HOME   ARCHIVE   GALLERY   SHOP   ABOUT US      
 

 
SALFORD STAR VERSUS SALFORD COUNCIL
 

Star date: 28th July 2010  

SALFORD COUNCIL REJECTS STAR APPEAL

"…you haven't published any positive stuff on MediaCityUK" John Merry

Yesterday, Salford City Council's Cabinet rejected Salford Star's appeal against the Council's decision to stop the city's community committees from funding the community magazine. One of the reasons given was that Salford Star hadn't done any positive stories on MediaCityUK.

Meanwhile, evidence that the Council brought to the `trial' purporting to show that the Salford Star was `not balanced' in its coverage, we believe, was totally discredited. But the goalposts kept shifting…

Very long but edited highlights here…  and updated 4th August 2010


Salford Council Cabinet Letter To Salford Star
click image to enlarge

SALFORD COUNCIL ON TRIAL

"I don't know which planet you're on or where you're coming from..." Stephen Kingston, Salford Star

Yesterday the Salford Star's appeal against Salford Council's decision to block the city's community committees from funding the magazine went back to the Council's Cabinet for the second time.

At an earlier hearing in June, officers of the Council had accused the Salford Star of not meeting the Council's criteria for funding publications because it was `overtly political' and `not balanced'without producing any evidence.

"We've not been provided with the written evidence of examples of political bias" said Council Leader, John Merry at the time "What I want to do is to defer the decision until I've got written evidence of whether it meets the criteria or not. I don't think that on the basis of the evidence I've got before me that I can make a decision. I've not got the evidence in front of me one way or the other…"

For an edited transcript of the June meeting and more background information click here…

For this hearing Sue Lightup, Salford Council's Strategic Director for Community Health and Social Care, produced a report as "additional evidence" to respond to the Salford Star's appeal. The evidence was based on 22 articles on the Salford Star website, from which she concluded…

• "There is not one quote from an individual referred to which is a response to the accusations – quotes are used from reports but with little evidence of direct contact with individuals about their quotes."

• "the articles are not balanced as they focus significantly on the Council, rarely about other public bodies…"

• "…all of the articles presented a critical or cynical view about the Council, its decisions or people" and "There were constant references about the Council that inferred lack of integrity, truth and accountability."

Also included as evidence was the National Union of Journalists Code of Conduct.

To see the full report and the 22 articles referred to, click here, and then click on Salford Star Appeal 1

THE HEARING

Sue Lightup, for Salford Council, took the Cabinet through her report and concluded that in terms of the criteria for funding publications she would still advise members to reject the Salford Star's appeal.

THE QUESTIONING OF SUE LIGHTUP

Stephen Kingston, for the Salford Star: Did you actually read these 22 articles?
Sue Lightup: I read every single one of them
SK: I went back through them all last night that's why I'm so knackered today – in every single article you've mentioned there were direct quotes from either representatives of the Council or the people who we were referring to. I can take you through every single article you've mentioned and name the person we quoted. I don't know which planet you're on or where you're coming from because every single one of those articles had a direct quote from the Council or quotes from councillors or officers.
SL: I'm not disagreeing with that, I'm actually suggesting in my report that you do quote people.
SK: It doesn't say that in the report – it says that there's no quotes from councillors – "There is not one quote from an individual referred to which is a response to the accusations" Every single article you read has this.
SL: I'm suggesting that there isn't an opportunity for people to respond. The quotes are out of context.
SK: Would you like me to take you through every single one of those articles – have you got time?

John Merry: Not really. Go on then, give us an example
SK: The article cited about the police probe into Salford Star – there's a direct quote from Nick Page… The Safeguarding Slammed article – a direct quote from John Merry, that's you, in response to it.
JM: Yeah…

SK: Another example – the 10% rises for the NDC – a direct quote from Councillor Bill Hinds responding to that article.

