shurlock Posted 29 June, 2015 Share Posted 29 June, 2015 One assumes Crook will instruct The Daily Star to correct the headline? (He blocked me on Twitter last year because I had the temerity to ask him if he'd challenged the Daily Mirror sub-editor over the "Meltdown" headline attributed to his article, after he said it wasn't the headline he would have chosen....) Its all very well highlighting that the headlines aren't written by the journos, but if said journos don't challenge inaccurate headlines attributed to their articles then its hardly surprising that people assume they are complicit. Why don't you challenge the paper directly? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
notnowcato Posted 30 June, 2015 Share Posted 30 June, 2015 Sounds like my kind of industry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CB Fry Posted 30 June, 2015 Share Posted 30 June, 2015 Why don't you challenge the paper directly? Maybe some kind of march would be appropriate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Jeff Posted 30 June, 2015 Share Posted 30 June, 2015 Hearing that Arsenal may well be back in the running... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wild-saint Posted 30 June, 2015 Share Posted 30 June, 2015 Hearing that Arsenal may well be back in the running... where did you read that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Jeff Posted 30 June, 2015 Share Posted 30 June, 2015 where did you read that? On a text during the night from a mate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
St Chalet Posted 30 June, 2015 Share Posted 30 June, 2015 Connor, what you are describing there is not journalism. Crook has basically allowed himself to become some cukold clickbate marketeer, so please don't label him a journalist. He merely peddles public domain information and passes it off as 'news'. If that's what it takes to make a living these days the so be it, just don't pretend it is anything more. Can't imagine Woodward and Bernstein / Washington Post giving up just because the White House didn't like the truth and instead focussing on WAG stories about the First Lady because it got more hits. PS he also blocked me on Twitter after calling him our last Summer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
St Chalet Posted 30 June, 2015 Share Posted 30 June, 2015 Hearing that Arsenal may well be back in the running... [Awaits article in Daily Star with you described as 'close sources'] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hasper57saint Posted 30 June, 2015 Share Posted 30 June, 2015 I take your point Trousers. However, to return serve - as it were - these papers don't 'listen' to freelancers. If a freelancer starts getting a bit too authoritative, or starts whining at them, guess what... they just use someone else. I don't know about finances and people situations, but I'd suggest losing a contract for a top-half Premier League club's coverage (and possibly Bournemouth too, now they're on the radar) in the national sport pages over it probably isn't financially worthwhile for the freelancers - who traditionally have little by way of security. I do accept that it's pretty naff and should be challenged if possible, though. I totally understand your point in them being 'complicit' too, if absolutely nothing is said. And there was me believing that most of you Journo's were members of the NUJ.Are they now toothless like so many other Unions? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hutch Posted 30 June, 2015 Share Posted 30 June, 2015 How many more clicks do you get by describing him as "Man Utd target Morgan Schneiderlin" rather than "Southampton midfielder Morgan Schneiderlin"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supersonic Posted 30 June, 2015 Share Posted 30 June, 2015 LOL @ some of the press spinning that Morgan is "training with the U21's" whilst his move to Utd goes through.... Well it is Alex Crook. The standard of our journalism in the UK is nothing short of embarrassing. The problem is half of Twitter thinks they are journalists and think they've made it after having a small paragraph printed in these comics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 30 June, 2015 Share Posted 30 June, 2015 Why don't you challenge the paper directly? Because I'm too busy writing sub-intellectual nonsense on an internet football forum Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrant Posted 30 June, 2015 Share Posted 30 June, 2015 Apparently the Daily Star are the best payers for freelancers, which seems strange for a paper with such low circulation numbers. If I were them, I'd be seeking better value for money elsewhere... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sotonist Posted 30 June, 2015 Share Posted 30 June, 2015 The standard of our journalism in the UK is nothing short of embarrassing. The problem is half of Twitter thinks they are journalists and think they've made it after having a small paragraph printed in these comics. bloggers killed journalism. everything is now gawker media or a clone thereof. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scotty Posted 30 June, 2015 Share Posted 30 June, 2015 Apparently the Daily Star are the best payers for freelancers, which seems strange for a paper with such low circulation numbers. If I were them, I'd be seeking better value for money elsewhere... Maybe they don't have many full timers, so can afford to offer more to freelancers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Biscuits Posted 30 June, 2015 Share Posted 30 June, 2015 So he's on holiday, he didn't write the article and he didn't come up with the headline. Why is his name on it then? If the whole thing has nothing to do with Alex Crook, why is a story being put out in his name? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitey Grandad Posted 30 June, 2015 Share Posted 30 June, 2015 So he's on holiday, he didn't write the article and he didn't come up with the headline. Why is his name on it then? If the whole thing has nothing to do with Alex Crook, why is a story being put out in his name? As I understand it, Saint-Armstrong explained this in his excellent post above. The story was issued through his account but somebody else pressed the send button. Alex may well have known of the contents but didn't choose the headline. It happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redslo Posted 30 June, 2015 Share Posted 30 June, 2015 Connor, what you are describing there is not journalism. Crook has basically allowed himself to become some cukold clickbate marketeer, so please don't label him a journalist. He merely peddles public domain information and passes it off as 'news'. If that's what it takes to make a living these days the so be it, just don't pretend it is anything more. Can't imagine Woodward and Bernstein / Washington Post giving up just because the White House didn't like the truth and instead focussing on WAG stories about the First Lady because it got more hits. PS he also blocked me on Twitter after calling him our last Summer. To be fair some of Woodward's books about President Bush were pure garbage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrant Posted 30 June, 2015 Share Posted 30 June, 2015 As I understand it, Saint-Armstrong explained this in his excellent post above. The story was issued through his account but somebody else pressed the send button. Alex may well have known of the contents but didn't choose the headline. It happens. Ultimately if it's sent from Crook's email account with his name attached to it, he should expect to be on the receiving end of all questions regarding the quality of the work. It'll be him, through M&Y, that'll cash the cheque for it, after all... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry_SFC Posted 30 June, 2015 Share Posted 30 June, 2015 How Alex Crook can call himself a journalist is beyond me. As someone else has mentioned, he regularly just reads stuff on the internet and passes it off as his own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrant Posted 30 June, 2015 Share Posted 30 June, 2015 How Alex Crook can call himself a journalist is beyond me. As someone else has mentioned, he regularly just reads stuff on the internet and passes it off as his own. He used to use quotes taken from interviews in the Saints matchday programme and claim them as exclusives as well. Largely got away with it because hardly anyone reads the programme these days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iansums Posted 30 June, 2015 Share Posted 30 June, 2015 To be fair some of Woodward's books about President Bush were pure garbage. Accurate then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redslo Posted 30 June, 2015 Share Posted 30 June, 2015 Accurate then. Not exactly. When Bush was riding high in the polls, they portrayed him as a good leader doing a good job. When things starting looking bad for Bush, suddenly the books made it look like he didn't really know what he was doing. Of course, he published Maestro in 2000 essentially portraying Alan Greenspan as a genius who had solved the pesky problems where the economy might ever go off track. Woodward may also be skeptical about Schneiderlin transferring to Manchester United. I am not sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DT Posted 30 June, 2015 Share Posted 30 June, 2015 Apparently the Daily Star are the best payers for freelancers, which seems strange for a paper with such low circulation numbers. If I were them, I'd be seeking better value for money elsewhere... Would be v surprised if they paid more than The Sun or Daily Mail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint-Armstrong Posted 30 June, 2015 Share Posted 30 June, 2015 Ultimately if it's sent from Crook's email account with his name attached to it, he should expect to be on the receiving end of all questions regarding the quality of the work. It'll be him, through M&Y, that'll cash the cheque for it, after all... Steve, I agree with you on this. If things are being sent out in your name, from your company - then you're associated with it. I just wanted to make the point that he hadn't written this one. I fully agree that it's a naff, pointless article that serves no real purpose, that has then been twisted by someone at the Daily Star for their own intentions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackanorySFC Posted 30 June, 2015 Share Posted 30 June, 2015 (edited) Would be v surprised if they paid more than The Sun or Daily Mail. The Sun and the Mail are both extremely profitable papers (in the Sun's case, a lot of that is down to the perceived quality of it's sports pages, esp match reports). They have huge staff levels concerned with the Star, not seen circulation figures for a while but the Star will be approx 1/4 of the Sun and 1/3 of the Mail. Small fry. The Mail's website gets unbelievable hits globally as well (they love a bit of click bait and celeb nonsense) and are one of the few newspaper groups to make a profit from online news. Far less need for Mail Group or News UK to outsource to freelancers like Crook (it happens, but way less than Express and Star) so will pay less and less often. Their staffers are extremely well numerated as well. Doesn't stop half of 'em being West Ham though (check out the Sun's massive coverage on anything West Ham, it cracks me up as I know half the sports desk are Hammers). Edit: Circulation figures for the Star are lower than I thought, 417,000 (according to May 2015 ABC's). 