Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: An indictment on NFL sports reporting
Eagles Forum > Philadelphia Eagles Message Board > Philadelphia Eagles or Football Related Discussion
Reality Fan
Tom Coughlin was going to be offered a contract?

Sam Bradford did not like Philly?

I could continue the list but what is going on with reporting these days? Some clown tweets something and it is given the same credence as if it really happened. AT this point you can't believe a word you read. What is worse is that other writers use these worthless/phony reports as basis for their articles....a truly lazy work ethic, but their flawed articles then skew what we fans think and the opinions we develop.

What a mess
mcnabbulous
It's not just sports reporting. It's the 24 hour news cycle, Twitter first universe we live in. It sucks.
Phits
I disagree. It isn't a mess. With the variety of outlets available, that deliver regular content, it requires the reader to decipher the information and determine facts from "reporting". I prefer this to the throwback era when the news outlets were minimal and the information provided was what they deemed relevant. At least now I can pick and choose my sources, based on the volume available.
Reality Fan
QUOTE (Phits @ Mar 4 2016, 06:16 PM) *
I disagree. It isn't a mess. With the variety of outlets available, that deliver regular content, it requires the reader to decipher the information and determine facts from "reporting". I prefer this to the throwback era when the news outlets were minimal and the information provided was what they deemed relevant. At least now I can pick and choose my sources, based on the volume available.



Yet a lot of people, yourself included cited reports that we now know were complete BS....

Too many guys just throw crap out that is reported as fact and turn out to be completely bogus.......it seems if they get 20% right they are deemed NFL insiders....

you and I can do the same thing without talking to anyone...
Phits
QUOTE (Reality Fan @ Mar 5 2016, 12:37 AM) *
Yet a lot of people, yourself included cited reports that we now know were complete BS....

How do you "know" they were BS? For example, numerous sites have reported that DeMarco Murray is unhappy in Philly. There's an old adage 'where there's smoke, there's fire'. The information presented is intended to spark discussion. This is a discussion board. It would cease to exist, if only documented facts were reported for discussion.

QUOTE
Too many guys just throw crap out that is reported as fact and turn out to be completely bogus.......it seems if they get 20% right they are deemed NFL insiders....
Readers who take everything written as fact or intended as fact are the problem.

QUOTE
you and I can do the same thing without talking to anyone...

True, and we could start a blog and hope for readership and possibly make a decent living off it. IMHO, giving people a platform to express and discuss their opinion isn't a bad thing.
Zero
Expressing an opinion as fact doesn't change much in the world of sports reporting. For fans, sports are a pastime ... unless you're deeply involved in gambling in which case you probably have deeper problems. The consequences of us digesting an opinion as fact are relatively inconsequential when concerning a player or a team. It's a game.

The more troubling and significant issue is with news "reporters." There are real and serious consequences that result when opinions are presented as fact, or when pertinent information is withheld or ignored. In sports the beliefs formed from faulty information or misinformation won't affect our lives the way it will with current events and politics.

As passionate fans we often forget that sports are a distraction, a pastime. When all the beans are counted, it really doesn't matter. Real life matters.
nephillymike
QUOTE (Reality Fan @ Mar 4 2016, 04:02 PM) *
Tom Coughlin was going to be offered a contract?

Sam Bradford did not like Philly?

I could continue the list but what is going on with reporting these days? Some clown tweets something and it is given the same credence as if it really happened. AT this point you can't believe a word you read. What is worse is that other writers use these worthless/phony reports as basis for their articles....a truly lazy work ethic, but their flawed articles then skew what we fans think and the opinions we develop.

What a mess


Add "the Eagles offer to Bradford is in the $12M-$15M range" to your list!! devil03.gif

I think of it this way.

In the old days (pre internet), because of limited outlets and the many times cordial relationships required for outlets to get that information from the teams, if there was 100 valid stories of interest that existed, the old way, we'd get to hear about 70 of them, but to get 70 correct stories we had to put up with 10 incorrect ones. Today, for that same 100 stories, we get to hear about 95 of them, but to get those 95, we have to put up with 30 incorrect ones.

