I want to understand. I do. But you see the uproar about the media. Especially about this team. You HAVE TO. This is a forum owned by a fan and inhabited by thousands more. We live for information about this team. I have seen many people over the past few weeks state that they depend on TGG for Jets info. That's what these a-hole literary predators are reading as well. How the hell will they ever be held accountable if their false efforts are freely perpetrated on this forum? It's the first one that comes up when you search "Jets Forum". The very first one. I don't expect Petro to agree, and I actually expect him to shoot my idea down without a thought. But at some point, we have to understand that this is not something that is acceptable from the people that give us this information. At all.
I honestly think most jets fans know ro ignore the anonymous horse shit by now. I don't disagree with the idea of ignoring them, but people need to make that decision on there own. We can't force reason. We can continue to call cimini and manish the cunts that they are though.
"Most" Jets fans are actually new to the Internet world of football that doesn't involve the fantasy aspect. Memberships will continue to spike, New guys will post terrible articles, and hacks will continue to be promoted like Cimini. I guess my idealism is getting in the way. But I'm still right.
These anonymous sourced articles are not credible, and should not be supported. i can appreciate the moderation challenges in upholding this though. as someone above suggested, perhaps a link ban would be a good first step. These clowns should not get any support via link hits coming from TGG. just my opinion.
The value in any fact-based journalism is largely based on the credibility of the sources. Anonymous sources have a very low credibility factor. So if you want to read low credibility journalism then read the stuff that sources anonymously. If you want high quality journalism then read the stuff that is based on what we can all see and then supplements that with contributions from sources on the record. There's nothing I've read about the Jets that has been anonymously sourced that was worth reading. This is true going back two years now. There was a lot of noise and hyperbole around the anonymously sourced stuff but none of it was worth anything. "Sanchez doesn't have the trust of his teammates" was obviously untrue because none of the people who have left the Jets since those articles were published have stepped forward and said that they were the source and they stand by their claim at the time. Sanchez is still the default QB of the Jets and nobody is saying they don't trust him now, despite the fact that there is another credible candidate competing with him. None of the anonymous source stuff is provable or has been proven out. It's all garbage designed to sell for the people who do it.
Every analysis notes, that particular attribute, and one of the critiques of the previous staffs was not moving him out of the pocket. http://www.nfl.com/draft/2011/profiles/mark-sanchez?id=79858 and its fair to point out he has shown that on broken plays, while here. Clearly his college days are overstated, but he can move well, and gets the ball off when given the opportunity in thos situations. Sanchez biggest problem, is when asked to stand 7 yards deep, and look around for three days, before getting rid of the ball. Je has clearly never made that jump, from having guys open by 5 yards....hence his decision making sucks. Then he gets drafted by a Coryell dosciple. .............
Not supporting writers, that cant get a named source is censorship? I would call articles using anonymous sources, propaganda, especially when they conveniently fit a preconceived media narrative. And, it should be boycotted. Which, is not Censorship. We cant stop him or mike freeman from publishing shit...that doesnt mean we need to consume it.
Man you are so much fun to mess with. The good part is that you understand. But Hobbes, seriously,, do you,,, have to,,,,,,, use so many,,,,,,,,unnecessary,,,,,,,,,, commas?,?,?,?,?,?,?, ,,,?
I agree with every single thing you said before the quote. I also agree with the quote. But it doesn't change the fact that these completely worthless articles get a ton of run. I hate the articles that don't have much substance. But they are mostly opinion pieces. I hate the articles gleaning info from tweets. But they are filler pieces. The articles that run because of anonymous quotes are neither. They are articles based on fiction. And nobody but the author can prove otherwise.
News reporting is based often on unnamed sources. Mehta might use them too much but I dont doubt the report is true.
Sensationalist news reporting does. Tabloids do it all the time. That's the kind that doesn't require a source. Same with a lot of political news. Except they usually do it to get a positive response. In sports, these hacks do it to invoke the negative. Maybe that's why this kind of irresponsible journalism gets the reaction it does here. It's easy not to doubt an anonymous source when you agree with what "they" say.
Possible solution. If a member links to an article that makes use of anonymous sources under current thread standards include the words "anonymous sources". That allows members to link articles as they wish and giving those who wish to ignore the option not to read.
Now you are kinda touching on why I wanted a format for starting threads. One of the things I tried to implement is linking the "Original Source" of the story. There are way too many threads that link a story to a reporters blog, from another article from another site from some newspaper. While this is slightly different from what you are talking about it's still along the lines of "Accountability" Reporters are conveniently getting anonymous quotes 3rd, 4th hand and running with it and not having to be held accountable. That is why I wanted the thread titles to have the ORIGINAL source. Sources original articles and accountability... Unfortunately people are too lazy and just want a damn twitter feed.
You just confused the shit out of me. But since I have been awake for close to 24 hours, I think I deserve a pass.
