全 88 件のコメント

[–]Newcastle Unitedno-soy-de-escocia 62ポイント63ポイント  (2子コメント)

I just wanted to emphasize that the most accurate source of transfer rumors, according to the table, is correct just over three out of every ten times.

Take all of them with a grain of salt.

[–]West Bromwich AlbionRazzwell_ 12ポイント13ポイント  (1子コメント)

The exceptions should be the BBC and Sky Sports although the formal newspapers such as the Guardian and the Times should be worth more than those such as the Sun. You can't expect them to get every single one right as not everyone has ITK's for each club.

[–]WalesWildBuffalo 7ポイント8ポイント  (0子コメント)

Sky Sporys have gone downhill in the last 3 years. Maybe not as bad as the tabloids, but much closer to them than they are to the BBC.

[–]Northern IrelandDylan0812 75ポイント76ポイント  (2子コメント)

It all depends on how they report the stories though.

For example BBC might say something like: "Arsenal have approached Napoli about Argentina striker Gonzalo Higuain

Whereas The Sun would be like: "GONEzalo - Arsenal land Argentina striker in SHOCK £94 million bid

[–]Crystal PalaceNickTM 13ポイント14ポイント  (0子コメント)

Luckily, the stuff with titles like the one you just made as an example usually get heavily downvoted. We also take into account titles when deleting duplicate threads: for example, if there was a Sun article with that title that was sitting at 0 votes and someone posted a BBC article with the title you suggested, we might allow the BBC article despite it essentially being a duplicate so people can actually have a discussion rather than just pointing out how shit the article itself is.

[–]Tottenham HotspurTheodoreP -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

Yeah. People and tabloids jump the gun, when it comes to pretty reliable sources of "Inquired"

[–]Crystal PalaceNickTM[M] 68ポイント69ポイント  (29子コメント)

So while this post’s up here - and thank you for writing it, because it’s great and ties into what I’m saying quite a bit - I just want to clear up a bit about banning sources. There’s been a bit of talk about banning the Sun in particular in the wake of the Dimitri Payet interview scandal, so I’m going to address that in particular.

We are pretty loath to ban any news source outright. That’s not to say we haven’t; we have and we do blacklist sources, but most of them are due to breaking reddit’s rules on spam/self-promotion. The real issue we have with banning any major news outlet is twofold. Firstly, in this interconnected day and age, you can have sources quoting from other sources, and people could start submitting Sun (for example) links under the guise of a non-banned link, which would mean we have to start delving in to each source individually before we can decide to leave it up or remove it, which is a huge amount of work that I’m not sure we can commit to always being able to do so. We’re people with jobs and lives to live after all, we won’t always be online. As such, it’d be a lot of work for relatively minor gain given that most news from sketchy sources mostly gets downvoted pretty quickly - as it should.

The more pertinent reason is that we think it provides something of a slippery slope to ban one major source and not any of the ones that are mentioned in a similar breath. At the end of the day, our main job is to maintain discussion on this subreddit, ensure that it's on topic, keep everything clean and tidy and remove undesirable users. When we start getting involved in the messy politics of what news source is viable and what isn't, then it becomes a bit more blurred and something we have to be careful with. Just look up there at that table. This isn’t a case of the Sun being a publication that is unique amongst its peers in that it fabricates stories. In fact, amongst the major red tops in Britain, it’s more reliable than its equivalent newspapers in the Mirror, the Star and the Express. So if we were to ban the Sun, should we ban the Mirror, Star, Express, The People and The Metro? What about Twitter sources? For the most part, they have practically no accountability - and yes, even the Sun has accountability - so should we ban all of them too? If not, how can we justify banning newspapers with actual employed journalists and not unverified Twitter accounts?

That’s the big issue here. Once we’ve banned one, where do we stop? Furthermore, how can we - a mostly English-speaking team - be assured of the quality of sources in, say, Italy or Germany, and thus be able to work out whether they should be removed? There’s a litany of reasons why this would be a bad idea. We sometimes have to make difficult decisions to try and keep the quality of the community up, but in some cases the community has to be able to deploy some critical thinking of its own and work out whether a source is legit by themselves, and vote correspondingly. We already have a flair system showing whether a Twitter account is verified partially for that very reason, after all. If people don't want to see the Sun on their hot page, they need to downvote it on grounds of it being considered inaccurate, sensationalist or otherwise bad content.

