The media continues to misrepresent Celtic fans and what we believe in.

At the risk of turning this into a series of rants, I want to do this piece on the way I’ve grown more and more frustrated with how the media portrays Celtic supporters. Too often, it feels as if the story about us is written before anyone bothers to look at reality.

I am new to this, but I look at all the comments on all the sites and take into account the views of fellow fans, and none of them trusts the media. This is not new. But the more I look at it, the more I understand what the issue is.

Media coverage often presents a distorted image of the club, built on rumours rather than confirmed facts. Passion becomes trouble, identity becomes controversy, and genuine concerns from supporters get dismissed as background noise, or worse; as an irrelevance the club is advised to just ignore.

To be clear, I’m not claiming Celtic fans are perfect.

No support anywhere is.

However, we have every right to ask why the lens so often feels harsher when it turns on us, and why the fuller picture rarely appears. The community work, the culture, the history, and the reasons this club means so much to people rarely make the headlines. Everything about our passion for this club gets warped.

That’s where much of my frustration begins.

In Scottish football, the media often drives its own narrative, it seems to me, and oftentimes it seems to have very little to do with the truth. Too many outlets frame Celtic negatively, as if they are simply waiting for an opportunity to publish another critical piece based on speculation rather than substance.

As I see it, certain journalists contribute to that pattern. Figures such as Keith Jackson regularly provoke controversy where none needs to exist. His coverage often highlights problems around Celtic while presenting Sevco in a far more positive light. Keevins, who I’ve read about more than read, seems to be another.

He appears to think of himself as some kind of controversial writer. That approach has drawn criticism, yet it keeps attention precisely because it generates reaction. Disgust and contempt are reactions, I suppose, and that’s what those articles get.

And he is not alone. Others repeat rumours, amplify weak stories and present distorted versions of events. That is not serious journalism. It is lazy reporting, and it damages the image of the club. It also damages the media itself, but this is less important to us. If they want to torch their own profession that’s up to them.

But Celtic supporters have every right to challenge that narrative.

Over the last year, I’ve noticed how often Celtic stories get framed through controversy rather than context. Football rarely stands alone.

Take the Remembrance poppy debate. I’ve looked into this one specifically because I had questions about it in November of last year.

Freedom means freedom to choose. But at times, when players or supporters chose a different approach from what the media expects and demands, the coverage quickly frames it as disrespect, and it does not matter that many fans see the issue through a more complex historical and cultural lens. Meanwhile, behaviour at Ibrox often receives far less scrutiny. They get away with their songs of hate … genuine hate, with no justification cultural or political. That imbalance does not go unnoticed.

Another example involves Palestinian solidarity displays. When the Green Brigade raised flags during European matches, coverage focused on rule-breaking and provocation. Supporters, however, saw those displays as humanitarian expression. Why did the media not take our side in framing it that way?

Similarly, Irish symbolism has always formed part of Celtic’s identity. Tricolours, songs and historical references reflect the club’s roots. Yet reporting frequently leans towards political tension or sectarian framing rather than heritage and history.

Supporter protests follow the same pattern.

Look at the way some in the media seem determined to frame the Collective’s protests through a lens of troublemaking, intimidation and Whether the issue concerns football governance, the monarchy or wider politics, coverage often portrays supporters as troublemakers instead of people expressing legitimate views.

At the same time, sectarian narratives frequently appear whenever Celtic enters the conversation. Incidents involving chants or derby tensions often get placed within the so-called “Old Firm cultural divide” reinforcing the idea that their sins are ours. The “two heads of the same coin” narrative is deeply offensive to our fans.

I’m not suggesting the media invents every flashpoint. However, the emphasis shapes how each story lands. With Celtic, controversy sells, and nuance usually disappears. I’ve only been active in following the club online for a couple of years, but even I can recognise the pattern now that I’ve been following it for a while.

Of course, the rivalry itself also affects how we see things. The Celtic-Sevco dynamic has never been just about football. A win can make everything feel fine, even when deeper issues remain. A defeat, meanwhile, can feel heavier than it should. Perspective shrinks to ninety minutes, and the media knows this.

As a result, many of us filter everything through that rivalry lens and the media amplifies it. Refereeing decisions, transfers, board strategy and media coverage all seem to connect back to the same comparison. The concerns may be real, but the rivalry magnifies them and makes every issue feel sharper.

Meanwhile, traditional and social media amplify every flashpoint. A single incident gets replayed endlessly, and the wider picture fades from view. That suits the media narratives which seek to paint our club in a negative light.

It enables them to frame incidents like that where our fans were pelted with missiles some years back as an issue affecting both clubs; yeah, one set of fans did it and the other set had it done to them … that’s not tit-for-tat. That’s just media tits getting an anti-Celtic story out of it.

I love the passion associated with our club. It makes supporting Celtic feel alive. Nevertheless, the media is forever blurring that.

That environment helps explain the rise of fan media.

In recent years, supporter-driven platforms have grown rapidly. What began as scattered blogs has evolved into podcasts, YouTube channels and social media communities where fans shape the conversation themselves.

Part of that growth reflects distrust.

Mainstream coverage screams bias at times and in response, supporters have created spaces to analyse matches, question the board, discuss recruitment and defend the club’s identity, sometimes from the media itself.

Encouragingly, younger fans now produce their own content instead of simply consuming it. Tactical analysis, financial breakdowns and historical context increasingly come from within the support itself and almost all of it is vastly superior to what you get from the likes of Jackson. At the same time, fan media provides accountability. When the board disappoints, supporters have a platform to make their voices heard.

Yes, fan content can be emotional and partisan. However, that reflects the reality of supporting Celtic. This club represents community, history and pride. Fan media does more than report events. It allows supporters to reclaim the story around Celtic, to take it away from those who would write their own version of it.

Even so, the sense of misrepresentation persists.

Coverage often reduces Celtic to stereotypes or political shorthand, ignoring the diversity within the support and completely rejecting context. When controversy arises, scrutiny frequently feels sharper than it does for other clubs. And we know which other clubs we are talking about when we say that.

Much of Celtic’s culture also fails to translate through mainstream reporting. The club’s heritage and social history require context that headlines rarely provide. That gap explains why so many supporters turn to fan platforms for explanation in their own words.

Ultimately, Celtic supporters are not perfect. However, media coverage often presents a selective and incomplete picture. Headlines focus on conflict while ignoring the community, culture and history that define this support.

That disconnect fuels frustration. It also explains why so many fans now push back. Supporters simply want to be seen as they really are, not as the caricature the media prefers to show. I want to read about what makes Celtic fans great. I want to read about what makes this club great. Ultimately, that’s why I write about it, because I know that other people feel the way about it that I do.