Duncan Jenkins and the comms director

amiable

Xavi6 wrote: »

Good article on The Independent site today with all the background the Jenkins, and also a call for Liverpool to apologise publicly (that'll go down well) -

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/news-and-comment/ian-herbert-joke-isnt-funny-any-more-for-liverpool-tweeter-who-fell-foul-of-clubs-paranoia-8212531.html

Yes. All

JimsAlterEgo

talk about an over reaction from the club

Matt_Trakker

~Rebel~ wrote: »

I don't see how they can just play it off as him having a "joke" - it's not like it was a parody or anything, tipping off funny rumours - he was actively doing his best to make people believe he had inside knowledge. For Months. And then he pisses and moans when someone at the club believed him?

He's had enough publicity already, it would be nice if he'd fuck off now and stop this rubbish tarnishing the club he supposedly loves. Find his attention elsewhere.

If this in any way jeopardizes Chang's position within the club I will be so pissed off.

so wrong, Chang's a bully, read the piece from the English Indo linked above and you'll see that. If you followed Jenkins on Twitter you'd know that he was constantly pulling the piss.
Chill out dude, Chang's a prat and should be run out of the club. Jenkins ins't tarnishing the club, Chang is. Indeed, he's been trying to resolve the issue for 2months but's been left with no other choice than to publish the events.
Read the article, if it doesn't change your mind I'd be very surprised..........and a bit disappointed....that you'd rather blindly follow the suits running your club than the supporters who have no time for thugs like Chang.

LuckyLloyd

~Rebel~ wrote: »

If this in any way jeopardizes Chang's position within the club I will be so pissed off.

Why? Jen Chang is an irrelevance.

amiable

JimsAlterEgo wrote: »

talk about an over reaction from the club

You must have all the details on the affair so?

You also must have had the same reaction every time Fergie bans people?

Xavi6

Mail Sport says Ayre will speak to Cummins as part of an investigation in to how Chang handled it.

If there's any malicious truth to it then Pool should just get shot of him ASAP. As Lloyd says, he's an irrelevance really.

amiable

Xavi6 wrote: »

Mail Sport says Ayre will speak to Cummins as part of an investigation in to how Chang handled it.

If there's any malicious truth to it then Pool should just get shot of him ASAP. As Lloyd says, he's an irrelevance really.

And The Mail are always correct?

Leiva

Xavi6 wrote: »

Mail Sport says Ayre will speak to Cummins as part of an investigation in to how Chang handled it.

If there's any malicious truth to it then Pool should just get shot of him ASAP. As Lloyd says, he's an irrelevance really.

Watch that f*+_::::+@£;$££**<>£ :mad: Duncan Oldhams video a couple of posts back.

This whole thing stinks and me thinks someone has an axe to grind.

Xavi6

amiable wrote: »

And The Mail are always correct?

Did I say that?

murpho999

Xavi6 wrote: »

Mail Sport says Ayre will speak to Cummins as part of an investigation in to how Chang handled it.

If there's any malicious truth to it then Pool should just get shot of him ASAP. As Lloyd says, he's an irrelevance really.

Ayre should sack a guy for trying to find a club mole?

Really people do overreact here.

This is a storm in an internet teacup and will soon pass and be forgotten.

amiable

Xavi6 wrote: »

Did I say that?

amiable wrote: »

And The Mail are always correct?

The fact I put a question mark at the end of my post would suggest you didn't say that.
Someone with a grasp of the English language like yourself should realise that surely?

Xavi6

murpho999 wrote: »

Ayre should sack a guy for trying to find a club mole?

Really people do overreact here.

This is a storm in an internet teacup and will soon pass and be forgotten.

Not Ayre, Chang.

If he's done anything to harm to name/rep of the club then his position is untenable. He's not important enough to be too worried about replacing anyway.

If he's done nothing wrong then Ayre will find out and it'll and be hunky dory.

Xavi6

amiable wrote: »

The fact I put a question mark at the end of my post would suggest you didn't say that.
Someone with a grasp of the English language like yourself should realise that surely?

Your question mark could also be construed as an implication that it's what I meant by linking to the story.

amiable

Xavi6 wrote: »

Your question mark could also be construed as an implication that it's what I meant by linking to the story.