As such, we won’t be banning links to the Sun, nor any other major news outlet. You’re absolutely well within your rights to downvote stories you think may be untrue, but we’re not going to start removing sources just because they’re produced by a newspaper you don’t like, so long as they comply with the submission guidelines.

(I apologise if that wasn’t quite clear enough in some way. I spent all last night trying to get through to a friend of mine in Istanbul so I’m not exactly firing on all cylinders. Feel free to ask for anything you might want clarified.)

[–]Leyton Orientblatentorient 11ポイント12ポイント  (2子コメント)

Always appreciate your and any mods work on here - just to add, that Payet interview actually wasn't fabricated. Looked like agent v journalist, but journo maintained on twitter he'd actually spoken to him and even proved it with a picture - so it's terribly hard because people upvote Sun article, then the counter thread, what do you do, take them both down? Put up another thread saying 'The Sun actually did speak to Payet' etc.

TL;dR very hard job modding this page, the figures above prove there's no point banning one publication, applause.

[–]Crystal PalaceNickTM 4ポイント5ポイント  (1子コメント)

just to add, that Payet interview actually wasn't fabricated. Looked like agent v journalist, but journo maintained on twitter he'd actually spoken to him and even proved it with a picture

Oh wow, I didn't know. I was rather preoccupied when that was going on so I didn't look into it. What a mess.

so it's terribly hard because people upvote Sun article, then the counter thread, what do you do, take them both down? Put up another thread saying 'The Sun actually did speak to Payet' etc.

Yeah it's not the easiest. Generally what we'd do in that situation is leave the first article up (and occasionally tag is as misleading or outright use the false flair which puts a strikethrough on whole title if it's an obviously false title/article) and allow a new one up that clarifies the situation. That way we have the original article up so people can still browse it whilst being made clear that it's false, whilst also having a correction article/thread up.

[–]Leyton Orientblatentorient 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

Totally understand, I've also got a friend out in Turkey - away from trouble but still it's not ideal being in a failed military coup. That Sun interview was a bit of a weird one, granted, but with everything, people will make up their own minds about what and who to believe. But cheers for clarification on mods thoughts about blacklisting etc, very helpful

[–]EvertonRandybutterrubs 9ポイント10ポイント  (17子コメント)

Hope your friend is alright.

On topic though, I can imagine trying to find the proper balance between banning a source and discouraging news outlets with horrible journalism can be very fickle. In the age we are in now, the snowball effect between outlets can be pretty insane though. I'm not sure what system would work best, but if everyone used downvotes on the articles instead of in the comments, things would probably be better, but it's hard to get people to do that.

[–]Crystal PalaceNickTM 8ポイント9ポイント  (16子コメント)

Hope your friend is alright.

He's fine thanks. He must be the only guy who can go on a month long break to Turkey to visit his girlfriend and have a military coup blow up three days before he was due to leave.

On topic though, I can imagine trying to find the proper balance between banning a source and discouraging new outlets with horrible journalism can be very fickle. In the age we are in now, the snowball effect between outlets can be pretty insane though. I'm not sure what system would work best, but if everyone used downvotes on the articles instead of in the comments, things would probably be better, but it's hard to get people to do that.

Pretty much. It's also horribly time consuming, and naturally as people all of the mod team would have differing views on what is acceptable and what isn't. So we think the best way of doing this is to let the community decide for themselves (for the vast majority of the time, anyway) and try to make it as clear as possible through flairs and site tags what they're up or downvoting.

[–]Chicken InnSouvlakiSpaceStati0n 6ポイント7ポイント  (0子コメント)

He must be the only guy who can go on a month long break to Turkey to visit his girlfriend and have a military coup blow up three days before he was due to leave.

I actually just read a hilarious article about a man from Darlington going on a tinder date to Istanbul for "a spontaneous bit of banter," with a woman who he never met. this was during the coup. if anyone wants to give it a read, it's here

on topic I 100% agree with not banning sources, just let the users downvote/upvote the content they'd like to see on the sub.