Councillor Lancaster: Did you ask Councillor Hinds for a quote in response to the issue?
SK: He's here – it was a direct quote from you wasn't it?
Bill Hinds: Yeah

SK:  We do come back and we are accurate and fair in everything that we do. I can go on and on and on and on…

John Merry: I've read virtually all your website…
SK: You love it…
JM: I'll just quote one example you might want to think about – the `Freedom of speech goes out of the window' headline…who attempted to censor you?
SK: It was a paraphrase of a quote from the Chair of Vertical Villages tenants association.
JM: It's nothing to do with freedom of speech
SK: We would argue that it is actually
JM: Go on then make your presentation…

THE SALFORD STAR PRESENTATION

Stephen Kingston: The report states that the Salford Star concentrates on the Council and doesn't cover other public bodies. Well, the public bodies we have looked into over the last few years include the NDC, NWDA,  the NHS Trust, Salford Royal Trust, Hazel Blears and other MPs, URC, Salix, Strategic Partnership Executive and Pathfinder. If there are any others in Salford let me know and we'll investigate them too.

To say that we only concentrate on Salford Council is untrue. What we do is look at the Council in great detail because the Council is the accountable body for most of these organisations. We've done loads on NWDA, and on Pathfinder and the University…

You say that the Star infers that the Council has got "a lack of truth, integrity and accountability" – I don't think we've ever said that the Council tells lies; we've said it misleads, which I'll stand by…and a lack of accountability – yeah, absolutely a lack of accountability.

It's a game of cat and mouse when you're a journalist – you have information you don't want us to see and it's up to us to dig it out – accountability is what we're here for. Part of the reason the Salford Star was set up was to make public bodies more accountable.

Of course we would argue that there is a lack of accountability – for instance in this very meeting, after we've been kicked out, there's an agenda item on the public funding for Chapel Street. As a journalist I'd really like to see that because I get asked by residents all the time what's happening down there – but we're not allowed to see it, which to me is a lack of accountability.

But the main thrust is that you're saying we're not balanced and we don't quote people who we feature. But I've got evidence here of every single article mentioned in that report with direct quotes from the Council or whoever we're on about.

You've also brought in the NUJ Code. The NUJ membership and branches in Manchester and Salford are probably our biggest backers. Why would the union back something that breaks its own code of conduct?

THE QUESTIONING OF SALFORD STAR

Sue Lightup: The Salford Star say they don't breach the criteria – three officers say they do breach the criteria…There are two areas where we feel it does breach the criteria in the political nature of the magazine and that it doesn't take a balanced approach. Those were the two key areas where we have a difference of opinion
Stephen Kingston: I haven't seen any evidence of it. Last time we came to Cabinet people were saying around the table that there was no evidence and I'm still waiting to see some evidence. Show me the evidence…

John Merry: Alright. Derek – do you want to ask a question?
Derek Antrobus: No

Margaret Morris: You claim a number of organisations that you're critical of…
SK: Not critical, investigating…
MM: Do you ever do any positive articles on the things that they've achieved. And can you give me some examples? SK: Absolutely. The University's art shows, the eco houses…
JM: What about Media City?
SK: We're investigating it – it's not open yet.
MM: Can I ask about Salford Royal then – have you done any positive stories about it?
SK: We did lots of stories around the campaign to keep the maternity unit open and we're involved in the campaign to keep it open now.
MM: Have you ever written anything about the things it's achieved?
SK: Has anyone sent us a press release about it?
MM: You're an investigative journalist
SK: We investigate – Salford Council and the NHS have massive press offices pumping out stories.

