These comments?WoodleyRoyal wrote:with a bit of luck he has been given his marching orders, terrible articles, terrible reporting and so many basic mistakes.
this article for instance, http://www.getreading.co.uk/sport/footb ... m-12522369 comments at the bottom tearing him a new one.
This first sentance
Trolled by a f*ckwit. Big dealgrammatical mistakes... charles watts! ...You need to act quickly trinity mirror....
Hi Jonathan!The Reverend wrote:These comments?WoodleyRoyal wrote:with a bit of luck he has been given his marching orders, terrible articles, terrible reporting and so many basic mistakes.
this article for instance, http://www.getreading.co.uk/sport/footb ... m-12522369 comments at the bottom tearing him a new one.
This first sentanceTrolled by a f*ckwit. Big dealgrammatical mistakes... charles watts! ...You need to act quickly trinity mirror....
3000+ upvotes on Reddit as well. Second most upvoted r/soccer post on deadline day behind Luiz's free kick.Royal Ginger wrote:This 'mare isn't going away from him. A quick google has found this story listed on a variety of other teams fan's forums and I've very quickly found the story reported in Hungarian and Romanian.
http://www.origo.hu/sport/focivilag/201 ... enisz.html
http://www.gsp.ro/fotbal/liga-1/farsa-a ... 00720.html
That's a bad day at the office.
Jonathan Low really is a class a dipstick, but he at least took it on the chin and said it wasn't his finest day. Lots of press running with this today as well, just to rub it in.Royal Ginger wrote:Get Reading actually ARE running it.
I'm not sure he even had that much notice tbh, though you're right it doesn't excuse basic and simple errors.Hound wrote:IN terms of sympathy - I'm a little short on it to be honest. Surely you would at least quickly put a name like that into google before posting it on the paper website - would take all of 5 seconds to do so.
And whilst he might have not asked for the job initially, he must have known for a month or so before CW left. And lets face it, its not a bad gig is it? Probably not the best paying, but still enough to put a bit of effort in and not make the kind of basic errors and lack of any kind of information in his reports. Its harsh, but an enthusiastic school boy could put together better articles than he has so far,
Agreed, the internet really does kill proper journalism particularly if the site you work for is solely driven on clicks on/to their website. You're forced to report what basically amounts to total cr@p and non-stories (just like SSN) nearly all the time just to maintain freshness.Wimb wrote:I'm not sure he even had that much notice tbh, though you're right it doesn't excuse basic and simple errors.Hound wrote:IN terms of sympathy - I'm a little short on it to be honest. Surely you would at least quickly put a name like that into google before posting it on the paper website - would take all of 5 seconds to do so.
And whilst he might have not asked for the job initially, he must have known for a month or so before CW left. And lets face it, its not a bad gig is it? Probably not the best paying, but still enough to put a bit of effort in and not make the kind of basic errors and lack of any kind of information in his reports. Its harsh, but an enthusiastic school boy could put together better articles than he has so far,
As for being a good or a bad gig, I don't think it's as fun as it used to be. You've got to churn out as much content as you can to get clicks, while having barely any time to write proper editorials or do any sort of real journalism. On top of that you're in a society now where people want stuff reported on 24/7 and so when can you switch off? Even 10 years ago you could hold stuff back for the morning's paper, or a midweek pullout etc, now it has to be up instantly or you'll lose your readership.
From my own experience having run TTE for nearly six years, it's sometimes really disheartening to see an article you know has taken someone hours of research and planning only get a fraction of the clicks you get for reporting a vague transfer rumour. Fortunately we're not under any massive pressure to clock up the click numbers so we try and to do it all but I can understand why proper journalism is getting buried beneath a mountain of memes, speculation and hot takes, especially for a commercial enterprise like GR.
I think it's about trying to get balance, but finding a revenue model that allows you to do both is really tricky and one that most sites haven't really got right yet. We rely on volunteers and passion to get us by, there's no real financial incentive to keep going. Even through the generosity of crowdfunding and support we get from the SB Nation network, we probably break even over the year when you take buying equipment, website subscriptions and various malarkey like that.Sutekh wrote:Agreed, the internet really does kill proper journalism particularly if the site you work for is solely driven on clicks on/to their website. You're forced to report what basically amounts to total cr@p and non-stories (just like SSN) nearly all the time just to maintain freshness.
In every single profession it should be quality over quantity. Rather one well written report a day than several meaningless poorly driven "splats" just to get people to keep checking back for that one gem in a million when it does appear. Remember the world isn't (and things aren't) better just because technology improves what is possible.
And this right here is the problem. You get what you pay for.Wimb wrote: I think too many people just magically expect people to produce high quality work and journalism without actually paying for it.
Or rather you get what you don't pay for.muirinho wrote:And this right here is the problem. You get what you pay for.Wimb wrote: I think too many people just magically expect people to produce high quality work and journalism without actually paying for it.
Or rather you don't get what you don't pay for.Norfolk Royal wrote:Or rather you get what you don't pay for.muirinho wrote:And this right here is the problem. You get what you pay for.Wimb wrote: I think too many people just magically expect people to produce high quality work and journalism without actually paying for it.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 61 guests