The sun link Gerrard with Leeds

Bluenose1979

Well-Known Member
That's nothing new. Been happening for decades. Outlet A 'breaks' a story, Outlets B, C& D pick it up and run with what has been reported elsewhere.

There's also the scope there that they run the story as reported elsewhere, check in with their own sources and run a follow-up further down the line adding to or refuting the original based on the information they've learned since.
Correct - and it's largely why there is little respect for the abject pish they publish regularly that proves to be nothing but guess work from less and less reliable sources now that every fckwit and their dug is a "blogger" running a website or social media account with the latest "news".

They don't even pick up content from know reliable sources nowadays - quite the opposite. They copy and paste from sources known to spout utter made up nonsense as standard. Not because it's true, but because t gives them a sensational enough headline to get clicks.
 
I must admit, it's always funny seeing folk moaning about how inaccurate the media are while failing to get simple things like who is reporting the story correct.
I must admit, it's always funny seeing folk moaning about how inaccurate the media are while failing to get simple things like who is reporting the story correct.
I must admit, it’s always funny seeing folk moan about folk that moan about getting what an idiot of a journalist either copies or makes up. If a journalist copies and pastes other stories of other idiot journalists then he is just as bad.
 

Ozman

Active Member
He’s already started he doesn’t want to manage lots of clubs, only the right clubs. He’s not moving for jobs like this. A comic.
 

DoubleWhopper

Well-Known Member
Official Ticketer
If he delivers us the title, I think Premier League clubs would be interested.

If Leeds are a premier league club next season, I think Bielsa will want a crack at that. And incidentally, I don't think they will be. The Bielsa "factor" is so overblown and Leeds aren't actually very good. After a strong start they're regressingly massively.

We accept Gerrard won't be at Rangers forever. Given how much "shelf life" is talked about these days, I'd say it's a certainty he'd have left by 2021-22. Because he'll either have delivered us a title by then and cashed in on it or he won't have delivered us a title and he'd have to be shown the door. Realistically we'll still keep him if we don't win it this season. If we don't win it the following season then he'd be gone.
 

The Dude

Well-Known Member
Correct - and it's largely why there is little respect for the abject pish they publish regularly that proves to be nothing but guess work from less and less reliable sources now that every fckwit and their dug is a "blogger" running a website or social media account with the latest "news".

They don't even pick up content from know reliable sources nowadays - quite the opposite. They copy and paste from sources known to spout utter made up nonsense as standard. Not because it's true, but because t gives them a sensational enough headline to get clicks.
Guess work in fitba journalism? You just new to this? That's been around as long as folk have been writing about fitba.
So who are the reliable sources they should pick up from? Even some of the 'reliable sources' posters on here used to absolutely swear by get it badly wrong.
 

Bluenose1979

Well-Known Member
Guess work in fitba journalism? You just new to this? That's been around as long as folk have been writing about fitba.
So who are the reliable sources they should pick up from? Even some of the 'reliable sources' posters on here used to absolutely swear by get it badly wrong.
Who ever said it was new? But it's markedly worse nowadays given the multitude of bullshit "sources" and the drive for instant clicks and quick turnaround on content.
 

The Dude

Well-Known Member
I must admit, it’s always funny seeing folk moan about folk that moan about getting what an idiot of a journalist either copies or makes up. If a journalist copies and pastes other stories of other idiot journalists then he is just as bad.
Why wouldn't it be reported unless you had information to contradict it?
 

gersrus71

Well-Known Member
Rangers go top of the league at the weekend
Within a few days they are linking our gaffer with all sorts of jobs
Hmmmm usual pish from the usual suspects.
They are shitting themselves
 

The Dude

Well-Known Member
Who ever said it was new? But it's markedly worse nowadays given the multitude of bullshit "sources" and the drive for instant clicks and quick turnaround on content.
The drive for instant clicks and quick turnaround is largely driven by the reader. I'd love to be able to sit and do long-form interviews and analytical pieces every day. But people want news stories every 30 minutes and have actually complained in the past when it fell to just once an hour while often ignoring the more detailed stuff in favour of the click-baity stuff.

In the 2019, my most-read story is Robbie Savage having a dig at Chris Sutton over Rangers having more trophies than Celtic.
 

Bluenose1979

Well-Known Member
Why wouldn't it be reported unless you had information to contradict it?
Because any self-respecting journalist, who actually considered their work to have greater integrity than any other random posting made up guff on the internet, would want to substantiate their stories before publishing.