JM: Not to say that I don't acknowledge the important role of an investigative newspaper, even one like the Star that investigates me from time to time.
SK: That's healthy in a democracy
JM: Absolutely and that's where there's no disagreement between us – the problem is do I think the Council should fund it…
SK: We're not asking the Council to fund it, we're asking the community to fund it through its devolved budget. That is the whole point and crux of the argument, and you are stopping them doing it.
JM:
We have tried to devolve as much power as possible to the community but it is still council money, it is still money that comes from council coffers, and as such it has to be subject to the same rules and regulations as council money – I know I'm getting tedious now but the point is that it is council money. Like I said, I would even support some of the stuff that's in the Star but it's not the same as saying that the Council should support it. And if the Council did fund it, it would destroy the raison d'etre of the Star. If we were funding it we'd have to have some editorial control over what would be published in the Star and I don't think you'd be keen on that anyway.
SK: We'll worry about that afterwards. Yes, I agree that the Council has got to be whatever body that needs to do whatever - but you say you've had to put criteria in place and we're saying that we don't breach those criteria because you've presented no evidence for it.

JM: OK the Hazel Blears Must Go campaign…
SK: Oh not that again – we went over that last time.
JM:The fact that you haven't published any positive stuff on Media City -because you're investigating it means that you've taken a view… We mentioned the `freedom of speech' headline… And Councillor Antrobus wasn't approached directly for a response to his article…

SK: No, hold on, just stop on that – Councillor Antrobus produced a Labour Party press release saying whatever about the green belt. We were the only publication to actually say that was a Labour Party press release and wasn't council policy. Every other publication that covered it said it was a U-turn in council policy – we were the only publication that went back to the source.

JM: Councillor Antrobus do you want to say anything about that?
Derek Antrobus: No

JM: The fact remains that there are issues about the way that you approached it. I find myself in quite a difficult position because one of the things I am sympathetic to is the idea that there should be a campaigning journal within Salford, it's just that I don't necessarily think it's the job of the Council to actually fund it .

SK: What is this `I don't think'? The Council report begins with Sue Lightfoot's `I don't think' – it's all subjective. I repeat, show me some evidence of where we've broken the criteria. Are we overtly political? Are we not balanced ? I've given you evidence today that every single article mentioned in that report was balanced. You've written in that report that we're overtly political with no evidence for it.

JM: I've given you numerous examples of where I felt that you had overstepped the mark…I don't think that we could come to the conclusion otherwise that the magazine takes a particular editorial view and I think that's significant. I don't think it's a magazine that shouldn't be published, it's a question of whether it's appropriate with the particular editorial stance it takes throughout its articles…it isn't the job of the Council to fund what is a polemical magazine.

JM: Anybody else want to comment?

Silence.

SK: We've got a story on the site this morning about child poverty and as a journalist you have to be a bit polemical when you find out that 60% of kids in Salford are living in poverty. That, quite frankly, is disgusting.

JM: Actually I didn't find that article particularly offensive.
SK: It wasn't supposed to be…
JM: You're perfectly entitled to ask questions, you're perfectly entitled to have opinions, that's why I take exception to freedom of speech and censorship arguments. If you can get the funding elsewhere then you could produce your magazine. The question is should we be supporting the magazine through what is, in effect, public money so that it can convey a particular polemical view point which I would argue has got political tones . Anybody else want to comment?

Silence.

SK: No-one? Oh come on…

THE CABINET VOTE

JM: I want to stress that this is not about what personal views we have about the Star it's about whether it breaches the code. My view is that having read these stories I think that there is a clear viewpoint behind it which could land us in trouble. I certainly think that if it was a magazine in support of what the Council was doing we'd be in the same situation.

SK: What you're saying is that no publication in Salford will ever be funded?
JM: There are guidelines
SK: But we haven't breached them, we've just been arguing about that. Give me the evidence…

Margaret Morris: Looking at the criteria and the guidance given to community committees, about a balanced approached giving proportionate information on issues, you haven't demonstrated that you do that – you give your point of view and that's it.
SK: For every single article in that report we have direct quotes in response…
MM: That isn't what I'm saying.
JM: It's perfectly possible to give a quote from someone within the context of a misleading article. The Press Complaints Commission deals with loads and loads of stories, just the fact that you've got a quote doesn't actually mean that it's necessarily balanced… Alright, are we ready to vote? Anyone in favour of the appeal?

