gave Arsene some schtick with a vengeance. Williams’ real message lay less in any content than it did in his tone and style. In characterizing Arsene’s pre-match Friday press conference –set on the cusp of Cesc’s departure – Williams characterized Arsene in this sequence: as defiant, borderline mendacious, delusional, careening, eccentric, and undemocratic. The real message lay in Williams’ manner of speaking:
“Yet the manager would not give an inch on Friday in his contention that the two players remain part of his squad.” (defiance) Again, “When all other means of defence had been exhausted, he resorted to a piece of semantic blocking.” (mendacious)
“Asked, in what seemed like a point-blank question, whether he expected Fábregas and Nasri to leave, he replied: “I expect nobody to leave the club.” (delusional) “By turns thoughtful, jocular, obdurate and mildly exasperated, Wenger dead-batted all discussion of deals yet to be concluded.” (careening) “‘Society dies on speculation,’ he said in another freshly minted axiom.” (eccentric) “His interrogators,” Williams continued, “were more than usually aware that they were asking their questions on behalf of Arsenal’s increasingly frustrated fans.” (undemocratic)
And then, without a peep on referee Phil Dowd’s mendacity (for full details, see The Untold ref review: Newcastle Dowd – Arsenal Williams moved in like a matador: “Wenger continues to deny the existence of a flaw that was most visible in the match at St. James’s Park in February, when [Arsenal] led Newcastle 4-0 at the interval only to collapse to a 4-4 draw…”
And now for the kill: Arsene has lost the plot: “This seemed a strange and unconvincing litany of excuses from a man who once said: ‘A great player is one who makes his team win. Anything else is just talk.’” But Williams’ slight bow to Arsene’s track record would morph into a claim that Arsene has lost the plot: “But Wenger has earned the right to do things his way for at least one more season, even though his latest choice of captain – Robin van Persie – looks no more likely than Henry, William Gallas and Fábregas to fit the mould of Patrick Vieira…” and the rest of our former pantheon. Like much of current mainstream media, it would appear that Williams wants Arsene abject, then out. To my yes, protective eyes, this reads like character assassination.
For what it’s worth, I replied to Williams with this online posting:
“Wenger owes you nothing and entertains you with juicy quotes and non-quotes. Who are you to speak for the fans and the other journos, as you openly say? Seems a bit presumptuous. Anyway, here’s my quid pro quo: for my having read through your rather snide description, I challenge you to dissect one of Fergie’s press conferences this season, in the run-up to his/MU’s 20th, with anything even approaching the not so quiet contempt that you visit here on Arsene Wenger. Cleverness can only take a writer so far before the ill-concealed bile starts to bore. You will so miss him when you drive him out of town; and, like a famous writer who used to cover Muhammad Ali in his heyday once said, ‘he was so much nicer to us than we ever deserved.’ You might consider that when you play verbal darts with AW next round.’”
During the match
The Guardian’s Live Coverage blog was manned by Jacob Steinberg who did produce even-handed coverage whilst managing to be clever. (Yes, it can be done!) Witness his in-game characterization of Barton’s actions: “ 86 min: The irony about the whole sorry affair is that Barton dived … moments after getting so furious about a dive.” The problem, however, was one of omission: Steinberg offered not a word of analysis (let alone of criticism) of Referee Peter Walton’s decision-making.
Post-match
Enter Paul Wilson who described Gervinho’s fall: “Gervinho was lying on the floor attempting to make a meal of minimal contact in a fair challenge by Cheik Tioté when Joey Barton came across to tell him to get on with the game.”
In “Wilson-speak,” the tripping is called “fair” and minimized; and Barton’s manhandling becomes a snide ‘get on with it’ (in my view): Wilson did admit that “Barton probably did not need to fall down as if poleaxed, though he did, and Peter Walton probably did not have to produce a red card, though he did.” But he also considers Barton’s yellow carding “possibly slightly harsh” as he pairs it with the prior fact that “Alex Song went unpunished after an earlier stamp on Barton, which was caught by the cameras.” And then instantly on to his (analysis-free) snap conclusion: “The Newcastle player was far more sinned against than sinning here.” (Wilson would later return to cinch this on Thursday.)
I then posted this on Wilson’s Guardian blog:
“Paul Wilson, you have left out so much of the dynamics of the Gervinho-Barton-Taylor incident and the ineptitude at best of so-called Referee Walton and his “Three Blind Mice” enablers that your account makes readers with eyes to see what happened wonder whether you’ve already received your invitation and punched your ticket to Ferguson’s coronation-to-be at season’s end. This report is seriously one-sided and all I can say is thank god the Guardian has better sense than to put you on to its brilliant phone hacking coverage. I will use this in my writing as exhibit A in writing an opinion piece (read hatchet job) that masquerades as proper reportage.”
