A post from ZimPaul.
The role of mass media is not in any way to reflect consensus, especially a consensus that will upset a status quo and vested interests. A nod in the direction of “popular consensus” maybe, where it doesn’t matter, while all the time selecting “news” in the opposite direction to that of consensus. The role of the mass media is to reflect the interests and perspectives of the establishment, or more specifically the money order.
The stakes are probably quite high. The entirety of EPL, as a global brand, its major clubs as global brands, players, the football association, and layer upon layer of economic interest built around this, Sky being in super-league stakes, but there are many others, many forms and methods of derivative income, such as advertising, and these represent the “money order”. It’s worth many billions in annual revenues. The key individuals making the key decisions number not more than hundreds. These people and their money matter, and their perspective, shaped largely by how to increase revenues and market share, is more important than consensus. The new money is very important in this (City, Chelsea, others).
EPL is in competition with the other Euro leagues, and streets ahead in terms of global market share. The point is to maintain and improve market share. Ultimately, there might be some forms of merger over market share, if it can be shown that revenues would increase, and in which a Euro super-league would result, a decision of the market, not football, but for now its competition, and EPL rules the roost globally.
The EPL product is in one way pure marketing genius, and in another way simply a crass formula that has been proven to work; see my earlier posts. this is why it will not change, the market is essentially conservative. I may be off here and there, since I don’t actually know the formula, but the principle is correct. It’s just TV, and revenues.
One asks again then what kind of influence Arsenal, one club, representing miniscule economic interests relative to the whole money order, might bring to bear? We are also capitalists, making money and large personal incomes, sometimes fortunes, but we run a tight ship and play by the rules. We run a business enterprise, and at the same time have a great deal of integrity when it comes to respect for football culture.
And yet, this highly negative, but I think realistic appraisal ignores facts in our advantage. Popular consensus is one, and it is clearly changing fast in our favour. Another is that the EPL has powerful competitors, such as Bundesliga, who have much in common with Arsenal’s approach and highly respect us. Yet another are the smaller clubs, who will increasingly see their future, indeed their only route, by broadly adapting Arsenal’s strategy to their own situation (financially and in football) despite the money order. We are showing what can be done to bring greater equity into the equation. We are showing that the interests of football, as opposed to rampant consumerism, is not powerless. It has more leverage than it thinks it has.
Therefore, the future is with us. But don’t expect it to be easy, or comfortable. I would have thought it has already been discussed amongst a few people that a City win makes perfect sense for the future of the EPL super-brand and its global market. When Pellegrini says “we are the Real Madrid now”, I suspect he is not only talking to the masses, but to the money. Very marketable that one.