Football Media

[phips]

explain

Explain what exactly?

here i was thinking that headlines are supposed to grab people's attention, draw them in, and get them to read the story.
so, inflammatory headlines like this are normal and to be expected.

not at all clear on why this is trolling journalism. its just journalism. the headline isn't a lie, its just omitting something. something that you find out by...you guessed it...reading the article, which is the whole point.

[iwasthere2012]

explain

Explain what exactly?

here i was thinking that headlines are supposed to grab people's attention, draw them in, and get them to read the story.
so, inflammatory headlines like this are normal and to be expected.

not at all clear on why this is trolling journalism. its just journalism. the headline isn't a lie, its just omitting something. something that you find out by...you guessed it...reading the article, which is the whole point.

Now you are just acting the dick. WW explained enough for anyone.... It is trolling 'Journalism' whether it's what you expect nowadays or not.
You bring a lot of flak on yourself by picking non-existent arguments. I'm starting to believe that is what you like.

[bigblue]

Now you are just acting the dick. WW explained enough for anyone.... It is trolling 'Journalism' whether it's what you expect nowadays or not.
You bring a lot of flak on yourself by picking non-existent arguments. I'm starting to believe that is what you like.

There's always some dimwit who thinks they need to constantly play devil's advocate. bridgesrightfoot used to be a good example, now we have this pipsqueek.

News flash phips: you're not being witty, you're not adding balance or a unique opinion to the discussion, you're just being a tiresome cunt.

[Original Dub]

Now you are just acting the dick. WW explained enough for anyone.... It is trolling 'Journalism' whether it's what you expect nowadays or not.
You bring a lot of flak on yourself by picking non-existent arguments. I'm starting to believe that is what you like.

There's always some dimwit who thinks they need to constantly play devil's advocate. bridgesrightfoot used to be a good example, now we have this pipsqueek.

News flash phips: you're not being witty, you're not adding balance or a unique opinion to the discussion, you're just being a tiresome cunt.

Annnnnd he's instantly picking up the slack now that the other WUM is gone.

[The Maine Man]

Yahoo Sports News article on 'How Klopp instilled a winning culture at Anfield'. So three wins on he bounce and it's a culture?!

[gillie]

Yahoo Sports News article on 'How Klopp instilled a winning culture at Anfield'. So three wins on he bounce and it's a culture?!

3 that's fuck all (Brenda) Suarez won 14 on the bounce one time or another did'nt he:)

[Tokyo Blue]

not at all clear on why this is trolling journalism. its just journalism. the headline isn't a lie, its just omitting something. something that you find out by...you guessed it...reading the article, which is the whole point.

A journal is a record of an event (originally one day's events), a journalist is one who records events and journalism is the recording of events. Omitting factual parts of an event is not journalism. It is bias and completely against the whole ethos of what journalism is.

Getting you to perform an action, click, read, buy etc. is advertising and promotion.

The point of journalism is to present facts. Do you dispute this?

[phips]

not at all clear on why this is trolling journalism. its just journalism. the headline isn't a lie, its just omitting something. something that you find out by...you guessed it...reading the article, which is the whole point.

A journal is a record of an event (originally one day's events), a journalist is one who records events and journalism is the recording of events. Omitting factual parts of an event is not journalism. It is bias and completely against the whole ethos of what journalism is.

Getting you to perform an action, click, read, buy etc. is advertising and promotion.

The point of journalism is to present facts. Do you dispute this?

not in the least. i don't believe the article in question omitted facts. there were quotes included. i'm assuming the "issue" here is that the title makes Aguero's departure sound like a certainty while the actual article itself and Aguero's quotes include qualifiers like "if everything goes as planned" that inherently convey uncertainty.

titles of articles, however, are completely different from journalism. their purpose is to attract attention, just like book covers or movie trailers. their sole purpose is advertising.


i guess i should've learned to expect this type of knee-jerk, short-sided reaction on here to something like this article. i won't comment on it/wind-up people (apparently) any longer.
(not referring to your thoughtful post Tokyo)

[Pretty Boy Lee]

not at all clear on why this is trolling journalism. its just journalism. the headline isn't a lie, its just omitting something. something that you find out by...you guessed it...reading the article, which is the whole point.

A journal is a record of an event (originally one day's events), a journalist is one who records events and journalism is the recording of events. Omitting factual parts of an event is not journalism. It is bias and completely against the whole ethos of what journalism is.

Getting you to perform an action, click, read, buy etc. is advertising and promotion.

The point of journalism is to present facts. Do you dispute this?

not in the least. i don't believe the article in question omitted facts. there were quotes included. i'm assuming the "issue" here is that the title makes Aguero's departure sound like a certainty while the actual article itself and Aguero's quotes include qualifiers like "if everything goes as planned" that inherently convey uncertainty.

titles of articles, however, are completely different from journalism. their purpose is to attract attention, just like book covers or movie trailers. their sole purpose is advertising.


i guess i should've learned to expect this type of knee-jerk, short-sided reaction on here to something like this article. i won't comment on it/wind-up people (apparently) any longer.
(not referring to your thoughtful post Tokyo)

I don't normally get involved in stuff as most propel manage to say i Better than I could, but........

