Media Rant

[JWEKD]

True, posting tweets here won't be harmful. It will frustrate everyone though. Why bother?

 

[Striiker]

It's not like I have a thread where I post all their tweets.

The only time I post one is when it's especially insane and I think it will amuse people, like it did me.

 

[JWEKD]

Yeah, but someone else proposed stickying this thread. Thats what i'm poo pooing.

 

[Rebels57]

Yeah, but someone else proposed stickying this thread. Thats what i'm poo pooing.

If they are *****ed about in only one thread, instead of sprinkled around in multiple, then they become easy to avoid for those that want to pretend they dont exist. Thats the idea behind it.

 

[JWEKD]

If they are *****ed about in only one thread, instead of sprinkled around in multiple, then they become easy to avoid for those that want to pretend they dont exist. Thats the idea behind it.

Go for it then. I just thought since the main theme on this board today has been *****ing about Flyers media, we should just ignore them completely. It'll never happen and people will continue to be angry about it, so I suppose keeping it in one thread (which will also never happen) is worth a shot.

 

[Rebels57]

Go for it then. I just thought since the main theme on this board today has been *****ing about Flyers media, we should just ignore them completely. It'll never happen and people will continue to be angry about it, so I suppose keeping it in one thread (which will also never happen) is worth a shot.

Id love to never see their names and their drivel again and having a thread dedicated to them that I will never look in would accomplish that lol.

 

[Garbage Goal]

I wasn't pinpointing this one thread when I said that nor any single poster. Was a general statement...thus why I spoke generally.

Posting links does support them whether you like to think it does or not. Some people are going to click on links just to see what the hoopla is about, even if the content is crappy or obvious sensationalistic drivel. If you believe otherwise then what's the point of posting links to terrible journalism if nobody is going to be clicking on it?

More clicks equal more site traffic and generally more ad revenue. That's how the internet works generally speaking.

 

[Striiker]

There's a difference between posting a link to a tweet and a link to an article.

People post individual tweets all the time but it's uncommon to see a link to an article.

 

[Broad Street Elite]

I wonder if this is how the guy who sold stone tablets felt when some dude rolled in with papyrus. I mean, even if what this guy is saying is true and digital media access to everything IS killing media jobs, so what? I mean that's part of the way advancement in society and this case sports media works.

Media still has a niche due to player access and the ability to ask questions (most of which are poor in my experience) to find out the WHY behind the WHAT occurred in the games that people can now view directly.

 

[Beef Invictus]

I would be OK with trusting tweets from the beat writers if I could remotely trust that they even know what they're looking at. I cannot.

And also because I refuse to follow them on Twitter because that kind of support can help keep them employed.

 

[Hurricane28]

Pantoch just wrote an article titled "Giroux surprise entry into Thursday Preseason game"

 

[JDinkalage Morgoone]

Don't forget the beat writers trying to turn the fans on guys like Richards, Carter, Hartnell, etc.

 

[Hollywood Cannon]

Don't forget the beat writers trying to turn the fans on guys like Richards, Carter, Hartnell, etc.

I mean the fans DID turn on Richards and Carter.

 

[Beef Invictus]

Don't forget the beat writers trying to turn the fans on guys like Richards, Carter, Hartnell, etc.

They don't care if they damage the team.

 

[GKJ]

When it comes to media-types that everyone knows like...those guys...think about how for as much as a lot of us here may disagree with each other on certain topics, when they put something out there that people here either way know is crap, there's a lot more people out there who don't know that. And that's how people turned on Richards and Carter and such. I don't know how many times I hear from people who aren't as tuned in as even us fans about stuff written by those people who I know put out unmitigated ********.

 

[Striiker]

 

[GKJ]

Its a newsletter and its pretty much the go to source for news in the industry. The guy who writes it (Dave Meltzer) was once called the greatest journalist in America by Frank DeFord.

And there's even a sect of wrestling fans who **** on Dave Meltzer for crediting sources while having no understanding of the industry. A bit of a different animal, but there's a guy who wrestlers once used to seek the approval of, and in some cases still do. I realize that wasn't the topic, but funny how that works almost the opposite way.

