Archive for the ‘Media Control’ Category

Endeavor Lands Elusive IPO, With Emanuel And Whitesell Controlling Nearly $1 Billion In Shares – Forbes

Patrick Whitesell and Ari Emanuel lead the successful IPO.

Eighteen months after tepid interest killed off a planned initial stock offering for Endeavor, CEO Ari Emanuel has completed a $511 million IPO that values the company at $10.3 billion and the shares he controls with partner Patrick Whitesell at $864 million.

The two Hollywood agents rang the opening bell at the NYSE Thursday to kick off the first day of trading for the company that owns the William Morris Endeavor talent agency, the Ultimate Fighting Championship and the Miss Universe Competition.

Its a big paydayand a moment of redemptionfor Emanuel, one of Hollywoods hardest-charging agents, who has transformed the boutique talent agency he founded in 1995 into a media company in its own right. He and executive chairman Whitesell, Endeavors two most senior executives, hold as much as 17% voting control of the company and share an economic interest in shares valued at $864 million, based on the IPO stock price of $24. Todays regulatory filings do not spell out their individual holdings, though Emanuel appears to have a slightly larger stake in the company.

A spokesperson for Endeavor declined to comment.

Over the course of two decades, Endeavor merged with one of Hollywoods oldest talent agencies, the William Morris Agency, acquired the sports management firm IMG, began investing in events, such as New York Fashion Week and Frieze London art fair, as well as sports leagues, such as the UFC and the Professional Bull Riders organization. All of these moves took the firm beyond the fickle world of talent representation, which is, in the words of one Hollywood observer, one bad lunch with a movie star away from a wrecking ball.

This plunge into new corners of the entertainment world helped diversify Endeavors revenue, with its direct ownership of sports properties accounting for 20% of the companys proceeds and events accounting for a whopping 43% in 2019. Its traditional representation business brought in 36% of revenue.

Endeavor built upon its relationships with talent to begin functioning like a traditional Hollywood studio, financing and producing entertainment content. It has bankrolled or sold more than 200 projects, including La La Land, Just Mercy and Hamilton.

Emanuel is looking for the stock offering to fuel Endeavors growth and bolster its position in an entertainment world now dominated by tech giants Netflix, Amazon and Apple. As part of the IPO, Endeavor will acquire the remaining 44% stake in the UFC that it doesnt currently own. Together with the public stock offering, Endeavor sold $1.8 billion in stock in a private placement.

Endeavor seemed primed for takeoff in the fall of 2019 when the stock sale was shelved, after the anemic Wall Street debut of indoor cycling darling Peloton and WeWorks decision to delay its offering. That derailed one of the biggest deals in Emanuel and Whitesells deal-making careers, one that would have been worth at least $1.5 billion for the duo.

Things grew bleaker as the pandemic crippled Hollywood, and Endeavor responded by laying off 350 employees last spring. Emanuel stopped drawing a salary in what amounted to a symbolic gesture (he received $14.14 million in compensation in 2020 that included a bonus for his leadership through the Covid-19 epidemic). Endeavor ended 2020 with a net loss of $625.3 million on revenue of $3.5 billion.

Its possible that Emanuel and Whitesell have more extensive holdings in Endeavor that have yet to be publicly disclosed in regulatory filings. Emanuel is also eligible to receive as much as $28 million in stock if or when Endeavors valuation tops $7.5 billion, and another $14 million for hitting certain market value thresholds.

Originally posted here:
Endeavor Lands Elusive IPO, With Emanuel And Whitesell Controlling Nearly $1 Billion In Shares - Forbes

India today is like a ship in a storm with no information, says Rahul Gandhi – National Herald

Q. Adult vaccinations are starting on May 1 along the lines you demanded, but states say they cannot start as they do not have the vaccines. What is your view? Did you seek the expansion of vaccinations too early? UK will start adult vaccines from June?

Ans. First, the government set a target of vaccinating 300 million by August. This is the above 45 age category. They managed to fully vaccinate not even 2 percent of the total population. With mounting pressure of the government not vaccinating enough, they added another 600 million to the list, by starting vaccinations for the 18+ group from May 1. But where are the vaccines? Why did the Modi Government abandon the people between age groups of 18 to 44 years by refusing to take responsibility for their vaccination? Why is there a discriminatory policy on the pricing of vaccines? Why should there be five different prices for the same vaccine? What is the strategy beyond two companies? How can that suffice for almost 1 billion people? We need 2 billion doses. Now, they are scrambling for vaccines. The numbers just dont add up.