A serious question, every post you make causes multiple people to insult you and question your loyalty. Nobody ever agrees with your point of view and it never results in sensible discussion. What is the actual gain for you coming on here? If I went somewhere and every single person there hated me, and I wasn't being paid to be there, I'd leave. Is that not the normal reaction to that kind of situation?

[Foreverinbluedreams]

not at all clear on why this is trolling journalism. its just journalism. the headline isn't a lie, its just omitting something. something that you find out by...you guessed it...reading the article, which is the whole point.

A journal is a record of an event (originally one day's events), a journalist is one who records events and journalism is the recording of events. Omitting factual parts of an event is not journalism. It is bias and completely against the whole ethos of what journalism is.

Getting you to perform an action, click, read, buy etc. is advertising and promotion.

The point of journalism is to present facts. Do you dispute this?

not in the least. i don't believe the article in question omitted facts. there were quotes included. i'm assuming the "issue" here is that the title makes Aguero's departure sound like a certainty while the actual article itself and Aguero's quotes include qualifiers like "if everything goes as planned" that inherently convey uncertainty.

titles of articles, however, are completely different from journalism. their purpose is to attract attention, just like book covers or movie trailers. their sole purpose is advertising.


i guess i should've learned to expect this type of knee-jerk, short-sided reaction on here to something like this article. i won't comment on it/wind-up people (apparently) any longer.
(not referring to your thoughtful post Tokyo)

The titles are part of the article therefore part of journalism.

You use book covers and movie trailers to try back up your point, let me ask you this, do these covers or trailers misrepresent what the content is? No they fucking don't and if they did said book or movie would get heavily criticised for misleading the consumer,

Do you get it now?

[mr_nool]

not at all clear on why this is trolling journalism. its just journalism. the headline isn't a lie, its just omitting something. something that you find out by...you guessed it...reading the article, which is the whole point.

A journal is a record of an event (originally one day's events), a journalist is one who records events and journalism is the recording of events. Omitting factual parts of an event is not journalism. It is bias and completely against the whole ethos of what journalism is.

Getting you to perform an action, click, read, buy etc. is advertising and promotion.

The point of journalism is to present facts. Do you dispute this?

not in the least. i don't believe the article in question omitted facts. there were quotes included. i'm assuming the "issue" here is that the title makes Aguero's departure sound like a certainty while the actual article itself and Aguero's quotes include qualifiers like "if everything goes as planned" that inherently convey uncertainty.

titles of articles, however, are completely different from journalism. their purpose is to attract attention, just like book covers or movie trailers. their sole purpose is advertising.


i guess i should've learned to expect this type of knee-jerk, short-sided reaction on here to something like this article. i won't comment on it/wind-up people (apparently) any longer.
(not referring to your thoughtful post Tokyo)

The titles are part of the article therefore part of journalism.

You use book covers and movie trailers to try back up your point, let me ask you this, do these covers or trailers misrepresent what the content is? No they fucking don't and if they did said book or movie would get heavily criticised for misleading the consumer,

Do you get it now?

The headlines are usually not written by the writer, though, but by a sub-editor. he's of course also a journalist of sorts, but he has a different agenda to the writer (getting "clicks" / selling papers rather than "presenting facts").

Also, saying that a journalist can't omit facts is just wrong. A journalist's job is to sieve through the facts and present those he/she deems relevant. If no facts were to be omitted the simplest article would quicly turn into a boring and very long book.

[Mase]

not at all clear on why this is trolling journalism. its just journalism. the headline isn't a lie, its just omitting something. something that you find out by...you guessed it...reading the article, which is the whole point.

A journal is a record of an event (originally one day's events), a journalist is one who records events and journalism is the recording of events. Omitting factual parts of an event is not journalism. It is bias and completely against the whole ethos of what journalism is.

Getting you to perform an action, click, read, buy etc. is advertising and promotion.

The point of journalism is to present facts. Do you dispute this?

not in the least. i don't believe the article in question omitted facts. there were quotes included. i'm assuming the "issue" here is that the title makes Aguero's departure sound like a certainty while the actual article itself and Aguero's quotes include qualifiers like "if everything goes as planned" that inherently convey uncertainty.

titles of articles, however, are completely different from journalism. their purpose is to attract attention, just like book covers or movie trailers. their sole purpose is advertising.


i guess i should've learned to expect this type of knee-jerk, short-sided reaction on here to something like this article. i won't comment on it/wind-up people (apparently) any longer.
(not referring to your thoughtful post Tokyo)

The titles are part of the article therefore part of journalism.

You use book covers and movie trailers to try back up your point, let me ask you this, do these covers or trailers misrepresent what the content is? No they fucking don't and if they did said book or movie would get heavily criticised for misleading the consumer,

Do you get it now?

The headlines are usually not written by the writer, though, but by a sub-editor. he's of course also a journalist of sorts, but he has a different agenda to the writer (getting "clicks" / selling papers rather than "presenting facts").