[–]EvertonRandybutterrubs 2ポイント3ポイント  (14子コメント)

Glad to hear it, knowing my luck that would be something to happen to me.

I can't fathom how time consuming that would be, or trying to come to a consensus between all the mods.. Flairs on sources seems to be the best way to let people know and deciding for themselves, for sure. It's just a little scary to rely on that sort of self regulation as it seems a lot of people don't like to read into things before making the decision to up/downvote.

Anyways, thanks for doing what you do. You seem to be the most active mod here: you're everywhere, which is a very good thing!

[–]Crystal PalaceNickTM 5ポイント6ポイント  (5子コメント)

Anyways, thanks for doing what you do. You seem to be the most active mod here: you're everywhere, which is a very good thing!

I actually can't reject this idea more strongly. I just post a lot so I'm the most visible. It's the other guys* who do more of the important stuff; if it wasn't for them this entire sub would grind to a halt. I'm like the Damien Duff to their Claude Makelele.

*Apart from /u/KensaiVG, we just keep him around as a pet.

[–]River PlateKensaiVG 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

Apart from /u/KensaiVG , we just keep him around as a pet.

Cold.

[–]EvertonRandybutterrubs 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

Well I just meant in the discussion parts, I can't see any of the behind the scenes stuff; didn't mean to insult any of the other mods!

[–]Crystal PalaceNickTM 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

Oh don't worry I understand! Just some other people have said the same thing and it's somewhat embarrassing when you get the other mods being overlooked because they don't fraternise with you peasants shitpost as much as me.

[–]Truro CitySwedishTurnip 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

What's /u/reyofish? The really old uncle who everybody forgets about that turns up for Christmas every 4-5 years?

[–]Crystal PalaceNickTM 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

I think that makes him Brad Friedel.

[–]River PlateKensaiVG 0ポイント1ポイント  (7子コメント)

You seem to be the most active mod here

Easy for him to be when he banks on other mods not being recognized as such, hmm Nick?

:P

[–]EvertonRandybutterrubs 2ポイント3ポイント  (1子コメント)

Didn't mean to insult you or any of the other mods, I appreciate everything you guys do to keep this place running and the shitposting to a minimum!

[–]River PlateKensaiVG 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

Didn't mean to insult you or any of the other mods

Didn't think you were, don't worry. Nick just takes special enjoyment in the fact people usually don't remember I'm a mod

[–]Crystal PalaceNickTM 1ポイント2ポイント  (4子コメント)

Who are you again?

[–]River PlateKensaiVG 1ポイント2ポイント  (3子コメント)

I'm you but stronger.

[–]Crystal PalaceNickTM 9ポイント10ポイント  (2子コメント)

And below me in the mod list. Back in your box now.

[–]River PlateKensaiVG 5ポイント6ポイント  (1子コメント)

At least I'm not in the bottom of the list anymore.

Let's not remember the context, just the facts.

[–]Newcastle Unitedempiresk 5ポイント6ポイント  (0子コメント)

Great post and a big thank you to OP. I've been trying to communicate this to many people on /r/soccer without much luck.

The herba-jerba "It's the Daily Mail/Sun" brigade just don't listen. The no smoke without fire rule must be taken into account and if a transfer doesn't happen, it doesn't mean players, clubs, agents and managers tried to make it happen.

[–]hagbean -5ポイント-4ポイント  (6子コメント)

we’re not going to start removing sources just because they’re produced by a newspaper you don’t like

don't think that's quite the reason people wanted the sun banned but oh well

[–]Crystal PalaceNickTM 3ポイント4ポイント  (5子コメント)

You'd be surprised. Either way though, that sentence doesn't explain why we're not banning the Sun, the other 600 or so words I wrote do.

[–]LiverpoolJackoosh 12ポイント13ポイント  (2子コメント)

I'm a pretty big fan of /r/liverpoolfc (and I think a couple of the other team subs as well)'s solution for this; at the start of the window someone made this lovely transfer source reliability guide and it ended up being stickied for a bit. It gives the readers of the sub an idea of which sources are reliable and which to take with a pinch (or sometimes a massive heap) of salt, which in general leads to better stuff hitting the front page.