A mere 1:20:00 after his first, Wilson filed a follow-up story as commentary on Arsene’s post match remarks. His sole focus was Gervinho-Barton: “Last season it was Abou Diaby, this time it was Gervinho, making his English league debut. Alan Pardew insisted he dived, Arsène Wenger claimed he did not, but the salient point was that after Barton had hauled him brusquely to his feet and told him to get on with the game the Ivorian became involved in a scuffle and clearly slapped the Newcastle man.”
But why is the “clear slap” the salient point? No mention of Gervinho’s being tripped. No mention of Taylor’s false remonstrations. No assessment of the merits of Walton’s call and when it was made. No commentary or insight into Barton’s strategy. No. For Paul Wilson, the “salient point” in all of this is the slap. Yes, it is clearly a factor; but by choosing it as his primary focus, Wilson showed his hand.
Then he’s straight on to a juicy quote by Barton’s coach Pardew: “He was just incensed at an opponent attempting to con the referee and I don’t think that makes him a villain. He’s just an opinionated boy, that’s all.” Any analysis of that comment from Williams? No. He cleverly sidesteps any hint of that by immediately changing the focus to Arsene’s bemused reaction at the press conference: “Even Wenger could not disagree with that assessment. Showing remarkable good humour in the circumstances, the Arsenal manager noted that Barton was the obvious link between the two dismissals in the last two games and claimed he had ‘got away with it’ on both occasions.”
Wilson goes directly to his bottom-line – to construct the reader’s takeaway impression: “Wenger was somewhat less relaxed about the visiting Arsenal supporters telling him in no uncertain terms to spend some money as his players ran out of ideas in the second half. Clearly frustrated by the apparently inevitable departures of Cesc Fábregas and Samir Nasri, and the lack of replacements being lined up, the Arsenal fans high up in the Leazes End twice chanted that Wenger needed to get his chequebook out.” That, in the end, was Wilson’s point.
Exaggerated? Well, he’s nothing if not consistent. Paul Wilson would next preside over yesterday’s (Thursday’s) Sports Blog. Its headline: “Barton-Gervinho debacle proves FA needs to invoke strong arm of the law. The events at Newcastle on the Premier League’s opening day show the game is becoming impossible to police.” “Impossible?” With four referees and Barton’s well-known history?
And who’s the Offender? Yes, Arsene. Witness Wilson’s opener: “Thank goodness the FA was not seduced by Arsène Wenger’s sophistry and did the right thing in upholding Gervinho’s three-match ban for violent conduct. The decision was about the only sensible, logical and justifiable reaction to all the silliness that surrounded Arsenal’s fractious first-day encounter at Newcastle.”
And if that’s not enough, try this: “While it was clear to all on Saturday that Barton acted far more aggressively than Gervinho, he was not stupid enough to strike his opponent. Grabbing an opponent by his shirt front and giving him the benefit of your forthright opinion may be sailing close to the wind in terms of acceptable behaviour, but it stops short of violence. I am still not really sure what Barton did to warrant even his yellow card.”
Say what?
Yep, he knows he’s stirring a shit storm: “For the past few days,” he notes, “people have been arguing that Barton was guilty of perpetrating a bigger con on the referee than Gervinho. I don’t think so, because Barton was on the end of a clearly deliberate assault, however feeble its execution.” Ladies and Gents, meet Paul Wilson: my (beloved, alas) Guardian’s Designated Hitman on all things Wenger.
On Tuesday, Walter alluded to his feeling in a Julius Caesar-like ‘Et tu Bruté moment’. I felt the same betrayal when my esteemed paper ran a gratuitously cruel Fan Poll late Tuesday. Unclaimed by any writer, I’d lay this Frankenstein at their Sports Editor’s feet:
Are Arsenal heading for the Europa League? Their captain has left, their manager is unpopular and their best striker is always injured – are the days when Arsenal could confidently expect to finish in the top four over? YES ___ NO ___ (check one)
This past Monday, my “balanced” David Hytner returned to the fray and produced my own ‘et tu David’ moment by focusing readers on Arsene’s state of mind going into Tuesday’s match with Udinese: “The pressure is stifling,” David assured, “but Wenger remains unmoved.” The match is a referendum on Wenger’s competence. “There are different readings of his mood and, on one level, it is hard not to admire his stoicism and faith… The alternative view on Wenger is that his stubbornness is verging on the delusional, that he is teetering on the brink.”
