Media thread 2022/23

Status
Not open for further replies.
madloaf said:
Here is a clip of maybe the stupidest 17 seconds in human history so you don't have to give that podcast a click. More partridge than partridge.

SndUp | Miguel Delaney Buffoon

Record, upload, share! SndUp is a social network, for audio! We enable you to upload audio clips and share them with the world. Sharing your talent is simple!
sndup.net
Click to expand...
The **** is thick as fuck.
 
Roy Munson said:
Delaney doesn't hate City. At all.

He's a smart lad. He says and writes exactly what his audience craves.

I worked with him recently, on a (I'll keep it unnamed for the moment) U.S. network's streaming platform
Click to expand...
On what planet is Delaney smart? He’s not smart at all. He’s thick as fuck. His critical thinking skills are appalling, his written English substandard and is incapable of advancing an argument in a coherent and consistent fashion, all characteristics that someone of his profession should excel at.

You think because he realises that writing negative stuff about City gets clicks that turns him into Gore Vidal ffs?
 
SebastianBlue said:
That was one of the few moments that were cringeworthy. And it was mostly down to their two weakest pundits: Schmeichel (egotistical ****) and Micah (who I think tries too hard to be funny or relevant).

Otherwise, if you watch the coverage throughout the tournament, they are substantially better than BT, in analysis, features, interviews, and general coverage.

That is especially the case when it comes to City—they are far fairer and even complimentary toward us than BT (and arguably any other British broadcaster). Thierry Henry in particular has been one of the most balanced pundits toward us.

As opposed to BT (and Sky, BBC, etc), where nearly every pundit is awful, their analysis of matches is often uncomfortably poor, their interviews are dull (because every player knows they are just looking for a sound bite to twist in to a controversy, so they all give club PR answers), and their coverage of City is actively hostile at times.

I would watch full coverage next season and then make up your mind.
Click to expand...

CBS (Paramount+ for us in USA) have created a blend of a) The humor of the original soccer am, b) Via Henry & Spitty some excellent tactical insight, and whilst Spitty is happy to push his dipper allegiance, he is very fair on City, c) A female presenter that ties it all together with humor, looks, intelligence and knowledge (even though she’s a United fan).

Sure there are some cringe moments, but there’s also some really fukin funny stuff (they’re happy to take the piss out of each other).
 
Impeccable One said:
CBS (Paramount+ for us in USA) have created a blend of a) The humor of the original soccer am, b) Via Henry & Spitty some excellent tactical insight, and whilst Spitty is happy to push his dipper allegiance, he is very fair on City, c) A female presenter that ties it all together with humor, looks, intelligence and knowledge (even though she’s a United fan).

Sure there are some cringe moments, but there’s also some really fukin funny stuff (they’re happy to take the piss out of each other).
Click to expand...
Abdo is up with Rebecca Lowe as the best football coverage hosts in the world right now.

The fact that Abdo literally translates some of the interviews given by players in several different languages for the show is incredibly impressive on it’s own.

And her Spanish translation is generally spot on.
 
SebastianBlue said:
Abdo is up with Rebecca Lowe as the best football coverage hosts in the world right now.

The fact that Abdo literally translates some of the interviews given by players in several different languages for the show is incredibly impressive on it’s own.

And her Spanish translation is generally spot on.
Click to expand...

I think Lowe edges it for me, in studio. But pitch side Abdo is peerless, although I might need to have a word with her wardrobe selection sometimes [emoji15]
 
TalkShite headlines today are:
Bellingham better than Zidane,
and
TAA not far off Messi
:)
 
SebastianBlue said:
Ha. As much as we may hate it, the broadcasters have to operate in the current consumptive media environment, and so virility is an element of being successful.

But it’s not the only element, and not the only reason their coverage is substantially better.

I have outlined other reasons.
Click to expand...
Phwoar
 
halfcenturyup said:
Yes, I have said before that Delaney can write well about the problems around football and how they originate when he isn't on his crusade. It's a pity that "proper" journalism is dying, there should still be a place for it even in sports, and there are plenty of issues that could be looked at.
Click to expand...
What Delaney offers is not journalism, it’s prostitution
 
gordondaviesmoustache said:
On what planet is Delaney smart? He’s not smart at all. He’s thick as fuck. His critical thinking skills are appalling, his written English substandard and is incapable of advancing an argument in a coherent and consistent fashion, all characteristics that someone of his profession should excel at.

You think because he realises that writing negative stuff about City gets clicks that turns him into Gore Vidal ffs?
Click to expand...
Where on earth did I make that comparison?

He's smart enough to make a good living in a wretched industry that has most others scrambling around for scraps, barely scraping by.

And, with all due respect, if you think any of the skills you've listed are relevent or particularly necessary in modern journalism, then you're really underestimating the state of the current industry.

I'd wager 70% of people who click on a Delaney article wouldn't know the difference between a well constructed sentence and a fucking solecism.

