Montreal Media Creating, Debunking, Fake News Stories

[Leafsman]

Some are/were very good like, as yoiu mentioned Dave Stubbs. Arpon Basu, Brian Wilde and Grant McCagg are also excellent, just to name a few. Unfortunately we also must deal with guys who seem to hold a grudge against the team, like Andrew Berkshire.

edit:I forgot Marc Dumont. Also great. He even gets every Seinfeld or Simpsons reference you throw his way.

I don’t consider Andrew Berkshire a reporter. He writes opinionated articles for Sportsnet, and analyzes hypothetical situations. Again, not a reporter.

My definition of a reporter is a person who tells you what has happened (“John Smith was placed on waivers today”) or what is expected to happen (“sources say John Smith is unhappy with the direction of the team and is expected to be traded soon. The team is talking with a number of teams to facilitate a trade”). Both are pertinent pieces of information.

The Speculation Network (TSN) and Specnet (Sportsnet) just like dreaming up scenarios and talking about what would happen for each one (“John Smith is a free agent. Here are five possible landing spots for him and how he fits in with each team”). Useless fluff they dream up just to get attention. This report about Pacioretty is just another example of fluff drummed up by “reporters” and networks who have nothing else to talk about.

Even my point about the Olympic rosters - even if NHL players went, what’s the point of speculating on the rosters? Sure, it’s fun but it’s a useless exercise. I don’t get that. Fans, reporters, and “experts” don’t choose the teams. Those selections mean NOTHING. I am tired of it.

[30ranfordfan]

I don’t consider Andrew Berkshire a reporter. He writes opinionated articles for Sportsnet, and analyzes hypothetical situations. Again, not a reporter.

My definition of a reporter is a person who tells you what has happened (“John Smith was placed on waivers today”) or what is expected to happen (“sources say John Smith is unhappy with the direction of the team and is expected to be traded soon. The team is talking with a number of teams to facilitate a trade”). Both are pertinent pieces of information.

The Speculation Network (TSN) and Specnet (Sportsnet) just like dreaming up scenarios and talking about what would happen for each one (“John Smith is a free agent. Here are five possible landing spots for him and how he fits in with each team”). Useless fluff they dream up just to get attention. This report about Pacioretty is just another example of fluff drummed up by “reporters” and networks who have nothing else to talk about.

Even my point about the Olympic rosters - even if NHL players went, what’s the point of speculating on the rosters? Sure, it’s fun but it’s a useless exercise. I don’t get that. Fans, reporters, and “experts” don’t choose the teams. Those selections mean NOTHING. I am tired of it.

A lot of that is simply giving the people what they want.

While I'd agree that speculating on who would go to the Olympics, if the NHLers went, is kind of a useless way to spend one's time... if your readers will read it, because they're interested in this sort of thing, then you're going to keep giving it to them.

I agree: "reporter" is not the term you use for someone like that. They're more of a "columnist".

It's why there are so many lists out there. They're gold when it comes to generating clicks. People want to to read a "top 10" or "top 20" list about types of dogs, or Albums of the 80s, or all-time great Las Vegas Golden Knights players, or whatever you're making that "list" of. Of course the credentials of whomever is compiling the list can be called into question (what makes them an expert?) but people like seeing a list validate their own opinions - and they like having something to complain about too. For instance: I find it laughable how many modern day Chicago Blackhawks were on the NHL's greatest 100 players of all time list. I question the sanity of anyone (born in 1970 or later) who doesn't rank Gretzky the #1 player of all time. I think it's sad when anyone puts Kurt Cobain into a "top guitar players of 1991" list, let alone "all time". I do really like seeing Red Hot Chill Peppers at the top of the list for bands that should never be played again though, or any list that ranks the Oilers management group the worst in the NHL.

[30ranfordfan]

so my jokes about lists aside.... I want to restate an earlier point I made.

Fluff articles (who would be on Team Canada, top 20 lists, where will awesome free agent sign?, any of that stuff) are written specifically to generate traffic. Lists, in particular, generate clicks. If you have to hit "next" to see the next one of the list (or next 2, or whatever) it's about increasing the site's relevance with google. A lot of the poorly written, speculative, rumor-based junk that's out there now.... that's cheaper than actually being a reporter.