Instead, these modern journalists are now not much different from those randoms in that the quick post of a grabby headline to get a click is more important. Once it's been clicked, it doesn't really matter what's behind it any more.
 

The Dude

Well-Known Member
Rangers go top of the league at the weekend
Within a few days they are linking our gaffer with all sorts of jobs
Hmmmm usual pish from the usual suspects.
They are shitting themselves
Wayne Veysey has no interest in (and even less knowledge of) Scottish football beyond what he can do to make money off his website.
 

Bluenose1979

Well-Known Member
The drive for instant clicks and quick turnaround is largely driven by the reader. I'd love to be able to sit and do long-form interviews and analytical pieces every day. But people want news stories every 30 minutes and have actually complained in the past when it fell to just once an hour while often ignoring the more detailed stuff in favour of the click-baity stuff.

In the 2019, my most-read story is Robbie Savage having a dig at Chris Sutton over Rangers having more trophies than Celtic.
Is that a contradiction of the point or just an admission that journalistic standards are going down the toilet to meet the braindead demands of a social media audience?

Sounds like the former.
 
Because any self-respecting journalist, who actually considered their work to have greater integrity than any other random posting made up guff on the internet, would want to substantiate their stories before publishing.

Instead, these modern journalists are now not much different from those randoms in that the quick post of a grabby headline to get a click is more important. Once it's been clicked, it doesn't really matter what's behind it any more.
This.
 

The Dude

Well-Known Member
Because any self-respecting journalist, who actually considered their work to have greater integrity than any other random posting made up guff on the internet, would want to substantiate their stories before publishing.

Instead, these modern journalists are now not much different from those randoms in that the quick post of a grabby headline to get a click is more important. Once it's been clicked, it doesn't really matter what's behind it any more.
Again, it's not their story as such. It's not that different to how outlets use news wires. IF Reuters reports that something has happened in Paris, the wee dude from the Sun isn't going to go and then verify that for himself before running it.

If people didn't click on those stories in far greater numbers than the in-depth stuff, outlets would move away from creating such content. People get what people read in the largest numbers.
 

The Dude

Well-Known Member
Is that a contradiction of the point or just an admission that journalistic standards are going down the toilet to meet the braindead demands of a social media audience?

Sounds like the former.
More the latter. As long as people click on garbage links in far greater numbers than they do in-depth content then papers will keep serving up the shite that does the better numbers.
 

WATP_74

Well-Known Member
Regarding the family element.
With money not being an issue, you think he could move his family up to Glasgow for a few years - hardly the other side of the world - and home school the kids or temporarily have them in a private school.
I realise his wife and older kids may have ties down there, but it's only for for a few years and not far from Liverpool.
Better than the Gaffer wanking like a trooper and being lonely every night.
 

Bluenose1979

Well-Known Member
Again, it's not their story as such. It's not that different to how outlets use news wires. IF Reuters reports that something has happened in Paris, the wee dude from the Sun isn't going to go and then verify that for himself before running it.

If people didn't click on those stories in far greater numbers than the in-depth stuff, outlets would move away from creating such content. People get what people read in the largest numbers.
I would argue getting something from Reuters is fine - it's a more reliable source. Similarly I'm sure PA and other more robust news sources carry a weight of expectation that what they have is actually verifiable within the level of reason a proper news outlet would expect.

We're not talking about that, are we? We're talking about the quick-fire, turnaround copy and paste from shitey blogs well known to spout utter made-up rubbish - which absolutely happens.

And again, your second point is merely a confirmation that journalistic standards are not about robust and accurate reporting. They are simply about quantity over quality and the main focus is on volume. It's not a defence for printing bollocks, it's a reason that smacks of a lack of any real integrity.
 

Bluenose1979

Well-Known Member
More the latter. As long as people click on garbage links in far greater numbers than they do in-depth content then papers will keep serving up the shite that does the better numbers.
I suppose that's as much an admission as any - and straight from the horse's mouth so to speak... :D
 

Bluebrox

Well-Known Member
He'll be with us this season and next season. Realistically, beyond that is anyone's guess. And, as I've mentioned before, family separation is not sustainable long term.
 

The Dude

Well-Known Member
I would argue getting something from Reuters is fine - it's a more reliable source. Similarly I'm sure PA and other more robust news sources carry a weight of expectation that what they have is actually verifiable within the level of reason a proper news outlet would expect.

We're not talking about that, are we? We're talking about the quick-fire, turnaround copy and paste from shitey blogs well known to spout utter made-up rubbish - which absolutely happens.