No the question mark means I'm asking a question. It's not that complicated.

Xavi6

amiable wrote: »

No the question mark means I'm asking a question. It's not that complicated.

Ok you win this battle of semantics, not that it's important.

amiable

Xavi6 wrote: »

Ok you win this battle of semantics, not that it's important.

I couldn't agree more

amiable

Xavi6 wrote: »

Mail Sport says Ayre will speak to Cummins as part of an investigation in to how Chang handled it.

If there's any malicious truth to it then Pool should just get shot of him ASAP. As Lloyd says, he's an irrelevance really.

murpho999 wrote: »

Ayre should sack a guy for trying to find a club mole?

Really people do overreact here.

This is a storm in an internet teacup and will soon pass and be forgotten.

Xavi6 wrote: »

Not Ayre, Chang.

If he's done anything to harm to name/rep of the club then his position is untenable. He's not important enough to be too worried about replacing anyway.

If he's done nothing wrong then Ayre will find out and it'll and be hunky dory.

So Chang should sack Chang?

Xavi6

amiable wrote: »

So Chang should sack Chang?

Having an off English day it seems, read it as Ayre should be sacked

But yeah, if Chang is guilty of anything untoward be should just be booted

murpho999

Xavi6 wrote: »

Having an off English day it seems, read it as Ayre should be sacked

But yeah, if Chang is guilty of anything untoward be should just be booted

Well I still don't see why the one-sided perception of a guy who had a fictitious and untruthful blog/twitter should be believed.

Ayre speaks to Chang and Chang says the allegations are false then that's the end of it unless there are recordings.

AdamD

murpho999 wrote: »

Ayre should sack a guy for trying to find a club mole?

Really people do overreact here.

This is a storm in an internet teacup and will soon pass and be forgotten.

Well if its true he did more than just 'try to find a mole' :rolleyes:

amiable

AdamD wrote: »

Well if its true he did more than just 'try to find a mole' :rolleyes:

Likewise if it is true that Sean Cummins has such close links to Duncan Oldham he should be told to fcukoff.
It's so easy to just swallow the details that are in the rags

JimsAlterEgo

amiable wrote: »

You must have all the details on the affair so?

You also must have had the same reaction every time Fergie bans people?

who I support is irrelevant, get off your high horse. :rolleyes:

amiable

JimsAlterEgo wrote: »

who I support is irrelevant, get off your high horse. :rolleyes:

So you won't answer the questions.

And you talk about me being on a high horse

JimsAlterEgo

I dont have all of the details, just whats in the public domain and as far as I can see its got nothing to do with Fergie banning people, yet you persist in turning every pool discussion that you dont like into a Utd vs Pool sh!tfest, now Fvck off and discuss the topic in question.

amiable

JimsAlterEgo wrote: »

I dont have all of the details, just whats in the public domain and as far as I can see its got nothing to do with Fergie banning people, yet you persist in turning every pool discussion that you dont like into a Utd vs Pool sh!tfest, now Fvck off and discuss the topic in question.

I'm not turning anything in to a Liverpool v United sh1tfest as you put it.
I think it's relevant that Fergie routinely bans journalists from his press conferences for asking questions he doesn't like and because of this I if you react the same is relevant.

You don't have all the details as you claim yourself yet you are trigger happy enough to condone without knowing all the details.

What's your take on Duncan Jenkins possibly being involved in scams on normal football fans in the past and seemingly is now looking to sell his story to the media to make a few bob on this?

I'll repeat it again, anonymous blogger repeatedly tells dozens of lies over and over again but suddenly is telling the truth and we should all just believe him and feel sorry for him? That would be naive but then it doesn't give you something to bash Liverpool with

skywalker

Xavi6 wrote: »

Good article on The Independent site today with all the background the Jenkins, and also a call for Liverpool to apologise publicly (that'll go down well) -

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/news-and-comment/ian-herbert-joke-isnt-funny-any-more-for-liverpool-tweeter-who-fell-foul-of-clubs-paranoia-8212531.html

The interesting part about this article is it names the mystery forum that Duncan supposedly got his team line ups from. est1892

And then he stumbled on a gold mine. Posting on the Liverpool FC forum, est1892, he discovered how, two hours before kick-off someone was repeatedly reporting the correct Liverpool starting XI – that holy grail of football writers. The 11 names and no more were posted. The aspiring, breathless "Duncan" immediately republished it each time.

