This is why I am very, very reluctant to get behind player-created content, despite the seductive sounding rationales offered for it e.g. that it cuts out the middleman, stops journos making up BS, etc etc
Yes it cuts out the middleman, but it doesn't get you any closer to the truth - rather, it just gives you a direct line to the "party line" from the player. This is exactly why journalism exists, because you can't just take what an inherently biased, self-interested party says as the gospel truth. Saying that only the player can give you the correct information about the player is straight up Orwellian logic.
You can see it happening in real time too, you only need to look at Instagram comments for example. Despite all the talk of trolling (which is definitely a real thing) the more striking feature is actually the cultish sycophancy.
This is the same reason I was hesitant to support SJ when he complained about "the trolls" a little while ago. In a lot of ways it's all an attempt by self-interested people to control the narrative and squash negative assessments of them, by replacing it with a biased pro-whoever narrative that frames all criticism as inherently bad.
Beyond that, it's also a pretty bad idea to take critique and analysis out of the hands of people who are actually educated in things like logic, reason, what a fact is etc, and hand it over entirely to footy players who may not have even a rudimentary education in how, say, logic works. If that sounds like pretentious philosophy student babble, well I think it's just as pretentious to think that only footy players are capable of understanding footy when we are all perfectly capable of watching it and more or less observing what is going on.
Yeah, so I was in the media in another life, so I know the machinations of that industry. Probably why I got so pissed off listening to the sycophantic raving about SJ's career.
Firstly, the league media is basically non-existent in NZ now. Being a Warriors player is as comfortable as anywhere in the competition. You're not being discussed on NRL360 unless you are a former Sydney star (RTS, AFB etc). When SJ said 'youse got what you wanted' in 2017, it was laughable. There was no media baying for blood, the World Cup was a non-event in the media. Media turn up to a scrum once a week, they ask really vague, uninsightful questions, then they push off until next week. When you're winning, a whole bunch of radio stations and hangers-on turn up and ask inane, bandwagon questions. When you're losing, it's the same 3-4 guys who don't, and maybe feel they can't, ask the hard questions because they get frozen out. The only 'objective' writer in this country in the mainstream is Chris Rattue, because he doesn't leave the office (and my god, is he bad).
As for podcasts, that's OK - I feel as if the younger generations of fans lap up anything their heroes say, now. I see it on social media. If you dare make a negative comment, you're jumped on by the 'die hards'. I feel like it might be a modern-day algorithm thing, where if you are pro-something - you are all in. You're the opposite of a critical thinker. All hail the thing I believe in, and I'll never listen to anything else. But my generation doesn't think that way, I certainly don't. I don't want to hear about how amazing Shaun is, how he's a God-tier Warrior...because that's not true. I remember hearing about how he didn't train hard, how his attitude was off, how he was arrogant as hell in his 2nd year and got dropped at the end of it, but I also remember the great stuff. That's the mature discussion I want - I can still say he did so many amazing things, but he left a lot on the table results-wise.
No doubt, poor journalism exists. In our country, it's weak, sloppy and half-arsed. But it's essential. The day that the news-makers create their own narrative is not a day to look fondly forward to. Podcasts are great, and they can shed light on things that the media don't have space to cover, or don't think is headline-worthy enough. But they can't be the only thing.