Two Salford Star hands go up…

JM: You don't have a vote…

The Cabinet votes unanimously to reject the Salford Star appeal.

Councillor Connor: I'm voting against it based on the fact that we don't fund any magazine, not on this particular case.
John Merry: I think we've made it clear that we've not cast an opinion about the quality of journalism but that it shouldn't be funded by public money…

Stop Press: 4th August 2010

A letter from Salford Council signed by Alan Westwood has been received re the appeal. It states:

"The cabinet resolved to dismiss the appeal as: The application fails to meet the agreed criteria in respect of Guidance to Community Committees re Spending of Devolved Budgets on Publications...

"The City Council has statutory duties to ensure that any monies it spends either directly or devolved through community committees are in accordance with Section 2 of the Local Government Act 1986. This precludes the publication of material by the Council  which appears to be designed to affect support for a particular party or in support of a party political campaign."

Salford Star response:

We have never `affected support' for any political party or any party political campaign. Any independent judge would see this for themselves. Unfortunately Salford Council is its own judge and jury with everything it does. Which is why publications like the Salford Star are so vital to democracy.

 


 

Richard Carvath wrote
at 2:45:45 PM on Saturday, August 7, 2010
Freemasonry masquerades as a movement devoted to doing good works. It is not. Freemasonry is first and foremost an occult Luciferic religion with a vision for a new world order and a plan for one world government under Lucifer. Many low-level masons (the first 3 ordinary degrees in particular) are unaware of the true nature of the organisation they belong to. Higher level masons know exactly what is going on and the top masons (i.e. 30 to 33rd degree in the Scottish rite) are directly involved in the inner cult of Lucifer worship. I wouldn't recommend anybody to join the masons and anybody already in should leave. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Now since this is the Salford Star, it may interest the comrades to know that Karl Marx was heavily involved with and influenced by freemasonry. Marx was closely associated with Mazzini - the European leader of illuminised freemasonry in the mid 19th century. Mazzini used Marx to penetrate and subvert the growing socialist Labour movement of the time. Marx was on the committee at the meeting in St. Martin's Hall (London) on 28th September 1864 at which the Internationale was founded. The comrades of Marx on the committee were Wolff (Mazzini's secretary); Le Lubez (a French freemason); Cremer (secretary of the English Masons' Union); and Weston. Stephen Kingston will know that in the early days of the Russian Revolution, the Bolsheviks (later called Communists) first referred to themselves as 'Spartacusts' (after freemason Adam Weishaupt's Illuminati pseudonym). The hand of freemasonry in the advent of communism and the Soviet Union is a matter of historical fact and serious historians know that (even if it is not popularly taught to the masses). The little known truth is that the original Marxist doctrine was inseparable from masonic designs. Now I think that as a non-comrade I should get a merit mark from Kingston for this mini essay on the Salford Star.
 
David Henry wrote
at 7:37:43 PM on Friday, August 6, 2010
Don't go down the Mason road unless you know what you're dealing with, secret societies want to remain secret and will do anything to keep it that way. That's one beehive you don't want to disturb, Beeeelieve mee. Although I believe the Masons do a lot of charity work and support our local communities. Maybe they'd make a donation to the Salford Star? :)
 
gone to pot wrote
at 12:45:27 PM on Wednesday, August 4, 2010
What is john merrys obsession with media city?BBC staff are being dragged up to salford with cash incentives and promises of sexy waterfront living.Maybe this explains why the road to media city is being resurfaced (paid for by SCC) and the rest of Salford is forced to dodge craters on a daily basis.such favouritism to seemingly contemptuous newcomers will only fuel the divide in this city.
 
Mike Skeff wrote
at 8:59:28 AM on Wednesday, August 4, 2010
No surprise that Salford Council will go to any lengths to stop the Salford Star getting back into print. It must be obvious to them that despite their clearly groundless claims that the Star is biased and does not give balanced views, the magazine will survive and grow. What the Star needs now is a show of support from the people of Salford. Salford Council committee should hang its collective empty head in shame and realise that they cannot silence the free press.
 