Jax Teller

More rambling on and a picture of the meeting
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2218464/Jen-Chang-Duncan-Jenkins-CCTV-image-Liverpool-investigate-harassment-claims.html

~Rebel~

Matt_Trakker wrote: »

so wrong, Chang's a bully, read the piece from the English Indo linked above and you'll see that. If you followed Jenkins on Twitter you'd know that he was constantly pulling the piss.
Chill out dude, Chang's a prat and should be run out of the club. Jenkins ins't tarnishing the club, Chang is. Indeed, he's been trying to resolve the issue for 2months but's been left with no other choice than to publish the events.
Read the article, if it doesn't change your mind I'd be very surprised..........and a bit disappointed....that you'd rather blindly follow the suits running your club than the supporters who have no time for thugs like Chang.

I read the article - but it's an article which tells only Jenkins side of the story, and quite obviously has a very biased slant towards him.

Yes he made jokes on his twitter feed, that doesn't make it a parody. He 100% tried to look like he had inside information to get himself some attention. I don't really care if he's a supporter, he actively went out to his way to lie to people, and imo is nothing but a complete douche.

The Anfield Wrap gave their take on it a few days ago and it was decidedly different to that Independent article posted above. They also stated how much pressure they received to do exactly what the Independent did and lambast Chang, without a shred of proof for these threats against his family (aside from the word of a man who's spent the last few months lying for attention).

And I'm not blindly following anyone, that's what you're doing in being so supportive of Jenkins based solely on his word. Innocent until proven guilty is the law of the land, and so far I have yet to see even the tinniest hint that Chang did what Jenkins claims in threatening his family. Again, if it comes down to who's word would I accept, I'd trust the one who doesn't have a track record of consistently lying.

bohsman

~Rebel~ wrote: »

He 100% tried to look like he had inside information to get himself some attention. I don't really care if he's a supporter, he actively went out to his way to lie to people, and imo is nothing but a complete douche.

Like 90% of football gossip twatters on twitter then?

citytillidie

All there is to it, this joke twitter account as close ties to Kop Talk, I would take anything that is said from them with a huge pinch of salt

opr

amiable wrote: »

Likewise if it is true that Sean Cummins has such close links to Duncan Oldham he should be told to fcukoff.
It's so easy to just swallow the details that are in the rags

Where are you getting these links? I haven't seen anyone other than yourself saying they had close ties?

skywalker wrote: »

The interesting part about this article is it names the mystery forum that Duncan supposedly got his team line ups from. est1892

He was a big poster on said site. The part of which he was getting the line-up's and some other info isn't available to most members of the site. It's hidden away with only a small number of people who have access.

~Rebel~ wrote: »

The Anfield Wrap gave their take on it a few days ago and it was decidedly different to that Independent article posted above. They also stated how much pressure they received to do exactly what the Independent did and lambast Chang, without a shred of proof for these threats against his family (aside from the word of a man who's spent the last few months lying for attention).

The podcast this week actually has a five minute segment at the start this week in which they talk about it. They admit to knowing that at the very least Chang threatened to have his season ticket removed.

Opr

5starpool

Strange story either way, but if there can be any proof of any family threats then Chang is done at the club, rightly so. Not sure how that can be proved or disproved though sadly.

Mr Alan

opr wrote: »

Chang threatened to have his season ticket removed.

Which would be perfectly acceptable if the club felt he'd cost them money with his "source"

K-9

opr wrote: »

The podcast this week actually has a five minute segment at the start this week in which they talk about it. They admit to knowing that at the very least Chang threatened to have his season ticket removed.

Opr

Unless Chang said so to them how can they know?

~Rebel~

opr wrote: »

The podcast this week actually has a five minute segment at the start this week in which they talk about it. They admit to knowing that at the very least Chang threatened to have his season ticket removed.

