What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Journalists making sh*t up?

Messages
3,070
I would rather see Kent snag the jumper.

Would make Friday nights way more entertaining for those watching and way more incentivised for the opposition players.
 

Hawkins

Juniors
Messages
1,993
Benji plays for Brisbane? what dickhead made that booking.

We have a place to send the broken toys. Its called English Superleague, quick wayne get him a plane ticket.
 

Paullyboy

Coach
Messages
10,473
If that happened and Kaaarrnt said that that person was horrified, then there's no problem.

See the difference?

As a matter of fact no, there is no difference to see. Once again, your lack of comprehension skills make this tough for me to explain.

Consider this - 'Joe Bloggs' is in the gym and notices that Benji looks disappointed/angry/annoyed at Milf's effort. (Very believable scenario by the way). 'Joe' happens to discuss this with Kent.

This doesn't mean that 'Joe' is shocked. He might have known about this for years or simply doesn't care, it doesn't mean that his account of Benji's shock is incorrect.

Seriously. How hard is it to get your head around? I can only assume Kent had something bad to say about your mob and you're holding a grudge like a jilted ex-girlfriend.
 
Last edited:

myrrh ken

First Grade
Messages
9,817
Christ almighty. There's not even an effin Joe Bloggs equivalent in this scenario so I dunnno what you are on about.

But let's go with your idiotic scenario.

If kent reports what Joe Bloggs thinks - that's good reporting given he spoke directly to Joe Bloggs

If kent reports what he believes Benji thinks as fact (which he did) - that is bad reporting. He is getting his info from Joe Bloggs who does not actually know what Benji thinks about the matter and is only going off what he saw/ heard at the gym. But he doesn't actually know if Benji was joking or scrunched up his face because he was farting or was using reverse psychology to motivate Milford, etc. Its not a sound basis to report it as fact.
 
Last edited:

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
65,842
Yep, if he'd have said, "there is a rumour that Marshall is shocked by Milford lack of effort in the gym"

Or it has been reported
Or otherplayers shared that Marshall is shocked

All very very different to saying "Marshall is shocked" that very clear makes it sound that Kent got the information first hand from Marshall.

But he is a grub, a bottom feeding news ltd journo, he works for one of the scummiest media companies in the world and he is a tool. So no surprises that he is acting the way he is.
 

bileduct

Coach
Messages
17,832
As a matter of fact no, there is no difference to see. Once again, your lack of comprehension skills make this tough for me to explain.

Consider this - 'Joe Bloggs' is in the gym and notices that Benji looks disappointed/angry/annoyed at Milf's effort. (Very believable scenario by the way). 'Joe' happens to discuss this with Kent.

This doesn't mean that 'Joe' is shocked. He might have known about this for years or simply doesn't care, it doesn't mean that his account of Benji's shock is incorrect.

Seriously. How hard is it to get your head around? I can only assume Kent had something bad to say about your mob and you're holding a grudge like a jilted ex-girlfriend.
Dude, you're geniused.

A real journalist has an obligation to make an attempt to confirm that second hand information is correct. Kent made no attempt to do this.

That's all that matters.
 

bileduct

Coach
Messages
17,832
I genuinely can't believe the lack of comprehension from so many people in this thread. For Benji to be horrified by something, he doesn't need to say those words, as a matter of fact facial reactions are a lot more accurate in these situations.

Any single person in that gym could have been watching Benji shake his head in disbelief (or something similar) after watching Milf skip a set and then report that to Kent.

And at no point did Kent indicate he spoke to Benji, you're just twisting it that way because your comprehension skills are lacking and you're just wanting to have a shot at Kent because he must have written something bad about your club at some point. (I completely get the hatred of Journo's by the way, they are scum, but the basis for your anger is misguided on this one).
Wayne made three points. 1) Benji denied making the statement. 2) Benji denied speaking to Kent. 3) Benji denied making the statement directly to Kent.

Kent knows that these three points are a hostile attack on his integrity as a journalist because they provide interesting insight into his personal and journalistic ethics. On NRL 360 Kent's ego got the better of him for a moment (as it usually does) and he made a statement about Benji that was heavily implied to be a first hand factual account of that person's thoughts. There was no "allegedly" or "according to" or "rumor has it" - anyone watching that would have been left with the impression either that Paul gained that information from Marshall himself, or that it's undisputed common knowledge which it obviously was not.

Now in the meantime we find out that Kent is using his personal relationship with Ikin to needle information out of him regarding the Broncos. Since Benji denied saying that he was "horrified", and knowing that the information didn't come from Benji himself, we now know that "horrified" is somebody elses spin of events - again, something not made clear by Kent on NRL 360.

According to Kent he called up Benji afterwards to apologise. This demonstrates how easy it would have been for Kent to call up Benji in the first place and actually verify that the information relayed to him by a third party was correct before putting it out there for general consumption. And that's kind of his responsibility as a journalist. It also suggests that Kent really only cared about any backlash to Benji when he himself came under fire.

So all of this reveals a few things:

1) As a Limited News journalist, Kent doesn't feel that he is under any obligation to approach the primary subject of a story and confirm basic information about it.
2) As a Limited News journalist, Kent will go on television and pass off second hand gossip as fact.
3) As a Limited News journalist, Kent will milk his close friendship with Ikin to Ikin's detriment just to satisfy his own ego.

There's a reason why Kent's explanation is woefully nonsensical - there's no shortage of easily fooled people like yourself out there.
 
Last edited:

no name

Coach
Messages
19,174
As a matter of fact no, there is no difference to see. Once again, your lack of comprehension skills make this tough for me to explain.

Consider this - 'Joe Bloggs' is in the gym and notices that Benji looks disappointed/angry/annoyed at Milf's effort. (Very believable scenario by the way). 'Joe' happens to discuss this with Kent.

This doesn't mean that 'Joe' is shocked. He might have known about this for years or simply doesn't care, it doesn't mean that his account of Benji's shock is incorrect.

Seriously. How hard is it to get your head around? I can only assume Kent had something bad to say about your mob and you're holding a grudge like a jilted ex-girlfriend.
Is Benji still shocked even though Joe noticed the disappointment/anger/annoyance months ago?
How long does Joe's evidence stay current?
Does Joe know what Milford has done in the meantime to rectify this opinion that Benji has of him?
 

bileduct

Coach
Messages
17,832
Is Benji still shocked even though Joe noticed the disappointment/anger/annoyance months ago?
How long does Joe's evidence stay current?
Does Joe know what Milford has done in the meantime to rectify this opinion that Benji has of him?
Here's a better question. Did Benji do a shart while hitting the weights? Is that why Joe noticed a funny look on Benji's face which was coincidentally at the same time Milford cut his set 1 rep short?
 

taipan

Referee
Messages
22,409
Anyone who mumbles in such a way when speaking, as this journo does, has to have reliable sauces.

Jim Beam,Jack Daniel,Bob Oatley,and Johnny Walker would provide all the clear unequivocal evidence to make profound statements that cannot be challenged, in a court of law or even at Kings Cross at 1am.
 

taipan

Referee
Messages
22,409
There was a another journalist called Kent. At the Daily Planet I think.

And that Kent at the Daily Planet, looked,spoke,dressed like a mild mannered reporter who championed the plight of the underdog and the causes he supported.
In direct contrast the other one, mumbles like a punch drunk fighter,and supports one cause, that of News Ltd ,so that we have to put up with dribble.This plank couldn't champion the plight of a baby quokka being tossed into the Swan River , unless it sold papers.He'd blame Milford.

Although Ikin does remind me of a Daily Planet copy boy:Jimmy Olsen:harmless and ineffective.
 
Top