Q. You have said the liberalised Vaccine policy is discriminatory. Vaccine makers have reduced prices for states. Your comments?

Ans. This is the story of discount sale, where you mark up the price, and then make a show of reducing it. It is a complete eyewash. Why should states pay more than the Centre to buy vaccines? Why should the states be left to fend for themselves? Why should there be a difference in price for vaccines for the Centre, the States and the private hospitals? Why should the price of vaccine even for the two companies be different? Why the discrepancy? After all, even when States pay for the vaccination of those between the age groups of 18 to 44 years, it is taxpayers money.

Q. The government has not invoked compulsory licensing for vaccines despite repeated calls by the Congress?

Ans. Dr. Manmohan Singh asked for compulsory licensing in his letter to the Prime Minister. The Congress President has repeated it several times now. Other countries have done this. The USA ramped up its vaccine production using their Defense Production Act. We have to do whatever it takes, within our laws, to ramp up the domestic production of vaccines here. We have the domestic manufacturing base. We can manufacture for both India and the world. All the industry needs is licenses and raw materials. It should have been done months ago.

Q. The Congress party has said it is willing to work together with the Centre in the fight against Coronavirus. How will you make it accountable then?

Ans. Congress Party has said from day one that it is willing to work with the government in the fight against Coronavirus and for a year now, even in just the last few days, the Congress President has repeated this position very clearly. We have been consistently giving suggestions on all possible forums.

Forget taking them seriously, the government has not even meaningfully acknowledged these suggestions. I see no contradiction in working together with the government in times of unprecedented crisis while at the same time holding it accountable for its decisions. The problem arises when the government doesnt believe in consultation, in carrying everyone along, in tapping expertise it lacks. This government seems to think that acknowledging help is needed is a sign of weakness. The hubris and pettiness of this government is unbelievable.

Q. The Madras High Court has held the Election Commission responsible for the Covid situation. Your views?

Ans. The Court was echoing a widely held view. In the past 7 years, like so many other institutions, the Election Commission of India has also crumbled. The Court has said what it believes, I dont want to make any further comment. Let your readers judge for themselves.

Our Institutions are a warning system- they give us feedback and information on how to respond to crisis but our institutions have been completely destroyed and taken over.

The press, judiciary, election commission, bureaucracy - none of them have played their role of guardian/watch dog. This means India today is like a ship in a storm, sailing without any information.

Corona is just part of the problem - the real problem is that India now doesnt have the capacity to respond to any major crisis because of what has been done to its systems over the last 6 years.

Q. There have been demands within for internal elections and a new Congress president? Are you ready to lead again in such times, especially when there are demands from various quarters within for you to lead?

Ans. I have always favoured internal organisational elections within the Congress and these will be conducted in time. It is for the party workers to decide as to who should lead the party. I will do whatever the party wants me to do. But right now the focus is on controlling the pandemic, saving lives, and alleviating Indias widespread suffering and pain. There will be time for everything else in due course.

PTI

Read more:
India today is like a ship in a storm with no information, says Rahul Gandhi - National Herald

Chrome is getting playback speed controls for its in-built media player – Chrome Unboxed

Ah, the power of the web. Every day, more and more tools are being created or honed to make the web a place for more powerful tools that can increase productivity and release us from the dependency of bloated, locally installed software. While powerful tools such as online video editors like Clipchamp or streaming game services like Stadia are extremely impressive, it is often the little things that can have the biggest impact on our day-to-day workflow. One such feature that could be headed to the Chrome browser very soon is the ability to speed up or slow down media playback.

I discovered a commit this morning from none other than Franois Beaufort who was responsible for much of the work that brought Picture-in-Picture to the Chrome browser. Thats just a small fraction of Mr. Beauforts contribution to Chrome and Chrome OS but needless to say, hes one sharp cookie. In a bug report/feature request submitted by Franois Beaufort back on April 9, work began on bringing some simple playback controls to the Chrome browsers native HTML media player. Because Franois is also a rather savvy developer himself, he is also the owner of the project in the Chromium repository and work is underway to make the feature a reality.

Advertisements

Add playback speed native control to media player

This CL adds a new playback speed button to media player native controls so that users can adjust audio/video playback rate.