Stephen Kingston wrote
at 11:20:45 PM on Tuesday, August 3, 2010
See Brian's comment below... Salford Media Scene isn't the Salford Star and was done by SCMP (Salford Community Media Partnership)of which Salford Star is a partner, along with Salford City Radio, Langworthy Cornerstone, CRIS etc. No-one seems to have any problems with other magazines that Salford Star people get involved with. It's just the Salford Star. As an aside though, the Salford Star has never opposed the concept of MediaCityUK, in fact the mag welcomes anything that might create jobs in the city. But I think we're entitled to investigate how much public money is going into Peel Holdings' `private' development (reckon about £500million+) and what local people will get oit of it, rather than just spouting MediaCity propaganda which we've proved in the past to be untrue.
 
brianfkirkham wrote
at 11:09:51 PM on Tuesday, August 3, 2010
Im a little confused here Mr Kingston. The reason for no devolved funding ? - "…you haven't published any positive stuff on MediaCityUK" John Merry Er, I've read all your articles in Salford Media Scene (BTW Cracking piece on the journey DVD folks!), and whilst i'll say theres nothing gold-plated about the articles on Peels Development, there is plenty of positive stuff in the article, perhaps Mr Merry hadn't seen Alison Surtees vision for the media centre her organisation hopes to have there alongside the BBC. Again, there's nothing inflammatory and, in fact, i found the comments of the BBC staff on their own website more damaging to the overall aims of the scheme. If anyone in charge needs proof of this they merely need to look at the attitudes of BBC stars portrayed on their own website. Nicky Campbell - "Commuting" to Salford Chris Hollins - Refusing to come to Salford Bill Turnbull - Considering "Options" One thinks - whatever incentives the BBC in London have tried to sell the move to Salford, They haven't worked!!!
 
DAWN O wrote
at 2:07:00 PM on Tuesday, August 3, 2010
I wrote a fair, unbaised interview about Media City in Salford Media Scene and I free-lance for The Salford Star so that technically counts?. I found it really hard to find work experience within Journalism as a lot of publications don't have the time or space for students. The Salford Star has helped me progress loads with my writing and build a portfolio for my work. It truly inspired me to work even harder at university because I thought to myself, if I wrote everyday of my life I would be happy. I think its time that the positives about The Salford Star are told. It makes alot of possitive changes that people never hear about. GO SALFORD STAR! And thanks Stephen, its an honour to help out on The Salford Star and Salford Media Scene. Be proud.
 
Stephen Kingston wrote
at 11:33:28 AM on Tuesday, August 3, 2010
I quite agree - the comment has been taken down xxx
 
John Merry wrote
at 11:29:39 AM on Tuesday, August 3, 2010
Sorry this simply is not good enough and this is the sort of smear that the star should not be associated with. Any masonic involvement would have to be declared and the star by pulishing the claim could be considered to be equally liable for the libel. He has not been able to come up with any evidence and if Richard is able to "check up" then he should do so. This is a very serious charge that someone has failed to declare a masonic involvement and if it is not true then it simply is an attempt to blacken someones name
 
Richard Carvath wrote
at 8:30:12 AM on Tuesday, August 3, 2010
I'm banned from SO, not because I ever breached SO's content/comment policy but because - despite their claim to be an impartial "community" website for use by all Salfordians - some of the (mainstream) social/political views I expressed on SO were not to the liking of those who run SO. I have absolutely no doubt that SO is partial and political and I 'have beef' with SO given how diabolically I've been treated by SO. SO is an amateur site devoid of any professional journalistic standards (unlike Kingston). Regarding the suggestions of Masonic impropriety, somebody ought to put the direct question to councillors, "Are you involved in Freemasonry?" and then let's have the 'Yes', 'No' or 'Did not Answer' published on the web. I'd be very happy to check up the answers given (after they've been given) myself as I'd be very happy to chase up a lead regarding this SO allegation. SO is crap: it's crazy that it might get funding or advertising when the Star does not; I'm no unqualified lover of the Salford Star but it does have intrinsic merit whereas SO is utter junk. Furthermore SO is just a website but the Star wants to be in print; the Star needs funds which SO doesn't.
 