Opr

Yeah, I mean this is the sort of action I would expect to have been taken if someone was purposefully compromising the clubs dealings. I would expect once it was confirmed that he was talking shite he'd be free to use it again.

Fair enough imo, considering he's the one who actively said he had a mole at Anfield.

bohsman

Mr Alan wrote: »

Which would be perfectly acceptable if the club felt he'd cost them money with his "source"

Where do you draw the line? Is it anyone that posts a rumour about Liverpool? A certain amount of followers? How about people on this forum? If you get too close to the truth with a post about a transfer target should the club take away your season ticket or ban you from the ground incase you cost the club money? Will you be more careful about what transfer rumours you post about in future?

bohsman

Actually if there is truth in the claim that Roma came out with this I wonder what the chances that some of the most followed people like Ballague or whatever are getting paid to post certain rumours.

~Rebel~

bohsman wrote: »

Where do you draw the line? Is it anyone that posts a rumour about Liverpool? A certain amount of followers? How about people on this forum? If you get too close to the truth with a post about a transfer target should the club take away your season ticket or ban you from the ground incase you cost the club money? Will you be more careful about what transfer rumours you post about in future?

Well, in this case, he regularly referenced his "mole at Anfield", so I'd imagine that's kind of the line...

I would imagine something solid would be needed for action to be taken. In this instance it was a public "admission".

opr

~Rebel~ wrote: »

Yeah, I mean this is the sort of action I would expect to have been taken if someone was purposefully compromising the clubs dealings. I would expect once it was confirmed that he was talking shite he'd be free to use it again.

Fair enough imo, considering he's the one who actively said he had a mole at Anfield.

Seems completely crazy to me that our Director of Communications should be meeting randomers off twitter and threatening to take season tickets away. I don't really care what details surround it or what Chang thought with regards to him having a mole.

Opr

Mr Alan

bohsman wrote: »

Where do you draw the line? Is it anyone that posts a rumour about Liverpool? A certain amount of followers? How about people on this forum? If you get too close to the truth with a post about a transfer target should the club take away your season ticket or ban you from the ground incase you cost the club money? Will you be more careful about what transfer rumours you post about in future?

The line is pretty simple. He claimed he had a source who was within the club and who was giving him this information. He claimed this constantly for months on end.

bohsman

Mr Alan wrote: »

The line is pretty simple. He claimed he had a source who was within the club and who was giving him this information. He claimed this constantly for months on end.

Don't read the LFC thread very often but believe there's a few ITK people there

opr

K-9 wrote: »

Unless Chang said so to them how can they know?

Listen to the podcast, it's a massively convoluted story. Short answer is that Chang rang one of them and advised he would take the threat of removing the season ticket away if Jenkins apologised to him or something along those lines.

Opr

Jason Todd

Ian Ayre is to meet with Sean Cummins...

The pressure on Liverpool to explain their meeting with the creator of the fictional "Duncan Jenkins" Twitter character escalated yesterday after he received personal threats on an internet forum which posted an image of him and his son.

Sean Cummins, the 35-year-old copywriter who created the Twitter character, declined to discuss the matter publicly yesterday, in order not to draw attention from the latest developments in the campaign to establish justice for the 96 fans who died at Hillsborough. But the forum abuse, seen by The Independent, came four days after Cummins claimed the club's communications director, Jen Chang, had told him he would come under personal attack if he failed to make public the fact that @duncanjenkinsFC had no inside track on transfers at Anfield.

Liverpool's managing director Ian Ayre will meet Cummins at some point after Saturday's home game with Reading, when the writer may discover more about whether the club intend to investigate his own allegations that Chang threatened him when the two men met for a lunch lasting one hour and 45 minutes at Manchester's Evuna restaurant on 22 August.

The club said yesterday that there was no evidence of threats. Asked why a director of the club would spend such a length of time with the creator of a Twitter character, a spokesman said that "Duncan Jenkins" had a substantial social media following, including a number of national newspaper journalists, which authenticated him. He also said that the "Duncan Jenkins" account provided no evidence that "he" was a Liverpool supporter. There is no taped recording of the meeting, Ayre confirmed that he had been in contact with the writer but could not discuss the issue at this stage.