Think about. What's more cost effective? Getting someone to write fluff articles from their mom's basement, or paying a guy to follow a team around and report on what they see? What does it cost to produce a 1500 word article, detailing the likely battles for roster spots with the Habs this year? What does it cost to produce an article highlighting Marc Bergevin's 10 biggest blunders? Especially when this is the 3rd time you've run that story in the last year. Which one gets you more comments? More clicks? More traffic?

[RGM81]

Some are/were very good like, as yoiu mentioned Dave Stubbs. Arpon Basu, Brian Wilde and Grant McCagg are also excellent, just to name a few. Unfortunately we also must deal with guys who seem to hold a grudge against the team, like Andrew Berkshire.

edit:I forgot Marc Dumont. Also great. He even gets every Seinfeld or Simpsons reference you throw his way.

Sums it up pretty well - I like a lot of those guys too. As I've gotten older I even have taken more of a liking to Jack Todd. I also appreciate Red Fisher more now -- those two guys were tough but fair. If the team stunk, they weren't afraid to say it but they also gave out praise where appropriate. And not everything was profound negativity--it was just fair and legitimate criticisms.

[subban7677]

I don’t consider Andrew Berkshire a reporter. He writes opinionated articles for Sportsnet, and analyzes hypothetical situations. Again, not a reporter.

My definition of a reporter is a person who tells you what has happened (“John Smith was placed on waivers today”) or what is expected to happen (“sources say John Smith is unhappy with the direction of the team and is expected to be traded soon. The team is talking with a number of teams to facilitate a trade”). Both are pertinent pieces of information.

The Speculation Network (TSN) and Specnet (Sportsnet) just like dreaming up scenarios and talking about what would happen for each one (“John Smith is a free agent. Here are five possible landing spots for him and how he fits in with each team”). Useless fluff they dream up just to get attention. This report about Pacioretty is just another example of fluff drummed up by “reporters” and networks who have nothing else to talk about.

Even my point about the Olympic rosters - even if NHL players went, what’s the point of speculating on the rosters? Sure, it’s fun but it’s a useless exercise. I don’t get that. Fans, reporters, and “experts” don’t choose the teams. Those selections mean NOTHING. I am tired of it.

I graduated from a journalism program here in Ottawa a loooong time ago and worked as a reporter for a little while. What you stated would have been 100% accurate just a few short years ago, but things have changed. The lines between true reporting, and infotainment have been blurred. There is very little true reporting anymore. Just watch cable news (American specifically). It's very little reporting, and mostly opinion. People aren't interested in facts anymore, they're interested in opinions, and specifically how they contrast with their own. While it's not that big a deal when it comes to sports reporting, we are headed down a very dangerous road when current affairs are involved.

[Leafsman]

I graduated from a journalism program here in Ottawa a loooong time ago and worked as a reporter for a little while. What you stated would have been 100% accurate just a few short years ago, but things have changed. The lines between true reporting, and infotainment have been blurred. There is very little true reporting anymore. Just watch cable news (American specifically). It's very little reporting, and mostly opinion. People aren't interested in facts anymore, they're interested in opinions, and specifically how they contrast with their own. While it's not that big a deal when it comes to sports reporting, we are headed down a very dangerous road when current affairs are involved.

That is the issue. I'm not interested in gossip. I want facts - not just in sports reporting but life in general. I'm 39 and you can call me a curmudgeon if you like, but I don't live in a bubble and I don't give a flying fig about lists and fairy-tale what-if scenarios. I'm much more concerned about whether a few nation leaders will blow us off the map soon. This has to stop and people need to get a life and start giving a damn about the world around them or this world will cease to exist.

We are doomed if the most important thing in people's lives is whether Montreal management comes to a charity event of a (probably) soon-to-be-ex player of the team, or what what Tom Cruise had for lunch and who he took with him, or how many times Prince William's children go to the bathroom.

[subban7677]

I'm a 41 year old curmudgeon, so no worries.