I don't know how effective it would be on /r/soccer though, since you'd need to find the equivalent of a Barrett, Joyce, etc for every relevant club, which would be a lot of legwork.

[–]Crystal PalaceNickTM[M] 9ポイント10ポイント  (0子コメント)

I don't know how effective it would be on /r/soccer though, since you'd need to find the equivalent of a Barrett, Joyce, etc for every relevant club, which would be a lot of legwork.

That's the problem really. One of the core concepts of this sub is that it's for football fans around the world; it's why we've always rejected the idea of having clickable crests or something at the top of the page that would take you to major club subreddits. At very least in terms of official recognition and accessibility, every club from Botswana Meat Commission to Real Madrid should be treated as equally as possible. Now, that might not always be possible, but it's a standard to work towards.

As such, a list would need to be compiled of literally every club we could do - if we were to put it in the sidebar, for example - so that's rather unfeasible. However, if the community wants to try assembling a list of sources from most to least reliable for major leagues or something like that then by all means drop us a mod message and if it's of a decent standard we might OK it as a resource thread for future reference.

[–]Manchester Unitedspoofex 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

To chip in, over at /r/reddevils we have spent the past 3 years building up a community sourced reliability guide based on the people who comment on our transfer rumours. This also includes individual journo's over papers and sites too.

https://www.reddit.com/r/reddevils/wiki/transfer-reliability-guide

[–]Manchester UnitedMoon_Doggie 8ポイント9ポイント  (2子コメント)

DiMarzio is a reliable source in the past, but you still have to take it exactly as he says. If he says a deal is close it means exactly that. It's close, but it still might not happen.

[–]pechofrio 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

DiMarzio is mostly accurate with Italian transfers though. To or from Serie A or an Italian player, also Raiola clients.

[–]WalesWildBuffalo 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

He's been really accurate with any United stuff for 2 years or so.

[–]Truro CitySwedishTurnip 4ポイント5ポイント  (6子コメント)

I respect the people who work in the sports journalism industry as it seems to be a very hard one to break into but the quality and content of sports journalism (football in particular) has really gone downhill in recent years especially with the rise of social media where your average joe with a few thousand followers can make up a rumour and many newspapers/websites will still jump on and report it.

You can say that they all have sources but I'm sure there's many junior editors or whatever out there working for the tabloids who are just told to link Big Club A with Big Player B so they can generate a story out of it that gets the website as many clicks and revenue as possible.

[–]ChelseaCarlosWeiner[S] 13ポイント14ポイント  (5子コメント)

The journalism industry itself has gone downhill.

Here's my copypasta for whenever this comes up.

It's actually an interesting phenomenon, how quickly bad information can go viral, and how seemingly reputable news outlets don't pick up on that bad information.

Unfortunately it's not as simple as "they need to do a better job", primarily because the public rewards the kind of reporting that leads to misinformation being spread, while punishing news outlets that have failed to adapt to this kind of content output.

Remember the phrase "If you're not paying for a product, you ARE the product"? This applies to 90% of modern media today.

KotakuInAction is the best example of this. Ostensibly the sub (was) is about fairness in gaming media, with many upset at how advertisers and other game developers take priority over the readers and actual gamers. This is the case, without a doubt, but why would Kotaku and other video game journalism websites do anything different? The people that pay them are game developers and advertisers, making them the customer. They pay these websites because they attract clicks. The more clicks you get, the more you can charge for advertising or promotion on your site.

Before news aggregators, newspapers charged advertisers more based on their distribution numbers. Same concept as clicks, except the reason your newspaper had more distribution was because it had more and better stories. This required a specific kind of person, a journalist, who could not only get a story, but write it in an interesting way. These institutions came with a LOT of rules, though, mostly enforced in-house. Fairness, accuracy, contemporaneousness, and news-worthiness were the major factors for getting a story out, because that is what your readers expected and demanded. If you had a great front page story, your competition couldn't copy that story until the next print cycle.

Flash forward to today, and the second a story is broken, someone else has it, someone with better social media presence and online distribution methods than the original outlet that filed the story. These companies are not staffed with journalists. They are staffed with SoMe savvy writers that can turn a story around in a flash, get it on social media, and have people engaging. This in turn prompts more of the same once the story begins to go viral.