Then Hytner has his “Gotcha!” moment: “When he was asked for the absentees against Udinese, he said that Nasri was suspended [a Freudian slip] and his face creased into a wide smile.” Then to sum with Hytner’s choice word: “Wenger, though, has called for unity at this precarious time and his overriding message was heavily defiant.”
Defiant toward whom? A self-righteous media? Now, every Arsenal piece is a test of Arsene’s character. You see Hytner could have ended his piece by admiring Arsene’s “stoicism and faith”; but, instead, he chose to end with the alternative view – Arsene being thought “delusional” and “defiant”, at “this precarious time”. Make no mistake, the mass media has put Arsene Wenger on trial.
Yep, re: Arsenal v. Newcastle, that’s what they’ve been saying. But just as important is what they are not saying. And here’s just a fraction of what a little context could have added. Consider this from one extremely intelligent commenter on UA: That “Andy Garratt, the same linesman who did not see Vidic’ handball a few months ago, but did see Arshavin (I think it was) offside against Sunderland when he was not.” Won’t reporters remember?
Or consider this from a second extremely intelligent commenter on UA: “The actual process of events, from Gervinho being fouled by Tiote, to Barton fouling Gervinho when he was on the ground, to Taylor hitting Gervinho, and Gervinho hitting Barton… to then come out with a situation where we didn’t get a penalty, and we were the only team to lose a player.” Won’t reporters try to establish an exact sequence?
And try this from a third extremely intelligent commenter on UA: “I am staggered by the number of people defending the sending off of Gervinho whilst only issuing the instigator with a yellow. There has clearly been a loss of perspective by people concerned about the social problems in Britain. Barton play acted by falling after receiving a minor arms length slap- after provoking Gervinho by grabbing him by the shirt off the ground in an act of aggressive violence. In my view there has been a tendency of Football authorities in Britain to disproportionately punish the victim of aggressive behaviour for reacting to aggression for far too long in English football- without doing anything about the instigators. This is a classic example. It is blatantly unfair and is contrary to the rules of natural justice which underpin common law in Britain. Arsenal need to take this blatant act of injustice to the European Court of Human Rights.”
Hyperbole? Maybe, but does this not raise the unspoken – but obvious questions? Why won’t most media?
All this is to say that our players’ reaction to “Bartonian Abuse,” whether immediate or deferred to other games, is reliably drawing flags and suspensions. Just ask Diaby, Sagna, Gervinho and Song. It’s not enough to dismiss their reaction as some do, as simply “unprofessional.” There is, alas, more to this. Indeed, to win Saturday’s match, Barton/Taylor brought a dimension and sparked a battle that must at least be considered. Whatever is truly in their hearts and minds, their willingness to play a rotten card has tarnished the game. Why do they have to view all this treachery as just “Joey being Joey,” and “hey, what else is new?”
But Barton aside, big media is now filling its post-Cesc story vacuum. “Cesc Leaving,” their two-year profit center – and reliable magnet for readers and advertisers – is fast being replaced with Arsene Out – a relentless Arsene-Watch with no holds barred. Arsene’s every move is now a test of legitimacy. Any departure is proof of his failure. And any mistake is used to enflame the crisis that many insist on.
It appears to me that the intended knock-on effect of all this is to try to discredit Arsenal itself as a destination for new signees. Judging from some coverage, nothing will satisfy but to bring Arsene down. They’ve loosed blood in water and now they can smell it. But some cracks in the media still do exist, and Bob Wilson just blew the whistle.
As a fourth extremely intelligent UA commenter alertly reported to UA readers: “Anyone listen to Bob Wilson on BBC radio 5 last night? When questioned about the fans unrest, Wilson responded; ‘I think the press are baying for blood, you can’t just put it down to the fans, the campaign to get Arsene Wenger out of this club and out of this country….don’t you underestimate what is happing on a daily basis in our media.’”
This said, it seems well past time that we, as Arsenal fans, rallied, one and all, to resist the media’s spreading cynicism and to fully defend our team and our coach. And also to help keep UA Media Watch alive and well.
Editorial note: thanks much to bob for this particular article, and to all other members of the UM team. Your contributions have most definitely not been forgotten J I’ll be compiling it all in the coming week. Cheers. -Anne
The harsh truths about Arsenal’s decline
How did we used to get the half time scores?