Stephen Kingston wrote
at 6:32:44 AM on Tuesday, August 3, 2010
Can't see John Merry in a Mason's apron somehow. A Salford City scarf maybe... We await Mr Gardner's response...
 
John Merry wrote
at 6:23:49 AM on Tuesday, August 3, 2010
Would Mr Gardner like to support his statement that higher ranking council members have masonic links or is it just plain libel in which case I am sure Steve will take action
 
Ben Clay wrote
at 2:31:54 PM on Sunday, August 1, 2010
Salford Star has made a good name for itself by holding the council and other public bodies to account so the moves to end funding from public money is no surprise. The argument that the Council does not fund Journalism partially stands up - at least because "Life in Salford" doesnt really qualify as Journalism in the traditional sense, but the vast quantities spent on this worthless rag at a time when public spending is being cut back and real services are under threat is a disgrace. Across the country local print journalism has been in decline and the circulation of Pravda like council free papers is one of the causes. While happy to waste our money on Life Salford Council has taken the mean spirited decision to cut off funding to the Star to undermine and silence a rare critical voice in the area.
 
Jack Rogers wrote
at 7:11:46 AM on Saturday, July 31, 2010
I enjoy in this article how Mr Merry describes funding on three occassions as the council's money and only once as the PUBLIC's Money. Where does government local and central receive IT's money from in the first place? Then again why should I be suprised when this council has just spent under half a million on open air gyms. Can some one point me the way to the beach, the weather must be improving.
 
John Carrington wrote
at 2:52:44 PM on Thursday, July 29, 2010
Contrary to what Steve argues, I do not believe this is 'a boring obsession.' I think people do care about the priorities of the Council who can find endless sums to subsidise their own in-house publication (which is awful by the way), and a campaigning journal like the Salford Star. Mr Kingston's point is completely valid. Few families from poorer backgrounds can afford access to the internet. It is the duty of local authorities to provide a forum where contentious issues can be discussed. Without this, tyranny reigns supreme. However, and this will provide little comfort, history shows that those in positions of power will always seek to stifle all criticism from below. The Salford Star is fighting a latter day 'tax on knowledge' as did the Chartists and those who fought against the imposition of stamp duty to newspapers in the early decades of the 19th century. This is an important struggle. It's important for democracy. It's important because the disenfranchised must have a voice and in the Star they have that voice. It's the reason why the council have consistently attacked it. Merry and Co are being disingenuous to say the least. It does highlight the problems within the 'cabinet style' adopted by councils across the country. They are akin to the top table of executives in the boardroom of a big corporation. Their attitude to the Salford Star is 'if it brings in great PR for us then we'll fund it'. Like the decisions made in the boardroom, it is utterly undemocratic. I think this struggle needs taking out into the community. Start a campaign that can be used to collect money from ordinary people to contribute to getting an edition out. It would be a great way of building support from below and exposing the foundations of sand that Merry and Co have built their corporate house upon.
 
Salford Star wrote
at 12:53:19 PM on Wednesday, July 28, 2010
See Steve's comment below...This is exactly why we need the magazine back out again - because we would have had the time and space to interview families with photos. We did loads of that in print but the net doesn't lend itself to those type of features because of the speed to get stuff online and the layout/space on the pages. We had less than a day to read, digest and do the feature on that Child Poverty report. That is the whole point of harping on about the Salford Star - as far as getting the community involved the print magazine is crucial.
 
