Swindon's New Media Policy Denies Fans Objective Coverage | US | Translation

Have you heard the story about the League One club that banned press coverage and ended up on the wrong end of a long and astute analysis from the New York Times? Swindon Town fans undoubtedly have.

They are a select group – a community of football fans that have not seen Premier League turf for more than 20 years; not known domestic cup success in more than 40 years; and have nobly braved the dark days of League Two ignominy.

However, about 8,000 of those fans will soon stream through the gates of a 15,000-seater stadium hoping that this year will be different to last; that Swindon is a club in motion and not some backwater underdog best known for being the side where Glenn Hoddle and Paolo di Canio cut their managerial teeth.

This hope, though, should be tempered by the installation of an egregious media policy. Its new "arrangement", as it refers to in a terse denial of blanket-ban accusations, will see an "in-house journalist" – a PR person to you and I – conduct pre-match interviews with management and players. The club will allow post-match interviews and BBC commentary, but this is a Football League obligation rather than a courtesy. The Swindon hierarchy has seen fit to effectively wipe out any neutral reportage or questioning of its staff: playing or otherwise.

"The chairman's view of the local paper is that it has got to be a cheerleader or nothing," Gary Lawrence, editor of the Swindon Advertiser, told The Guardian last month. "So, at the moment, we are nothing. That is not to say we have an agenda against the club – we just want to cover it from the fan's point of view."

Supporter groups are also understandably aggrieved. Michael Brunskill of the Football Supporters' Federation suggests: "Banning the media does nothing but send the message that you have something to hide and don't want to engage with the local community."

Far more so than the Chelseas and Manchester Citys of this world, Swindon is a community club. It relies heavily on a localised body of support because China, Singapore and America just aren't interested in the lower-league game. The policy has effectively removed any real immediacy between footballer and fan. It has also denied the club's staff the opportunity to promote individualism within a team structure.

In its most stark terms, a media ban endangers the very existence of Swindon Town FC.

Journalism is a bitter and fickle industry, no one is in doubt of this, but it is also (when done right) a necessary conduit for truth. That truth may manifest itself in a Saturday interview with a player; it may well be news of a sacking; it could be details of a club teetering on the brink of administration. The notion that any questioning of this sort should only be handled by the club's "in-house journalist" (PR guy) is a farcical one. Furthermore, it is a swift boot between the legs for those who are paying money to support a third-tier team.

The very need for objective press coverage became obvious in Swindon only a few years ago when the club neared financial ruin and was handed a transfer embargo. This news, ultimately, is what facilitated Lee Power to take over at the club, following a buyout by a consortium led by Jed McCrory shortly beforehand, and pull it back from the likelihood of life in the Conference hinterland. The irony now seems lost on Power.

Power has blamed the media for the recent tumult at Swindon and suggested the press makes up stories. However, it was former chairman McCrory who allegedly made accusations of match-fixing against Power. This was repeated by Power in court during a legal battle over the club's ownership. The press justifiably reported it. It is a matter of fact that prior to his ownership of Swindon, Power held a directorship of a printing company that, after his departure, was liquidated and left creditors, including Celtic and Rangers, millions of pounds out of pocket. The press justifiably reported this also.

The Swindon chairman has effectively waged war over his objection to how the club is portrayed by two local outlets. "Their stance all the time is negative. We are charged by the league for an illegal approach to a non-league player, that is top of the list; we sign a player from Liverpool, that is three down," he told The Guardian. Regardless of his comments about the media's "stance", these actions are what can destroy teams – especially ones living hand-to-mouth. No amount of Liverpool loanees are going to save a small club which has been charged with not trading honestly. Power's stance challenges the old newspaper adage that journalism is something somebody else doesn't want you to print and everything else is advertising.

Unsurprisingly, Swindon's "in-house journalist" (PR guy) refused to make any comment. Similarly, but more worryingly, the FA couldn't even muster a response to requests by the National Union of Journalists to take action.

Fans deserve truth. They do not deserve bleached and authority-filtered press releases. They do not deserve to be treated with abject distain by their team's key-holders. The policy appears to be as much an effort in keeping rumours and conjecture to a minimum as it is keeping the fanbase ignorant of where and on what their money is being spent. It is easily done though in a post-Leveson Britain.

@morethanaphelan