And again, your second point is merely a confirmation that journalistic standards are not about robust and accurate reporting. They are simply about quantity over quality and the main focus is on volume. It's not a defence for printing bollocks, it's a reason that smacks of a lack of any real integrity.
No, we're not talking about that. The stories lifted by the Sun all appear on NewsNow which, while hardly on the same level of an agency like Reuters, do have strict editorial guidelines by which sites must operate otherwise they are de-platformed (funnily enough, the Sun's content doesn't meet NewsNow guidelines).

Once anyone (and that goes from fan-led content like H&H, to tabloids, The Athletic or even Reuters/PA) start talking about 'sources' giving them a line, it becomes almost impossible to disprove - as well as having some protection. Until you can prove it is true or bollocks, you take it at face value. It's something I'll often do - particularly with Football Insider 'exclusives'. We'll report what they have claimed (often adding in opinion on whether it seems plausible or not) and try follow-up as soon as possible with information from my own 'sources'.

While, I have my own personal experience with Football Insider which sours me on them, Wayne Veysey (their editor and the named writer on the Gerrard/Leeds story) is a relatively-reputable journalist down south.

The second point, you seem to miss. There's a fine balance to be struck. Absolutely, robust and accurate reporting is key but there are also commercial demands to be met for papers like the Sun. They need to get clicks to generate revenue or everything goes behind a paywall.
 

Bluenose1979

Well-Known Member
No, we're not talking about that. The stories lifted by the Sun all appear on NewsNow which, while hardly on the same level of an agency like Reuters, do have strict editorial guidelines by which sites must operate otherwise they are de-platformed (funnily enough, the Sun's content doesn't meet NewsNow guidelines).

Once anyone (and that goes from fan-led content like H&H, to tabloids, The Athletic or even Reuters/PA) start talking about 'sources' giving them a line, it becomes almost impossible to disprove - as well as having some protection. Until you can prove it is true or bollocks, you take it at face value. It's something I'll often do - particularly with Football Insider 'exclusives'. We'll report what they have claimed (often adding in opinion on whether it seems plausible or not) and try follow-up as soon as possible with information from my own 'sources'.

While, I have my own personal experience with Football Insider which sours me on them, Wayne Veysey (their editor and the named writer on the Gerrard/Leeds story) is a relatively-reputable journalist down south.

The second point, you seem to miss. There's a fine balance to be struck. Absolutely, robust and accurate reporting is key but there are also commercial demands to be met for papers like the Sun. They need to get clicks to generate revenue or everything goes behind a paywall.
As I said, all of the above simply underlines the fact that (morseo in the modern day) the emphasis on accuracy of content is reduced in favour of volumes.

Rather than find evidence to prove a story, don't find evidence to disprove and you justify it going public, with the usual lazy caveats of anonymous "sources" because it's a get-out that is so vague and deliberately difficult to check up on, that it's a get out of jail free card to just put something-anything out there in that 30 min window.

I don't think I'm missing anything in terms of the commercial requirements to generate clicks. I'm pretty much categorically stating it as the motivator for less effort being made in ensuring the actual accuracy or integrity of the content itself. Put simply I don't think accurate and robust reporting IS key any more. It's secondary.
 

Oduwa

Well-Known Member
Official Ticketer
The Leeds equivalent of Humza Yousaf can confidently tweet that he isn't going to Leeds.

And be right.
 

LOL 133

Well-Known Member
Didn’t want to post a link so I’ve just copied the first bit;

‘LEEDS are interested in taking Steven Gerrard to Elland Road should Marcelo Bielsa leave at the end of the season, according to reports.’

Nothing other than speculation and no quotes. No chance of Gerrard going to that basket case I don’t think.
Gerrard is a man of his word and he'll be here for the 4 years he signed up for. He can see the potential and knows how to make us great again.
 

tazzabear

Well-Known Member
Didn’t want to post a link so I’ve just copied the first bit;

‘LEEDS are interested in taking Steven Gerrard to Elland Road should Marcelo Bielsa leave at the end of the season, according to reports.’

Nothing other than speculation and no quotes. No chance of Gerrard going to that basket case I don’t think.
Did the Sun have the day and date correct?
That’s as far as they go with accuracy.
 

Mbear

Well-Known Member
The only way I could see Gerrard leaving next summer is if the travel / family set up is wearing thin. That can’t be easy, same for Michael Beale who’s family have remained down south.

Other than that, both are here for 55.
This has always been my biggest worry when it comes to Gerrard.

missing his day to day life with his wife & kids will be a thing, there's no getting away from it. He’s only human like the rest of us at the end of the day
 
Top