Steve wrote
at 12:44:24 PM on Wednesday, July 28, 2010
Despite what you think I'm on your side. I like the Star and wish it well. But I'm not sure that your readers share the priority you give to featuring Salford Council's decision on funding for the magazine. Your story on child poverty was really good. Might have been even better if there'd been some photos and some interviews with families in Salford who are suffering the effects of poverty. It's that sort of story that deserves your efforts.
 
Nachtschlepper wrote
at 11:33:37 AM on Wednesday, July 28, 2010
Maybe I was being a little facetious in my comment. However it is interesting that though he could find no evidence of the Salford Star being 'overtly political' he simply moved the goalposts to justify a blantantly unfair decision. There also seems to be some confusion down at the Kremlin. Councillor Connor claims the Council will not fund a magazine. What about Pravda, sorry Life in Salford? Councillor Merry says that the Council would have to have some editorial control if they funded the Salford Star. Then goes on to say that he thinks the Council would be in trouble if they did. There was never any doubt that the Council would alter their stance. I just wish they had the intelligence to come up with a plausible excuse
 
Stephen Kingston wrote
at 11:33:20 AM on Wednesday, July 28, 2010
See John Merry's comment...I think the phrase was `less Pravda like' than some of the other council mags which are barely concealed propaganda. LIFE is well concealed propaganda. Don't look for a ringing endorsement of the loss making rag over here...
 
Nachtschlepper wrote
at 11:06:52 AM on Wednesday, July 28, 2010
Ahhh Steve so nice to hear from again. Talking of boring obsessions; don't you think you should get over your's concerning the Salford Star. After all if you don't like it don't read it.
 
John Merry wrote
at 10:29:24 AM on Wednesday, July 28, 2010
I cannot believe that Nachtschlepper is so biased that he does not know I was referring to the article rather than the facts it describes. That in itself speaks volumes about him rather than me. As for Salford Life even Steve when he reviewed it was unable to find evidence of political bias.
 
Nachtschlepper wrote
at 8:44:50 AM on Wednesday, July 28, 2010
So Merry doesn't find it offensive that 60% of this city's children live in poverty? That speaks volumes. Can we now expect that Life in Salford is subect to the same rules as the Salford Star? Life in Salford is after all overtly political and unbalanced. I hardly expect anyone from the Council to answer that question because it is patently obvious they never look at this website.
 
Salford Star wrote
at 8:44:05 AM on Wednesday, July 28, 2010
See Steve's comment below...It's hardly a `boring obsession' to inform the people of Salford what is going on in their city. The majority of people in Salford have no net access and that's why it is so important that the magazine comes out in print again. It's about democracy and stuff like that, and if that's an `obsession' then we're really sorry. Perhaps you could put your energies to better use by being indignant about an official 60% child poverty rate in Salford.
 
Steve wrote
at 8:36:31 AM on Wednesday, July 28, 2010
Get over it Salford Star. This is becoming a boring obsession. Get on with reporting on Salford and stop writing lengthy articles about how hard done you are by Salford Council. Put your energies to better use.
 
Council coffers/public money wrote
at 3:26:34 AM on Wednesday, July 28, 2010
Sounds like they are saying "If we dont like what you are doing we cant give you council money but if we do like what you are doing then that is community money". I suggest that the Star either starts its own orchestra or opens a loss making ice rink------both funded by community money. Maybe you could then sponsor yourself so that they dont actually "lose" money. I think that is the sort of "book cooking" and "financial sleight of hand" that a certain authority use. I wont name them in case they throw their dummy out of the pram.
 