But the "reputable" news outlets need to get in on this action as well. That's where the money is, after all. But there isn't a single news outlet today that has a staff as good as they did 10 years ago. The demand for free content has driven them into the ground. Unable to pay proper journalists, many have hired highly underskilled writers that can churn this shit out. They don't know how to fact find, they don't know where they cross the line into opinion, and they don't know the kind of effect they can have on the public.

TL;DR - if people demanded to PAY for their news, instead of getting it for free, this would hardly be an issue.

[–]Crystal PalaceNickTM 6ポイント7ポイント  (1子コメント)

Completely true. I studied journalism and have worked (a bit!) in the field of sports journalism, and it's staggering how many people don't quite understand this. They sit there and complain about how journalism is going downhill, without realising they're a pretty huge part of it.

The journalistic industry caters towards its consumers; its state is a reflection of what the people want, and thus you as a consumer too.

[–]Truro CitySwedishTurnip 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

I'm helping! :D

[–]Truro CitySwedishTurnip 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Yes that's a good explanation, I guess people that have better social media skills are preferred to better writers in the current state of the industry for the reasons you mentioned? I mean I can't really complain too much as the amount of titles I look at without reading the article on/r/soccer is probably over 75%, it's just the way the world is now I guess.

[–]Manchester UnitedSarcasticDevil 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

There was a really good article on the Guardian about this the other day. Sadly the comments were just filled with "Grauniad y u hate Corbyn?" and completely missed the point of the article

[–]United StatesliverSpool 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Not to detract from your point but Jesus it's funny to think of kotaku in action ever having been about journalism

[–]evil-red-devil 5ポイント6ポイント  (2子コメント)

What is the source of your percentages?

[–]Arsenal1hive 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

This is a high-effort post, fantastic job on it!

[–]Borussia Dortmundhesitantrice 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

Hope you find it m8

[–]New York Red BullsAnthonyNice 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Just saying, Kenyan prisoners have a 100℅ rate...

[–]ebenscrouge 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Excellent post. Thank you for the write-up! Glad this is stickied

[–]Borussia Dortmundpig_says_woo 1ポイント2ポイント  (3子コメント)

How hard would it be to throw in German Italian and Spanish sources as well. This is a great write up, very well done.

[–]ChelseaCarlosWeiner[S] 1ポイント2ポイント  (2子コメント)

I looked briefly, but since I don't speak anything beyond basic Spanish it would've taken a lot of effort. I'd love it if someone could do something similar for their respective country.

[–]JuventusJuventus_1897 9ポイント10ポイント  (1子コメント)

Italy:

La Stampa - Fairly reliable. Their most reliable journalist is Massimiliano Nerozzi.

Corriere dello Sport - 50/50 in reliability. Based in Rome, so Roma/Lazio rumors are more reliable than others. Antonio Barillà is one of their most famous journalists. However, he mostly does interviews/news.

TuttoSport - The Sun of Italy, so VERY unreliable. Based in Turin, yet 99% of their Juve rumors are shit. Here is their funniest Juve headline. They fucking reported Messi to Juve lol. Guido Vaciago is one of their stupid reporters.

Gazzetta dello Sport - Based in Milan. The biggest newspaper in Italy. Reliability depends on reporter. Carlo Laudisa is like 80/20 in reliability. Many Calcio followers rate him as #2 most reliable journalist in Italy after Di Marzio. Fabiana Della Valle, the Juventus insider for Gazzetta, is 70/30 in reliability when it comes to Juventus rumors. Marco Iaria is one of my favorite journalists in Italy. He works for Gazzetta; however, he doesn't report on rumors. He is their football finances guy. Give him a follow on Twitter; he tweets his articles regularly and they're a great read.


SportItalia (TV Channel) - Their lead journalist, Alfredo Pedullà, is 60/40 in reliability. They're famous for hiring super hot female presenters to present their mercato shows.

SKY Sport Italia (TV Channel) - Most reliable rumor mill in Italy. Di Marzio works for them and he's the most reliable journalist in Italy. Fabrizio Romano & Manuele Baiocchini also work for SKY; they're basically Di Marzio's henchmen.

