Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
6 minutes ago, Finnegan said:

why would anything be "embargoed" until today?

It’s for the print press. It gives them a chance to fine tune their stories so there’s fresh content for the weekend papers so radio and TV don’t take all the content before the papers get chance. It’s been going on for years. Gives them time to research and fact check before going to print too.

Posted
Quote

Part of last night's press conference was embargoed until today

Can anyone tell me what that means in practical terms? I'm struggling to understand what embargo means in that context.

Posted
1 minute ago, taupe said:

Can anyone tell me what that means in practical terms? I'm struggling to understand what embargo means in that context.

Some of the interview is embargoed so the papers can print it rather than straight on the internet I think, could be wrong. 

Posted
6 minutes ago, BrianBeane said:

Jason is a fan and has consistently pushed difficult lines of questioning which others have been too shy to do. Have we embargoed parts of press conferences before? I can't imagine Jason trying to push clickbait nonsense but may be wrong.

You’re right re Jason has definitely been asking tough questions the rest in the media won’t. Embargoing is standard tbh can’t remember the exact reason it happens. But from what Jason has said this might be worth listening to. 

  • Like 1
Posted
17 minutes ago, SecretPro said:

****s sake.

Thought he did that last night, but subject to embargo until today?

Posted
1 minute ago, Ginger_Filbert said:

Some of the interview is embargoed so the papers can print it rather than straight on the internet I think, could be wrong. 

I've not heard the word used in that context before. Not being a press person, I've still no idea what it means.

Posted
10 minutes ago, Finnegan said:

 

Without wanting to fall in to the trap of being whipped in to a frenzy, surely that can only be comments that make things worse?


If he'd rowed back on anything he'd said and been more diplomatic then why would anything be "embargoed" until today?

Sometimes it may be comments which would have impacted on a situation that occurred that day. For example, something which may hurt us on deadline day in terms of getting players in and out. 
 

It’s reasonably common. For example, Bruno Lage’s entire pre match conference was embargoed until the day after this midweek set of games 

  • Like 1
Posted

Who 'embargoes' it? The club? The interviewee? Is it an informal agreement with the press, a kind of quid-pro-quo for being able to attend?

 

If it's sensitive material, someone speaking too soon or out of turn, or maybe without full knowledge of the facts, then I could understand. But for it to be not ok one day but ok the next kinda baffles me.

Posted (edited)

Ok, I did a bit of a web search and have a handle on it now. Maybe he said something more on the Fofana situation he alluded to??? Intriguing but not life threatening methinks!

 

 

Edited by taupe
Posted
11 minutes ago, FLINTHAMFC said:

Are you seriously equating giving the person you love £200 to giving someone you employ tens of millions?

Principles remain the same, read the last section of my post.

Top provides the money Rodgers decides who to buy, simple and the basic seperation of business acumen and football knowledge.

variation from this obvious use of peoples strengths leads to owners getting delusional and making disastrous transfer decisions and managers resigning.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...