Jump to content

The 2016 Takeover Thread


Sam3773

Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

Even if it's a false claim that may harm someone's reputation.

They even write against fellow journalists (ahem phone scandals). Full on civil/world war in Journalism Land.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, dn1982 said:

I was just pointing out how Sky contradict themselves. They used to break stories now they just regurgitate crap off the Internet and add Sky Sports understands before it. 

They do spout a lot of crap, but not ‘everything’ is regurgitated from the internet. They have loads of influence and connections in the game; more than they should, and I am sure they have broken the odd exclusive.  Time will tell if this has any substance, probably not, but the fact they have a reporter camped outside BMH suggests they have heard something to me.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Gary Thomas said:

They do spout a lot of crap, but not ‘everything’ is regurgitated from the internet. They have loads of influence and connections in the game; more than they should, and I am sure they have broken the odd exclusive.  Time will tell if this has any substance, probably not, but the fact they have a reporter camped outside BMH suggests they have heard something to me.

If you post enough rumours as "stories" then occasionally you'll score a hit. It doesn't mean they've got any better sources than anyone else. They do have a platform to say "look we told you so" for the rare hits.

Why do you think in any week you can find stories in the media that "it's going to be the hottest summer on record" and "it's going to be the coldest summer on record"? It's because our cognitive biases lead us to both remember the hits more than the misses and better remember things that conform to our own preconceptions. We are hard-wired to do this and it requires concious effort to think sceptically and recognise it for what it is. But this thread isn't the place to discuss psychology..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, dounavilla said:

As much as I believe he absolutely has the right to keep his wealth private it's always the first question fans ask and try to seek is "what's he worth?".

Its also the thing I despise most about football, its tantamount to comparing the size of your teams penis and the media are desperate to know the size of ours so they can wave it in other teams faces so to speak, not cool at all.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, limpid said:

If you post enough rumours as "stories" then occasionally you'll score a hit. It doesn't mean they've got any better sources than anyone else. They do have a platform to say "look we told you so" for the rare hits.

Why do you think in any week you can find stories in the media that "it's going to be the hottest summer on record" and "it's going to be the coldest summer on record"? It's because our cognitive biases lead us to both remember the hits more than the misses and better remember things that conform to our own preconceptions. We are hard-wired to do this and it requires concious effort to think sceptically and recognise it for what it is. But this thread isn't the place to discuss psychology..

Plus they make a shit load from steering people how to bet via Sky Bet. Certainly no conflict of interest there. <_<

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's why phrases such as 'sources suggest' and 'we understand that' come in. It becomes a fact, they have been told that and therefore nothing they've said is not true. Doesn't matter who said it or whether they were even told to say it.

'The queen is actually a goat they put a costume on' is a lie.

'I've been informed the queen is a goat they put a costume on' is perfectly true. Or it would be had I been told that, but as a journalist has a right to not reveal their source, you can't prove I wasn't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, 7392craig said:

I get sarcasm, I don't get the UKIP link.

Wasn't sure if you were being sarcastic or not. 

UKIP thing of maybe not being too welcome to foreign influx into UK, hence being a bit anti-Tony. That's my guess any hoo 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...
Â