You're certainly smart enough to know exactly what my point was.
 
Roy Munson said:
Where on earth did I make that comparison?

He's smart enough to make a good living in a wretched industry that has most others scrambling around for scraps, barely scraping by.

And, with all due respect, if you think any of the skills you've listed are relevent or particularly necessary in modern journalism, then you're really underestimating the state of the current industry.

I'd wager 70% of people who click on a Delaney article wouldn't know the difference between a well constructed sentence and a fucking solecism.

You're certainly smart enough to know exactly what my point was.
Click to expand...
You and I clearly have different metrics as to what constitutes smart.

I was responding to a word you deployed, and gave specific examples of why I believe that to be incorrect. Irrespective of the evolving landscape of sports journalism, the fundamentals of his job remain to deploy the English language in order to communicate, and if he is advancing a particular argument, to do so in a coherent, well-considered, consistent and reasoned fashion, and so those skills remain relevant in modern (broadsheet) journalism, and form the bedrock of his profession - and the barometer against which his smartness needs to be evaluated - and he abjectly fails on all counts, save for his communication skills which I would describe as barely adequate, but still substandard for a professional journalist.

By measuring his smartness against his ability to garner clicks from Liverpool and United fans you are conspiring in the same race to the bottom which cunts like Delaney relish in and encourage to flourish.

So feel free to measure his smartness in those terms, and I’ll measure it in mine, but by your metric, Howson, Goldbridge and that Anfield Agenda bloke are all smart too, and by mine they are not - and you will continue to ascribe an unwarranted level of intelligence to someone who criticises City in an irrational, inconsistent, tendentious and specious fashion.

If he really was that smart, he wouldn’t need to do it like that, although I’m sure it would garner discernibly less clicks.
 
Last edited:
gordondaviesmoustache said:
You and I clearly have different metrics as to what constitutes smart.

I was responding to a word you deployed, and gave specific examples of why I believe that to be incorrect. Irrespective of the evolving landscape of sports journalism, the fundamentals of his job remain to deploy the English language in order to communicate, and if he is advancing a particular argument, to do so in a coherent, well-considered, consistent and reasoned fashion, and so those skills remain relevant in modern (broadsheet) journalism, and form the bedrock of his profession - and the barometer against which his smartness needs to be evaluated - and he abjectly fails on all counts, save for his communication skills which I would describe as barely adequate, but still substandard for a professional journalist.

By measuring his smartness against his ability to garner clicks from Liverpool and United fans you are conspiring in the same race to the bottom which cunts like Delaney relish in and encourage to flourish.

So feel free to measure his smartness in those terms, and I’ll measure it in mine, but by your metric, Howson, Goldbridge and that Anfield Agenda bloke are all smart too, and by mine they are not - and you will continue to ascribe an unwarranted level of intelligence to someone who criticises City in an irrational, inconsistent, tendentious and specious fashion.

If he really was that smart, he wouldn’t need to do it like that, although I’m sure it would garner discernibly less clicks.
Click to expand...

If it helps @gordondaviesmoustache @Roy Munson , I think you are both right.

:)
 
gordondaviesmoustache said:
You and I clearly have different metrics as to what constitutes smart.

I was responding to a word you deployed, and gave specific examples of why I believe that to be incorrect. Irrespective of the evolving landscape of sports journalism, the fundamentals of his job remain to deploy the English language in order to communicate, and if he is advancing a particular argument, to do so in a coherent, well-considered, consistent and reasoned fashion, and so those skills remain relevant in modern (broadsheet) journalism, and form the bedrock of his profession - and the barometer against which his smartness needs to be evaluated - and he abjectly fails on all counts, save for his communication skills which I would describe as barely adequate, but still substandard for a professional journalist.

By measuring his smartness against his ability to garner clicks from Liverpool and United fans you are conspiring in the same race to the bottom which cunts like Delaney relish in and encourage to flourish.

So feel free to measure his smartness in those terms, and I’ll measure it in mine, but by your metric, Howson, Goldbridge and that Anfield Agenda bloke are all smart too, and by mine they are not - and you will continue to ascribe an unwarranted level of intelligence to someone who criticises City in an irrational, inconsistent, tendentious and specious fashion.

If he really was that smart, he wouldn’t need to do it like that, although I’m sure it would garner discernibly less clicks.
Click to expand...
In this context, smart and intelligent are not synonymous.

Being smart is often as simple as knowing the answer. Very different from being intelligent (which, to me at least, involves a far more advanced level of mental acuity and the ability to think critically and from a variety of perspectives).

Do I think Delaney and the other grifters you've mentioned are intelligent? Nope. Far from it.

Do I think they've found the answer to making money through clickbait bollocks? Absolutely. Therefore, by definition, they're smart.

Your last sentence is the crux of it. Why would he do it any differently if he's getting the desired outcome?

I hope at least we can agree that by any definition, Delaney is a ****.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top