The feature may seem like a very minor update but it should be a big deal for many users. The use-cases are quite practical. If you are scrubbing through a large number of videos, this will help reduce the amount of time you spend auditing or looking for specific content. Slowing video down can be useful if youre trying to pinpoint a precise moment in a video for whatever reason. Digging into the features commit, it appears that the playback speed options could range from 0.25x to 2x with the ability to adjust by .25x increments as needed. Youll be able to access the playback speed from the three-dot menu that housed the PiP button and this should be available for Chrome Desktop, Android, and Chrome OS when it arrives. The commit attached to the feature request was opened just a couple of weeks ago so I dont expect to see this arrive immediately but we could see it pop up in the Canary build of Chrome in the coming weeks if were lucky.

Well keep a close watch on this one and let you know when it goes live. Is this a feature that you would use? Whats your use-case? Drop a comment below and let us know. Who knows? Maybe Franois will read it and theyll ramp up development. Stay tuned for updates.

Advertisements

Read the rest here:
Chrome is getting playback speed controls for its in-built media player - Chrome Unboxed

Media Statement: ONA Supports the Auditor-General’s Recommendations on the Serious Staffing and Infection Control Issues in Long-Term Care – Yahoo…

The New York Times

Mark Rasch hopped on his bike Tuesday in Bethesda, Maryland, pedaled off for an afternoon ride and realized he forgot his mask. As he turned back for it, news came on the radio over his earbuds: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said masks were no longer required outdoors for fully vaccinated people unless they were in a crowd. Rasch, a lawyer, rode on, naked from nose to chin for the first time in a year. He reached nearby Georgetown and found he was nearly alone, in that almost everyone else there remained masked. I wondered if there was a store I could go into without wearing a mask to buy a mask? he said. Instead, he went home and told his wife, Nothing is changing, but its happening quickly. Sign up for The Morning newsletter from the New York Times Its springtime of the pandemic. After the trauma of the past year, the quarantined are emerging into sunlight and beginning to navigate travel, classrooms and restaurants. And they are discovering that when it comes to returning to the old ways, many feel out of sorts. Do they shake hands? Hug? With or without a mask? Its a confusion exacerbated by changing rules, state and federal, that vary by congressional district or even neighborhood, all while the very real threat of infection remains, in some places more than others. Many states and cities are scrambling to incorporate the agencys new counsel into their own rules. New York has ended its curfew. In California, where masks remain recommended, authorities are looking to reconcile the clash of cues. We have reviewed and support the CDCs new masking recommendations and are working quickly to align Californias guidance with these common sense guidelines, Dr. Toms Aragn, director of the California Department of Public Health, said in a statement. Dr. Susan Huang, of the University of California, Irvine, Medical School, explained the conflicted psychology as a function of rapidly changing risk and the difference in tolerance that individuals have for risk. At present, she said, most places have a foundation of people vaccinated but are not near the 80% that marks herd immunity with no children inoculated. Were between the darkness and the light, Huang said. She likened the psychology around masks and other behavior to the different approaches people take to changing their wardrobes at the end of winter: People who are more risk-averse continue to wear winter clothes on 50 degree days, where bigger risk-takers opt for shorts. Eventually, she said, everyone will be wearing shorts. It seems that this psychology may come to define the way the pandemic ebbs, revolving less around public dictate than personal comfort after a stark trauma. For many, the jurisdictional battle is internal, with head and heart clashing over the right personal policy. I have hugged friends but in a very clumsy body posture, said Shirley Lin, who lives in Fremont, California, where she works on business development at a mobile game company. The bear hugs with the joyful scream will not be seen for a long, long time. Her partner lost his mother to COVID-19. She died in August in St. Petersburg, Russia, at age 68. Lin, scarred, is dubious that the risk has passed. I dont think we can slack off on the proper social distancing and masking, she said. But we are much more optimistic. Masks have also become so much more than mere barrier between germs and lungs. They can keep that too-chatty neighbor at bay or help the introvert hide in plain sight. And vanity? Goodbye to that. It saves me having to put on sunscreen and wear lipstick, said Sara Becker, an associate professor at the Brown University School of Public Health. She recently had an awkward transitional moment when she, her husband and two children went to an outdoor fire pit with vaccinated neighbors. Someone offered me their hand, and I gave my elbow, Becker said. She was not quite ready for handshakes or hugs, she explained, though pre-COVID, I was definitely a hugger. So was Dr. Shervin Assari, but hes abstaining at least for now, particularly after the past few weeks. His mother, who lives in Tehran, Iran, was just released from the hospital there after a dangerous bout with COVID-19, and Assari feels chastened anew. I had an abstract idea about the risk, and now I really see the risk, said Assari, who lives in Lakewood, California. Hes half-vaccinated, he said, and terribly scared of COVID-19. Assari, a public health expert, is trying to modulate his own behavior given the three different worlds hes trying to navigate: the working-class neighborhood where he lives in South Los Angeles; his daughters elementary school; and the historically Black medical school, Charles Drew University of Medicine and Science, where he teaches family medicine. Each differs in culture. Most residents of his neighborhood wear masks but also seem to him respectful of individual choice. The elementary school maintains rigid standards with daily checklists to make sure no one is sick or at risk. And at the medical school, people religiously wear masks, even as the school roils with mistrust of the vaccination, despite the fact it trains doctors, nurses and others in the field. Its shocking; its very deep mistrust, not just moderate, Assari said. The skepticism of the medical establishment was centuries in the making like the infamous Tuskegee experiments and he doubts it will end soon. But the mistrust at his school is different from that of conservatives: Vaccination may be slow among both groups, but white conservatives may be quicker to rip off their masks, if they wore them at all. Theres none of that Tucker Carlson stuff here, he said. Carlson, a talk-show host on Fox News, said on a recent show that having children wear a mask outside should be illegal and that your response should be no different than seeing someone beat a kid at Walmart and to call the police. (Dr. Anthony Fauci, the presidents chief medical adviser for COVID, promptly shot back on CNN, I think thats self-evident that thats bizarre.) In San Francisco, Huntley Barad, a retired entrepreneur, ventured out with his wife this week, and they took their first walk without masks in more than a year. We walked down the Great Highway, he said. Were ready to poke our heads out from underneath our rock and perhaps find a restaurant with a nice outdoor table setup on a warmish night, if possible. But he said that their plans for a date night werent firm, much like the conflicting guidance and behavior of a nation itself. Nothing definite yet, he said. This article originally appeared in The New York Times. 2021 The New York Times Company