There was a ton of shit that went on back in the day that nobody knew about.

Today, not so much, but, we have to put up with a much higher degree of incorrect ones.

I'd rather live in today's world with a chance to decipher the BS from the true and talk about it all in places like this.

Not saying a yearning for the past is wrong, it is just not my personal preference.
Rick
QUOTE (Phits @ Mar 4 2016, 06:16 PM) *
I disagree. It isn't a mess. With the variety of outlets available, that deliver regular content, it requires the reader to decipher the information and determine facts from "reporting". I prefer this to the throwback era when the news outlets were minimal and the information provided was what they deemed relevant. At least now I can pick and choose my sources, based on the volume available.

Nope, it's a mess. "Reporters," rarely seem to fact check like in the old days. If it sounds good, and even remotely plausible (sometimes not even that) they tend to report it.
Phits
cheers.gif Yep

QUOTE (nephillymike @ Mar 5 2016, 06:45 AM) *
Add "the Eagles offer to Bradford is in the $12M-$15M range" to your list!! devil03.gif

I think of it this way.

In the old days (pre internet), because of limited outlets and the many times cordial relationships required for outlets to get that information from the teams, if there was 100 valid stories of interest that existed, the old way, we'd get to hear about 70 of them, but to get 70 correct stories we had to put up with 10 incorrect ones. Today, for that same 100 stories, we get to hear about 95 of them, but to get those 95, we have to put up with 30 incorrect ones.

There was a ton of shit that went on back in the day that nobody knew about.

Today, not so much, but, we have to put up with a much higher degree of incorrect ones.

I'd rather live in today's world with a chance to decipher the BS from the true and talk about it all in places like this.

Not saying a yearning for the past is wrong, it is just not my personal preference.

Reality Fan
QUOTE (Zero @ Mar 5 2016, 06:05 AM) *
Expressing an opinion as fact doesn't change much in the world of sports reporting. For fans, sports are a pastime ... unless you're deeply involved in gambling in which case you probably have deeper problems. The consequences of us digesting an opinion as fact are relatively inconsequential when concerning a player or a team. It's a game.

The more troubling and significant issue is with news "reporters." There are real and serious consequences that result when opinions are presented as fact, or when pertinent information is withheld or ignored. In sports the beliefs formed from faulty information or misinformation won't affect our lives the way it will with current events and politics.

As passionate fans we often forget that sports are a distraction, a pastime. When all the beans are counted, it really doesn't matter. Real life matters.


The bold is exactly what I am talking about. WHen guys like Nabby talk about a QB it is easy for the rational minds to take it for the uninformed opinion that it is (sorry Nabby, I could not resist.. blah.gif ) But seriously, when sports reporters like Iam Rapparot tak about the Eagles on the verge of signing Tom Coughlin to a contract when, in fact, he was nearly laughed out of his interview it speaks to a serious ethical problem of the actual reporters just making up stories and, in many cases, at the behest of agents to better their clients leverage in exchange for favors, information or money.
Reality Fan
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Mar 5 2016, 06:45 AM) *
Add "the Eagles offer to Bradford is in the $12M-$15M range" to your list!! devil03.gif

I think of it this way.

In the old days (pre internet), because of limited outlets and the many times cordial relationships required for outlets to get that information from the teams, if there was 100 valid stories of interest that existed, the old way, we'd get to hear about 70 of them, but to get 70 correct stories we had to put up with 10 incorrect ones. Today, for that same 100 stories, we get to hear about 95 of them, but to get those 95, we have to put up with 30 incorrect ones.

There was a ton of shit that went on back in the day that nobody knew about.

Today, not so much, but, we have to put up with a much higher degree of incorrect ones.

I'd rather live in today's world with a chance to decipher the BS from the true and talk about it all in places like this.

Not saying a yearning for the past is wrong, it is just not my personal preference.


You are as inaccurate on this as you were for 4/36/72.....