SportsMediaSet (TV Channel) - Unreliable. Not highly, though. Niccolò Ceccarini I think works for them... he's alright. Not the most reliable journalist around.


CalcioMercato.com (Website) - Highly unreliable.

Goal.com (Website) - Unreliable. However, they do have one very reliable journalist. Unfortunately for other Calcio fans, he only reports on Juventus rumors. His name is Romeo Agresti. In my opinion, when it comes to Juventus rumors, he's #2 after Di Marzio. #3 would be Carlo Laudisa. Cool thing is, because of his hard work, JuventusTV hired him to be like a match-day presenter.

[–]dsuperheld 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

Netherlands: 2 main papers who are busy with transfers. Rest of papers less likely to fill their papers with it. I think we have quite a different media landscape to England and Italy if it comes to transfers.

Telegraaf: Very reliable on Ajax. Pretty reliable on other clubs. Very warm contacts with Ajax over the last ~30 years at least. Seen by some as Overmars' mouthpiece. And very good with Koeman (columnist as well) and van Gaal over the last years.

Algemeen Dagblad: Pretty reliable, most reliable on Feyenoord matters. Not that many scoops on other clubs. Got good contacts with Danny Blind and people in KNVB/National team at this moment.

Eindhovens Dagblad: Local paper of Eindhoven. Good on PSV things. Since the man who had the most scoops (for Voetbal International) on PSV is their new press officer, most doesn't leak anymore. If it does ED is the best in finding out at the moment. Reliable on PSV.

Voetbal International: Pretty reliable on most dutch clubs and players. Lost their way on scoops (local reporters often seems first) but still reliable enough.

Local media: BN De Stem, Tubantia, Gelderlander and Limburger have all got good contacts with their local clubs. Pretty reliable as well.

I think those are the most important ones. Others:

FoxSports.nl: In the last months they had some scoops on smaller clubs/players i guess. Seem to become more reliable then before. Would class them as 'Okay' at this moment.

Voetbalzone: Unreliable. They steal their shit from all over the internet and other papers. Hardly ever have transfernews themselves.

Voetbalprimeur: Despite their name (Voetbalprimeur translates to FootballScoop in English) they haven't got that many scoops afaik. And even less scoops that turn out to be true. Same shit as Voetbalzone.

Not sure if i missed anything. There are some other shit sites like the last ones but those are the biggest i guess.

[–]Manchester CityRektSquared 2ポイント3ポイント  (1子コメント)

Damn it where's Devineman when you need him

[–]WalesWildBuffalo 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Probably arguing with teenagers on another forum.

[–]n4dmg 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

I respect the decision to allow all publications a voice- however, the Sun is not just a newspaper known for incorrect transfer rumours. With the history of false news stories that it currently holds, football related or not, I feel it is rather unnecessary to allow further publication of any of this ''newspapers'' content. Feel free to let the voting system determine which stories are readable, but I just think that this news corporation has done far too much damage to society to deserve any kind of coverage.

Just my two cents.

[–]Exeter Cityekul46 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Remember a couple years ago when people acted as if Hulk went to Monaco when he didn't? Lets not have that again.

[–]Blackburn RoversGambaKufu 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Thanks for this. I've tried to make some of these points before and been downvoted for it.

Alan Nixon, one of the red top types who specialises in this stuff (think he works for the Scum now) used to post a bit on a Rovers fan forum about ten years ago and in between telling us bits he'd heard (until some of his rivals cottoned on and started reading the threads) he had some similar words of advice. The main one I find is still true is the three club rule - it's extremely unlikely that there are ever three or more clubs chasing the same player, so when you read "Liverpool, Arsenal and Everton are all chasing X" disregard it, that story is almost certainly an agent trying to raise their client's profile.

[–]ChelseaOnehellofaballer 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Great write-up. I find it very interesting, and was looking around the internet for stuff like this just the other day. Does anyone have a documentary/video/articles about the business of football transfer news? Anything will be appreciated.

[–]El GounaPharaohLeo 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Here's a different angle:

Journalism, like other professions, is a way to make money. They make money by having people read their stuff. The more people read their stuff, the more money they make. It's an abstract simplification but it's basically true to journalism much like any other profession.