Please enter your comment below:
 
 
 
Salford Star Hoodies
Salford Star contact
Deli Lama
advertisement
 
Contact us
phone: 07957 982960
Facebook       Twitter
 
 
Recent comments
article: SALFORD LIBDEM CANDIDATE CLAIMS SHE’S BEING BULLIED IN CLAREMONT
I was a teacher at PWHS when you were there Guy Otten. I remember the staff meeting. "Go". I will say no more on this site.... [more]
article: SALFORD LIBDEM CANDIDATE CLAIMS SHE’S BEING BULLIED IN CLAREMONT
I have read this story and, try as I might, I see no evidence of any bullying; what I see is someone using self promotion to drum ... [more]
article: SALFORD LIBDEM CANDIDATE CLAIMS SHE’S BEING BULLIED IN CLAREMONT
Imagine a world without politics!! I can dream.... [more]
article: SALFORD LIBDEM CANDIDATE CLAIMS SHE’S BEING BULLIED IN CLAREMONT
So, the Libdems are back on the ballot papers in Salford and seeking publicity. They disappeared from most of Salford from 2013,... [more]
article: SALFORD CITY FC WIN PROMOTION TO VANARAMA NATIONAL LEAGUE
Three promotions in four seasons, a superbly re-vamped Moor Lane ground - or should I say Peninsula Stadium - together with an ave... [more]
 
 
 
 
 
Days
Hours
Minutes
Seconds
 
 
 

Donate

Help the Salford Star...

all donations welcome

 
 

More articles...

SALFORD RED DEVILS DIRECTOR OPENS UP ON PROBLEMS AND SOLUTIONS AT THE CLUB

Star date: 24th April 2018

"WE ARE PROBABLY THE MOST POORLY SUPPORTED CLUB..."

What is the future for Salford Red Devils? A wealthy benefactor has gone, players have been sold, crowds are small and income is low. On the pitch things aren't too bad but, off the pitch, the new owners are trying to pick up the pieces, including a new Salford Red She-Devils team...

"I think the reality is that we are probably the most poorly supported club" Executive Director Andrew Rosler tells Gareth Lyons "I think you kind of get the team you deserve..."

Full details here...

SALFORD LIBDEM CANDIDATE CLAIMS SHE’S BEING BULLIED IN CLAREMONT

Star date: 23rd April 2018

TENSION, 'BULLYING' AND POLITICAL DOG FIGHTING IN LOCAL ELECTION CONTEST

While the local election campaigns around Salford are pretty mild at the moment, in the Claremont ward it's all kicking off, with the LibDem candidate, Stef Lorenz, accusing Labour Party supporters of 'bullying', and the authorities of complicity.

Stef has been blocked from putting up posters in the local Height Library for a jumble sale and art auction in aid of restoring the old Height Youth Club, been forced to stand down as chair of that campaign and has been met with a volley of political abuse on social media. What's going on?

Full details here...

SALFORD MINERS REMEMBERED AT AGECROFT MEMORIAL

Star date: 22nd April 2018

RESPECT PAID TO IRWELL VALLEY MINERS

Yesterday, former miners, families and trade unionists gathered at the Agecroft Colliery monument to pay respects to those who lost their lives down the pits...

"Today means everything, it's the only way we can pay back what they did for you" said Jackie Rimmer, whose father died down Agecroft Colliery in 1963.

Full details here...

SALFORD CITY FC WIN PROMOTION TO VANARAMA NATIONAL LEAGUE

Star date: 22nd April 2018

SALFORD CITY ONE STEP AWAY FROM FOOTBALL LEAGUE

Salford City FC became champions of the National League North yesterday, despite losing 2-1 to Boston United. Harrogate Town's defeat at Bradford Park Avenue means that no-one can now catch the Class of '92 club.

Full details here...

SALFORD COMMUNITY WOOD CARVING CLUB OPENS AT ECCLES CENTRE

Star date: 22nd April 2018

EXHIBITION OF SALFORD WOOD CARVINGS OPENS NEW UNEMPLOYED ARTS CLUB

An exhibition of ninety wood carvings, featuring everything from birds to animals, to wood spirits and politicians, has opened at the Salford Unemployed and Community Resource Centre.

The exhibition will kickstart a new Salford Unemployed Arts Club based at the Centre, where anyone who is unemployed or disabled can meet and try wood carving or any other creative activity.

Full details here...

 



written and produced by Salfordians for Salfordians
with attitude and love xxx