Read more:
Media Statement: ONA Supports the Auditor-General's Recommendations on the Serious Staffing and Infection Control Issues in Long-Term Care - Yahoo...

Kick It Out’s Townsend: ‘We are fed up with hashtags and fed up of slogans’ in fight against racist abuse – ESPN

In a high-profile attempt to expose the scourge of racism towards players at all levels of the game, English football will unite to undertake a three-day social media boycott this weekend "in response to the ongoing and sustained discriminatory abuse received online."

The initiative has the backing of all professional leagues, including the Premier League and Women's Super League, with the Football Supporters' Association and Kick It Out, English football equality and inclusion charitable organisations, also signed up to the shutdown, which is designed to cover the full weekend of fixtures, including Manchester United vs. Liverpool -- traditionally regarded as the biggest game in the English game. But while the social media boycott is designed to not only raise greater awareness of the targeting of players through online abuse but also pressure social media platforms Facebook, Instagram and Twitter to enforce stricter measures in combating the issue, those involved in the fight against racism and discrimination insist that the battle is not limited to social media.

Troy Townsend, the head of development at Kick It Out, has spent over 20 years with the organisation, attempting to offer support to the victims of racism at the same time as holding football's governing bodies to account. And in a wide-ranging interview, Townsend, the father of Crystal Palace midfielder Andros, has told ESPN that Kick it Out is fighting a constant battle that has no end in sight.

2 Related

ESPN: How significant is this weekend's boycott of social media? Will it work?

Townsend: It depends what you mean when you say "will it work?" It will work in terms of raising awareness; it will work in terms of football finally coming together on this topic and finally saying that what we are all going to do. But anything surrounding branding -- kit sponsors, or brands connected with those football clubs -- shouldn't be on the platforms either. I cannot stress this enough. Football is a minute drop in the ocean in terms of the global use of social media, so what makes football think it can create the global drop in the ocean it wants to create to stop hate crime being allowed on those platforms?

I would like to see sport come together. The biggest sports in the U.S, the biggest sports in this country, the biggest sports in the world, with those global figures... then we might be able to ripple. For now, all we are doing is still creating the conversation.

I don't want to be negative, as I want to applaud the clubs and the leagues who are doing it -- we have to take our part and take ownership of it. But actually what impact will it have, we'll have to see.

ESPN: So football alone can't drive the change and force social media companies into stronger action?

Townsend: This is what I want to get people to understand. Football in England is in a bubble, and it controls everything within its environment. This is why football is struggling, as it doesn't control the social media space. You can't just flick a switch or wave a wand and everything is great -- that is why we are struggling over here as it has little or no impact.