 

[YEM]

Posting links does support them whether you like to think it does or not. Some people are going to click on links just to see what the hoopla is about, even if the content is crappy or obvious sensationalistic drivel. If you believe otherwise then what's the point of posting links to terrible journalism if nobody is going to be clicking on it?

More clicks equal more site traffic and generally more ad revenue. That's how the internet works generally speaking.

agreed
& same with twitter links
seems like the people who get the angriest about this also draw the most attention toward these crappy writers
just ignore...

 

[Curufinwe]

Are more useful role for this thread might be for people who don't follow all the beats asking questions to those that do.

Such as, have any of them commented on Manning not playing again tonight?

 

[JDinkalage Morgoone]

I mean the fans DID turn on Richards and Carter.

They don't care if they damage the team.

When it comes to media-types that everyone knows like...those guys...think about how for as much as a lot of us here may disagree with each other on certain topics, when they put something out there that people here either way know is crap, there's a lot more people out there who don't know that. And that's how people turned on Richards and Carter and such. I don't know how many times I hear from people who aren't as tuned in as even us fans about stuff written by those people who I know put out unmitigated ********.

The fans turned on Richards and Carter and the Olde City crew because of Timmy. No doubt in my mind. They decided tabloid journalism was the best way to generate hits and not actually discuss any hockey. I mean, Christ. The way Jeff Carter is perceived in this town is as if he was living in a mansion made out of cocaine.

They totally blew up any internal struggles the Flyers had and caused dumb people in the city to turn on these guys.

 

[Rebels57]

The fans turned on Richards and Carter and the Olde City crew because of Timmy. No doubt in my mind. They decided tabloid journalism was the best way to generate hits and not actually discuss any hockey. I mean, Christ. The way Jeff Carter is perceived in this town is as if he was living in a mansion made out of cocaine.

They totally blew up any internal struggles the Flyers had and caused dumb people in the city to turn on these guys.

My problems with Carter and Richards had very little to do with tabloid journalism and a whole lot to do with their dissapearing act in the Stanley Cup Finals, followed by half-hearted effort the following season.

 

[Curufinwe]

http://www.csnphilly.com/philadelphia-flyers/radko-gudas-wont-face-hearing-boarding-major-vs-rangers

That Vesey was uninjured and remained in the game undoubtedly influenced the decision not to suspend Gudas even though that is not supposed to carry any weight in such matters.

https://www.nhl.com/news/department-of-player-safety-faqs/c-738846

Why is injury taken into account when deciding Supplemental Discipline? And what other factors are taken into account?

Per Article 18.2 in the CBA between the NHL and the NHLPA:
"... In deciding on Supplementary Discipline for On-Ice Conduct, the following factors will be taken into account:
(a) The type of conduct involved: conduct in violation of League Playing Rules, and whether the conduct is intentional or reckless, and involves the use of excessive and unnecessary force. Players are responsible for the consequences of their actions.
(b) Injury to the opposing Player(s) involved in the incident.
(c) The status of the offender and, specifically, whether the Player has a history of being subject to Supplementary Discipline for On-Ice Conduct. Players who repeatedly violate League Playing Rules will be more severely punished for each new violation.
(d) The situation of the game in which the incident occurred, for example: late in the game, lopsided score, prior events in the game.
(e) Such other factors as may be appropriate in the circumstances."

 

[Flyotes]

Womp womp.

 

[PAZUZU]

http://www.philly.com/philly/sports/20161014_Sielski__Giroux_is_whatever_you_want_him_to_be.html

Am I being an internet spelling Nazi or should he know how to spell "Weise" since he supposedly covers this team?

 

[LegionOfDoom91]

http://www.philly.com/philly/sports/20161014_Sielski__Giroux_is_whatever_you_want_him_to_be.html

Am I being an internet spelling Nazi or should he know how to spell "Weise" since he supposedly covers this team?

He doesn't really cover the team. He's just there to write hit pieces about the four major sports teams here in Philadelphia. He's a paid troll essentially.