There was substantial support for Cummins on mainstream social media yesterday, with minority criticism from some observers on Twitter who feel the story is "one-sided." But no detailed picture of the meeting or the reasons for it has been forthcoming from the Liverpool end, to challenge the immensely detailed log of emails and text messages to and from Chang, which Cummins has preserved. There are no signs that Liverpool intend to sue over the claims.

Some observers maintain the view that Cummins is an attention-seeker, though this seems to stem from the "Duncan" comedy character, who as a fantasist aspiring journalist liked to say he was right, being confused with a real individual. "If I had wanted attention I would have dropped the cover and revealed it was me," Cummins said on Monday.

The Twitter feed of the sporting intelligence website – @sportingintel – yesterday published one of two images Cummins has secured from Evuna, which demonstrate that he and Chang met at 1.03pm on 22 August and parted company on 2.49pm that day. The respected Anfield Wrap website also has evidence that Chang did threaten to remove the Liverpool season ticket Cummins shares. Ayre told the Associated Press at the Leaders in Football conference last week that "in our 10-year plan, digital media is at the forefront of what we do" and the club have started holding dedicated press conferences for writers from beyond the mainstream media.

Link

Paully D

Apology from Liverpool:

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/liverpool-have-apologised-to-the-creator-of-comedy-spoof-1408429?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

The bizarre tale of the Liverpool FC director who allegedly threatened the comedy creator of spoof journalist Duncan Jenkins may have entered its final chapter today – after the club made a written apology to Liverpool fan Sean Cummins.

Website www.sportingintelligence.com have broken the news that Liverpool’s managing director Ian Ayre has made a written apology on behalf of the club for the behaviour of communications director Jen Chang towards Cummins, the creator of spoof journalist ‘Duncan Jenkins’, during a meeting between the pair on 22 August and in the days afterwards.

Cummins, a 35-year-old copy writer from south Manchester, is the man behind Jenkins, who he used as a vehicle for writing tongue-in-cheek 'scoops' relating to the Anfield club - mostly regarding transfer whispers and recycled internet gossip, a lot of guesswork and comedy fantasy.

But Chang became so concerned about the idea that 'Jenkins' had a mole inside the club that he arranged to meet Cummins in a Manchester restaurant, and according to Sportingintelligence "....asked Cummins to tweet as Jenkins that a) ‘Jenkins’ was not real; b) ‘Jenkins’ had no club mole".

The Sportinintelligence report goes on:

"Cummins detailed the meeting and the aftermath in an explosive blog post on 12 October, in which he outlined a series of accusations against Chang, including that Chang had effectively threatened to ban him from games by cancelling his shared season ticket.

"Sportingintelligence has established beyond doubt that the meeting took place; that all the tweets and emails within the blog are genuine; and that Liverpool have seen evidence of the above.

"Ayre met Cummins in person in Liverpool last week to hear Cummins’ side of the story. Ayre held a second meeting with Cummins in Liverpool today, when he handed over a letter of apology.

"Ayre writes in the letter: 'Based on everything I have heard and seen, including information provided by the parties involved in the matter, I acknowledge some of the elements you highlight were not appropriate… I would therefore like to apologise to you on behalf of Liverpool FC, for any upset and distress this caused you. Clearly it is not appropriate for me to comment on how the club is managing this internally, and I trust you understand this.”

Cummins, the creator of 'perspiring journalist' Jenkins, who gained more than 40,000 followers on Twitter, told Sportingintelligence: “As a Liverpool supporter, I fully appreciate that our great club has got a lot more serious issues to handle than what a spoof character was writing on Twitter.

“It was never, ever my intention to distract from those issues, and I was shocked and surprised things unfolded as they have done, over a made-up character who was always clearly trivial.

“All I ever wanted was an apology and I got one in writing today.”

TerryTibbs!

lolz.

Leiva

Good.

Done and dusted.

move on.

amiable

A copy of the letter of apology

Yakult

amiable wrote: »

A copy of the letter of apology

seems legit..

RasTa

Yakult wrote: »

seems legit..

+1

Red Crow

This blame Suarez thing is just absolutely hilarious