We are talking about our biggest stars being abused, like Raheem Sterling and Marcus Rashford, and it doesn't even register in the countries where these platforms are based. How are we going to influence that? Maybe if we start sharing responsibility across sports that have a global impact, but I'm still saying just maybe, because sport is just one element of this.

ESPN: Have you noticed an increase in abuse towards footballers in recent months and years?

Townsend: The hate being levelled at our sports stars in England isn't new. People are reacting like 'I can't believe they are doing that to our sports stars,' but I dug up an interview I did eight years ago with Jason Brown, the former Blackburn goalkeeper, and he got pretty horrendous abuse. In the interview, I am saying the same words now as I did eight years ago, which tells us we haven't moved on at all. We have not gotten better at changing the language and tone.

Dan Thomas is joined by Craig Burley, Shaka Hislop and others to bring you the latest highlights and debate the biggest storylines. Stream on ESPN+ (U.S. only).

I would say we haven't developed at all. It is being highlighted as there are no fans in stadiums and we are highlighting this because we have more time on our hands and the accessibility of phones. But has it increased? I would say no. I would just say that the conversations we would normally have on the way back from a game, or popping into the pub as we do here in England, are just not happening, so the platforms are fueling that instead.

ESPN: Social media abuse has become a major problem, though, hasn't it?

Townsend: I think what social media platforms have done is collectively given individuals the confidence to be able to speak freely and target anybody. I've seen Facebook messages when they are asked for statements from the media and they give generic responses on how many people they have deleted from the platforms or prosecuted in court, and there is never accountability on that.

For anybody who is aware and uses social media, they are always one step ahead anyway -- they have another account and have easy access. We are not dealing with the problem; we are not dealing with it collectively enough; and we aren't holding people accountable for what effectively is hate speech that evolves into hate crime.

ESPN: What can be done to stop social media abuse and ensure swifter, tougher action by social media platforms?

Townsend: We are pressing the government to get more involved, but they've been talking about it for a very long time. Again, we are no clearer on when it will go to Parliament.

People in the industry are fed up of hearing the same thing as on a matchday. Players are subjected to the most vile abuse anybody could ever wish to see. The whole conversation here in England on matchdays is to prepare your players for abuse, because one of them -- and let's be honest, it is predominantly Black players -- will get targeted.

When you play against a rival club, you get booed in the stadium and you'd get abuse anyway. I'm not saying that is OK, but it is almost part and parcel of what they do.

1:02

Leicester City's Wes Morgan is just one of three Black captains to ever lift the Premier League trophy.

ESPN: What, specifically, do social media companies need to do to help stem the tide of abuse?

Townsend: Black people are always going to be identified by their colour, or by certain emojis that have connotations on their colour and history. That is the area where I feel that social media companies really have to decide what they are going to do in this area.

A monkey emoji, gorilla emoji, an orangutan emoji, a banana emoji has certain significance when directed at Black people. But the message from social media companies is essentially "we aren't going to do anything about that; we don't deem them as discriminatory." That means that they will allow the abuse to continue on their platforms.

ESPN: Kick It Out was founded in 1993. How much impact has the organisation had in almost 30 years?

Townsend: I have to be honest, but I don't feel that we have the impact. We have been in this space for 28 years, and many will ask what have you achieved in that time? When you are fighting against racism and discrimination, it is an ongoing battle, and I don't sit there and tick boxes and a list of achievements.

We educate very well; we remind players of their responsibility; and while at times we have to call out the industry, we don't have the influence on the industry. Sometimes it is like banging your head against a brick wall.

We put together an end-of-season report each year, so fans and people connected with the game can write to us about incidents, and we log those and then challenge the football authorities on another case and another case and another case. We put out our stats at the end of the year, and last year was the seventh year on the spin that those stats went up and racism was the highest form of discrimination being recorded to us.

People may not see our significance, but it is a constant battle. We are a small charity who are battling against the wind, I would say, but it is important that we are relevant now as we were back in 1993. Anybody who has worked in this organisation knows that we aren't doing it for pats on the back and plaudits, but we are almost going into battle every single day.

ESPN: How much of an impact has the Black Lives Matter movement had on Kick It Out's role within the game?

Townsend: We gained traction the minute BLM was being spoken about in this country. The circle starts with George Floyd and Black Lives Matter, and how football embraced the Black Lives Matter slogan, taking the knee. And all of a sudden, there was a wave of traction towards Kick It Out and "why do we need Black Lives Matter when we have had Kick It Out in this country for so long?"