Today, for those 100 stories, 10 are accurate and 40 are plausible and the remainder are just plain made up...
Reality Fan
QUOTE (Rick @ Mar 5 2016, 09:15 AM) *
Nope, it's a mess. "Reporters," rarely seem to fact check like in the old days. If it sounds good, and even remotely plausible (sometimes not even that) they tend to report it.


exactly...anything to get clicks
D Rock
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Mar 4 2016, 09:10 PM) *
It's not just sports reporting. It's the 24 hour news cycle, Twitter first universe we live in. It sucks.

Actually, twitter is helping to save journalism. Journalism died with the advent of Ted Turner's CNN. Back in the day, the big 3 networks made their bones easily. NBC, for example, covered it's nut with The Tonight Show and Days of Our Lives. All the rest was pure profit. They offered the evening news, commercial free, as some measure of "giving back" or a "public service."

Along came Ted with CNN and the 24 hour news cycle. Even then, it wasn't until the OJ Simpson trial that middle America left the 3 network teat and began lapping up the cable "news" with pavlovian vigor. At that point, it became a ratings game, and all about sponsorship $$$. The more sensational, the better.

Twitter has created (for better or worse) an unending army of citizen journalists, and if the average user vets sources and fact checks, it's a much more reliable source for information than CNN, Fox, or MSNBC.
mcnabbulous
There is definitely more accountability, but there is also more inaccuracy due to the need to be first. Unfortunately most people stop paying attention after the initial headline wave.

The redactions and corrections are always brushed under the rug.
Reality Fan
QUOTE (D Rock @ Mar 5 2016, 02:33 PM) *
Actually, twitter is helping to save journalism. Journalism died with the advent of Ted Turner's CNN. Back in the day, the big 3 networks made their bones easily. NBC, for example, covered it's nut with The Tonight Show and Days of Our Lives. All the rest was pure profit. They offered the evening news, commercial free, as some measure of "giving back" or a "public service."

Along came Ted with CNN and the 24 hour news cycle. Even then, it wasn't until the OJ Simpson trial that middle America left the 3 network teat and began lapping up the cable "news" with pavlovian vigor. At that point, it became a ratings game, and all about sponsorship $$$. The more sensational, the better.

Twitter has created (for better or worse) an unending army of citizen journalists, and if the average user vets sources and fact checks, it's a much more reliable source for information than CNN, Fox, or MSNBC.


Don't blame Ted...blame 60 minutes and guys like Roone Arledge who pioneered profitable news before CNN appeared....but you are spot on about ratings.....the issue is that none are held to account for all the crap they male up....there are no repercussions...look at Sal Pal and all the shit he made up in just the last month..

They just move on to the next story
Eyrie
QUOTE (Reality Fan @ Mar 5 2016, 11:07 PM) *
They just move on to the next story

Except for the rare occasion when they guessed right, in which case they'll trumpet their "insight".

Happens over here too.
The Franchise
QUOTE (D Rock @ Mar 5 2016, 02:33 PM) *
Back in the day, the big 3 networks made their bones easily.


Yes, things were much better when the nation had to choose between 3 monolithic government-monitored television networks to get their filtered dose of current events. Idiot. Sheeple like you are why we can't have nice things.

You can find any amount of information you want on any subject on the internet, from countless sources, with countless opinions. You can literally see the exact same story reported on from dozens of different angles and biases. This allows intelligent, rational people to create informed opinions. Unfortunately, yes, this also allows for legions of morons the world over to believe whatever they see on reddit, network news, ESPN, Twitter, etc.

Journalistic ethics has always been a laughable myth - but now, more than ever, at least official 'journalists' are held somewhat accountable at times because of all the places people can get information. Hell, you could argue that without the Drudge Report there would be no Lewinsky scandal, as Clinton and Co. had already intimidated Newsweek's 'journalists' into silence. 2 days later, the entire media was forced to report the story. JFK's degenerate family is sure as hell glad that social media couldn't report on their lives behind the scenes during the 60's.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2017 Invision Power Services, Inc.