I woke up this morning to the FiveLive sports report suggesting more turmoil at Anfield as Liverpool’s co-owner George Gillett criticised Rafael Benitez “in the wake of the team’s defeat to Chelsea”. So did George Gillett say that the owner criticised the manager for the team’s performance this season, after the Chelsea game?
The story had more than a ring of truth: George Gillett was said to be the driving force behind the owners’ conversation with Jurgen Klinsmann, which united fans in favour of Rafa and against the board. And turmoil at Anfield is nothing new after Benitez received an instruction to focus on coaching the team in one hostile transatlantic conversation in November 2007.
The first thing I did, then, was to log on to the internet to find out more about the story. I read the Guardian’s article first:
George Gillett ‘blames Rafael Benítez’ for Liverpool’s poor start.
Then in the office I saw the splash on the front page of the Telegraph’s sport section:
George Gillett: blame Rafael Benítez for Liverpool’s failings
Online, the ‘exclusive’ article in The Times which had “obtained a transcript” of a conversation with a fan that George Gillett “expected to be a private chat”.
Only by then, I already knew the story was nonsense. Within minutes of logging on to my favourite fans’ site, Red and White Kop, the following facts became clear:
- the story was not new. The conversation happened on the day of the Liverpool v Hull City game
- the report of the conversation had been in the public domain for some time
- George Gillett was not casting aspersions on Benitez or the team, in the context of the games this season. The comments were taken completely out of context
The Times article was truly misleading. Rather than “obtaining a transcript”, it would appear they cut and paste a forum post. And then, outrageously, edited out the sections written by the person who conducted the interview and passed off the note of a meeting as a “transcript”.
The Guardian has since had the good grace to apologise for its article. It reads:
The original omitted to attribute quotes from the fans’ group to the newspaper where they originally appeared. This has been corrected.
And over 11,000 people have read the post on Red and White Kop which helps clarify the story, mitigating the impact of some of the national newspaper reporting.
Now, there may be a story in here somewhere. Perhaps the transcript was passed to journalists yesterday in an effort to a) stoke further suspicion of the manager b) give a favourable impression of the owners investment or c) motivate fans to agitate against the owners.Maybe some of the journalists ran the article in good faith.
There certainly are issues worthy of further investigation. How much debt really is on the club? How much do the owners envisage for transfers? On what basis does Gillett claim that Liverpool’s financial position is better than Arsenal, Manchester United or Chelsea? And what impact is the delay to the stadium having on the local community around Anfield?
The lack of journalistic inquiry – and the attempts to pass off others work as their own – only goes to serve cynicism amongst Liverpool fans that the media care less for the truth than getting a hostile reaction.