I saw that as people not really supporting everything that we do. People didn't want to hear it, or listen to it, until they saw that Black Lives Matter was in the title.

1:40

Shaka Hislop questions why UEFA hasn't renounced racism in the same way it has the European Super League.

ESPN: Do the football governing bodies do enough to combat racism within the game?

Townsend: They [the Premier League, English FA, EFL] do work with us, I can't deny that, but I don't think they really like the tough questions, the questions in regard to accountability, where they may have let down a club or a team or a player. I don't think they are open and receptive to the tough questions that need to be answered.

In England, we have "No Room for Racism," and UEFA have "Say No to Racism," but what are the details behind the slogan? Where are the solutions and what are we doing to change the mindset and attitudes of many?

We had a high-profile incident recently when Rangers played Slavia Prague and it was proved that Glen Kamara of Rangers was called a "f---ing monkey," but the player who said it was wearing a "Say No To Racism" logo on his sleeve.

When push comes to shove, whether you are starting the abuse, writing the abuse or watching the abuse on the pitch, you aren't saying "say no to racism" or "no room for racism," and you are not thinking about Kick It Out. Until we get that trend and constant abuse going downwards instead of upwards, as it seems to be, then we are fed up with T-shirts, we are fed up with hashtags and fed up of slogans. We all have to be accountable for that, and we have to be stronger in our messaging and eradicate it from our game.

My thing is always about protection of the victim, and this isn't something football does well at all. How do you protect the victim when they have been victimized? How do you protect their reactions, and protect them from the ongoing questions they have been asked, or the ongoing questions they ask themselves?

Why? That is a simple question they ask themselves. Why? Why has somebody decided that I am the person they are going to target because of the colour of my skin?

3:05

Shaka Hislop offers a passionate statement on the drive for change in his ESPN+ series, "Show Racism the Red Card."

ESPN: How challenging is your role when you learn that a player has been racially abused?

Townsend: Although we are an organisation, this is my dedicated work and I am somebody who will automatically reach out to individuals as much as I can. That process might be directly, but sometimes because of the nature of the abuse, you don't want to reach out directly because you want them to have the comfort of the people closest around them first. So I'll reach out to clubs, and if I have personal relationships, of course I reach out, but effectively, we are deemed as part of the issue as well.

Even from a player's standpoint, they may not be clear on what we do or can we do anything for them that takes away the pain. The job is hard enough as it is, the identification of so many players who actually say, "What can you do for me, I've been abused on social media, I have shared some with you, but there is more still waiting in my DMs."

Read all the latest news and reaction from ESPN FC senior writer Mark Ogden.

They ask, "Can you influence social media companies; is there a way I can be protected on this?" The worst part for me is that for the most part the answer is no.

ESPN: How can that change?

Townsend: One of the things I'm putting in place is an advisory board -- a players' advisory board -- that will have players from across the leagues from different backgrounds. Ex-players will be involved as well. So when people ask for my solution, I ask for players to be more into Kick It Out. They hold us to account, and they challenge us and provide us with advice -- maybe back in the changing rooms, the players are talking about this topic and they want the advice. So players help us move forward as an organisation and help us unlock this new understanding of what we do.

We always get criticised -- "You are only a T-shirt, aren't you?" -- and I get told by so many players that "oh, you know, we get told to put these T-shirts on," and I actually turn it back on them and ask well, what do you want to learn about the organisation? Well, what do you want to know; did you ever think to reach out to us?

But we have to take part of the blame along the way. Hopefully the advisory board, which will be announced very soon, will give us that wider reach in terms of discussing the things the players are talking about.

Let's start having this open and honest conversation. I have no fear about being criticized; I think that half the problem is that football doesn't like criticism. I have no fear about being criticized, as I have always been looking to do better and trying to do better.

People think this is an easy job and an easy ride and we are loaded with money, that we are funded by all the footballing bodies, but we're not. We are a small charity with a limited workforce that covers right across the game. We are punching above our weight on a daily basis.

I say to people, if you really want to understand our day-to-day, come and work with me. Come and look at the stuff that I see. What our reporting officers see on a daily basis, every form of discrimination. Come and see the impact that this small charity has on the big space that is football and you'll see how easy this job is for any of us.

View post:
Kick It Out's Townsend: 'We are fed up with hashtags and fed up of slogans' in fight against racist abuse - ESPN