Also, saying that a journalist can't omit facts is just wrong. A journalist's job is to sieve through the facts and present those he/she deems relevant. If no facts were to be omitted the simplest article would quicly turn into a boring and very long book.

Phips licker!






;)

[Foreverinbluedreams]

not at all clear on why this is trolling journalism. its just journalism. the headline isn't a lie, its just omitting something. something that you find out by...you guessed it...reading the article, which is the whole point.

A journal is a record of an event (originally one day's events), a journalist is one who records events and journalism is the recording of events. Omitting factual parts of an event is not journalism. It is bias and completely against the whole ethos of what journalism is.

Getting you to perform an action, click, read, buy etc. is advertising and promotion.

The point of journalism is to present facts. Do you dispute this?

not in the least. i don't believe the article in question omitted facts. there were quotes included. i'm assuming the "issue" here is that the title makes Aguero's departure sound like a certainty while the actual article itself and Aguero's quotes include qualifiers like "if everything goes as planned" that inherently convey uncertainty.

titles of articles, however, are completely different from journalism. their purpose is to attract attention, just like book covers or movie trailers. their sole purpose is advertising.


i guess i should've learned to expect this type of knee-jerk, short-sided reaction on here to something like this article. i won't comment on it/wind-up people (apparently) any longer.
(not referring to your thoughtful post Tokyo)

The titles are part of the article therefore part of journalism.

You use book covers and movie trailers to try back up your point, let me ask you this, do these covers or trailers misrepresent what the content is? No they fucking don't and if they did said book or movie would get heavily criticised for misleading the consumer,

Do you get it now?

The headlines are usually not written by the writer, though, but by a sub-editor. he's of course also a journalist of sorts, but he has a different agenda to the writer (getting "clicks" / selling papers rather than "presenting facts").

Also, saying that a journalist can't omit facts is just wrong. A journalist's job is to sieve through the facts and present those he/she deems relevant. If no facts were to be omitted the simplest article would quicly turn into a boring and very long book.

It's irrelevant really who writes the headline, it's still wrong and is rightly criticised.

[Tokyo Blue]

Also, saying that a journalist can't omit facts is just wrong. A journalist's job is to sieve through the facts and present those he/she deems relevant. If no facts were to be omitted the simplest article would quicly turn into a boring and very long book.

I disagree. Being deliberately selective with facts to suit your own previously determined agenda is biased and unacceptable in my view.

As you can imagine, I don't read the papers much.

[Original Dub]

Also, saying that a journalist can't omit facts is just wrong. A journalist's job is to sieve through the facts and present those he/she deems relevant. If no facts were to be omitted the simplest article would quicly turn into a boring and very long book.

I disagree. Being deliberately selective with facts to suit your own previously determined agenda is biased and unacceptable in my view.

As you can imagine, I don't read the papers much.

I believe it's called propaganda. And it has worked for quite a long time now.

But it can NEVER be called proper journalism.

[mr_nool]

Also, saying that a journalist can't omit facts is just wrong. A journalist's job is to sieve through the facts and present those he/she deems relevant. If no facts were to be omitted the simplest article would quicly turn into a boring and very long book.

I disagree. Being deliberately selective with facts to suit your own previously determined agenda is biased and unacceptable in my view.

As you can imagine, I don't read the papers much.

I believe it's called propaganda. And it has worked for quite a long time now.

But it can NEVER be called proper journalism.

This is aimed at both you and Tokyo:

Of course journalism can be used as a propagande tool, but even the most unbiassed journalist has to make a selection of which facts to present.
If I present myself by saying "I'm nool, i'm 37 and live in Holland" I have presented three facts, but have chosen to omit about a million other ones, such that I'm 6'1 tall, wiegh 81 kilos, have a cat called muhamed, and that I like to watch Bulgarian midget porn. That's a selection i have to make, or my presentation will never fucking end.

[Cocacolajojo1]

Cool cat name! Why?

[phips]

A serious question, every post you make causes multiple people to insult you and question your loyalty.

people's (Original Douche's) opinion of my loyalty mean fuck all to me. they think their loyalty is better than mine because: A. they've been fans longer and/or B. they're from Manchester, which is unbelievably naive and xenophobic.

Nobody ever agrees with your point of view

i dont care. this is a forum. im not here to spout ideas and hope people blindly agree with me so i feel good about myself

it never results in sensible discussion.

and if you go back and read them all you'll see that 95% of them turn to insensible discussion due to other people, not me. (case in point: the irrational response in "3 billion club" thread)

What is the actual gain for you coming on here?

i enjoy reading user's posts (when they're not stupid ones in response to mine)

If I went somewhere and every single person there hated me, and I wasn't being paid to be there, I'd leave. Is that not the normal reaction to that kind of situation?

this is a forum. why should i care what random people on the internet think of me?
plus, i had left a few years ago but OD cared about my "disappearance" and wondered where i was (such compassion). so here i still am. blame him.

[mr_nool]

Cool cat name! Why?

It's not really called Muhamed. My missus wouldn't let me name it.

[Tokyo Blue]

Cool cat name! Why?

It's not really called Muhamed. My missus wouldn't let me name it.

Tell me the Bulgarian midget porn thing wasn't a lie.