Now the way that model would ideally work is when a news source is professional enough to produce reliable news they would get more readers. Sadly that's not the case (or at least that's not the case any more). Now the model is when a news source has more social online exposure they would get more readers. Reliability and accuracy are not top of the list anymore. Why? Because of the ease of getting the news online. It's just a click. And it's mostly for free. The moment you click on a link, is the moment that source makes its money (figuratively speaking). With millions upon millions of internet users, exposing your links online is the aim for a news source.

Now imagine what the field is like when it comes to rumors (football transfers or celebrity gossip) and not factual news (current events or economy/business news). Accuracy is probably not even on the list of priorities in that case. Looking at the numbers provided in the post, even the most accurate source in UK's sports journalism is only accurate 3 out of 10 times! I'm almost certain that I personally can have comparable accuracy just by speculating a club's needs vs players available in the market. I'm almost certain most of us here can.

The problem as I see it is that more and more sources are finding the internet to be the best medium to earn money through exploiting the public. Sadly, the public are on average as savvy as their weakest link.

[–]West Bromwich AlbionRazzwell_ 0ポイント1ポイント  (10子コメント)

Surprised the Metro is ranked that far below the Sun. Thought they were the same level in terms of transfer rumours.

[–]evil-red-devil 1ポイント2ポイント  (7子コメント)

The Metro isn't even a real paper, it's useless

[–]Crystal PalaceNickTM 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

I mean it is a real paper. I picked one up yesterday on my way back from Euston. It was printed on real paper are everything!

You're right that it's generally pretty awful in regards to sporting transfer rumours though. One suspects that might be due to the constraints of having to pump out two or more pages of football news every day whilst presumably having a much smaller team than a large national newspaper.

[–]West Bromwich AlbionRazzwell_ 0ポイント1ポイント  (5子コメント)

To be fair if the Metro isn't a real paper then the Sun isn't a real paper.

[–]evil-red-devil 5ポイント6ポイント  (4子コメント)

The Sun is the most popular newspaper in the country by a distance. The Metro is a free 'newspaper' that you find on train seats

[–]West Bromwich AlbionRazzwell_ 1ポイント2ポイント  (3子コメント)

There's only a difference of about 500,000 in copies sold daily so there both quite popular. Also it is a real paper, it's printed in a tabloid format and contains news and sport which means it's a paper.

[–]evil-red-devil 2ポイント3ポイント  (2子コメント)

Metro isn't sold though

[–]West Bromwich AlbionRazzwell_ 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

I know it can be picked up for free but it's still "sold" as a metric of how many are picked up by consumers.

[–]WalesWildBuffalo 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Because it's free. If they charged the same as The Sun, they wouldn't 'sell' a quarter of the copies.

[–]Manchester Unitedmu_37 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

look at it this way,the Sun made 4000ish wrong claims while the Metro only made a 1000ish.so yeah...

[–]Northern IrelandDob-is-Hella-Rad 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

I've seen plenty of things that turn out to be true from the Sun, along with plenty of false things. I actually don't think I've ever noticed a story the Metro got right.

[–]FC Sibir NovosibirskJustSmall -2ポイント-1ポイント  (1子コメント)

Would it be possible to have submitters assign a 'Rumor' flair to each rumor post? Obviously this can't be done with Automoderator, and it's hard to flair posts for mobile users, but still.

Because I frankly don't care for rumors and seeing the 1000th 'Pogba going to x confirmed' gets rather tedious. I've set up a fairly large filter using RES that gets rid of most rumor posts, but unfortunately it also filters non-rumor posts. And I can't get rid of Twitter posts either because that'd remove many posts from official club accounts too. But if every rumor post was forced to be flaired properly one could just filter those posts.

[–]Arsenal9jack9[M] 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

Would it be possible to have submitters assign a 'Rumor' flair to each rumor post?

We treat anything not from an official source as a rumour, the stats above indicate that it's a fair stance. That means you would end up adding a rumour tag to everything that's not an official source. soccerbot already adds an "official" tag so a rumour tag would be largely redundant.

[–]ArsenalMacc14 -2ポイント-1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Wow, the mods actually done something.