23% of the Sun and 25% of the Mail's circulation numbers for the same period. Still double the Guardian's though (Scott Trust still bailing them out). Edited 30 June, 2015 by JackanorySFC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angelman Posted 30 June, 2015 Share Posted 30 June, 2015 Listening to all the Utd supporters calling in talkSport and spouting off on forums that they don't think Morgan is good enough as he has no European and CL experience and that he is OK at best. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 30 June, 2015 Share Posted 30 June, 2015 I'm not going to sit here, biting my tongue and pretend I have nothing to do with Alex - as many of you will know, I do. I've worked for him as a freelancer, and I've spent time inside M & Y's offices, so I feel as if I can offer up a bit of truth here. He's done me a turn, as someone who is now writing for a few national titles as well as covering matches and doing interviews of a weekend for various outlets alongside my studies - I owe a lot of thanks to him. In an industry as competitive as journalism, I'm pretty thankful to him for taking a punt on me and putting me in touch with some pretty helpful people that have put me ahead of the competition, at this stage. The same goes for a couple of the guys working at Saints, who've been helpful to me also over the past couple of years, so I like to think I can see it from both sides (especially as a fan of the club) - and try to be a fair judge. It's only fair and balanced that I put that out there, rather than put out a thinly-veiled attempt at defending anyone with my adjudged vested interests. So basically, I have five points to make. 1) Freelance journalists do not write the headlines 2) Alex Crook is on holiday in Cornwall and did not write the article 3) Daily Star will have requested that article and written their own headline 4) The copy begins with the focus on Schneiderlin 'waiting' - not 'forced to train with the kids' - typically that's where a journalist indicates the 'angle' 5) It's a pretty empty article, and doesn't feature anything particularly 'newsworthy' for us - but it might be of service some of the Daily Star's readership While Alex didn't send the copy out, it is Alex who has the contacts at the Daily Star and his name is on the email address used to send copy out for nationals to pick up - which is why he'll have his name on it. It'll have come to exist because the Daily Star requested a 'latest' on Morgan's move to United - and as sport pages go, the Daily Star pay surprisingly well. In summary, it's a pretty naff article with a sensationalist headline forged for click bait, which doesn't represent the piece with great accuracy - best ignored. It's not helpful, though, I agree. For what it's worth, Jim Lucas has highlighted on Twitter that his gripe is with the paper, not so much the writer... Can you also name drop and credit all the twitter user accounts you've nicked info off over the years and passed off as your own. Thanks in advance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supersonic Posted 30 June, 2015 Share Posted 30 June, 2015 How Alex Crook can call himself a journalist is beyond me. As someone else has mentioned, he regularly just reads stuff on the internet and passes it off as his own. You've hit the nail on the head. He isn't a journalist, he's a reporter. Too many people nowadays think that surfing the Internet/twitter trying to find a news story from a relatively unknown but decent source (ie some of the posters on here/foreign newspapers) and claiming to be journalists. Also, what self-respecting professional will: 1) produce an article and not have any control over the headline. Surely this is the most inportant part as this is what people will use to decide whether or not to read the article. 2) allow an article to be published in his name if he hasn't produced it? 3) allows themselves to effectively become the Daily Star's (or any other newspaper for that matter) ***** by writing an article for a fee and then having nothing to do with how it's published. Amateurish. I've said it before and I'll say it again. The standard of journalism in the country is declining rapidly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
St Chalet Posted 30 June, 2015 Share Posted 30 June, 2015 Anyone know if Morgan was training today? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrant Posted 30 June, 2015 Share Posted 30 June, 2015 You've hit the nail on the head. He isn't a journalist, he's a reporter. Too many people nowadays think that surfing the Internet/twitter trying to find a news story from a relatively unknown but decent source (ie some of the posters on here/foreign newspapers) and claiming to be journalists. Also, what self-respecting professional will: 1) produce an article and not have any control over the headline. Surely this is the most inportant part as this is what people will use to decide whether or not to read the article. 2) allow an article to be published in his name if he hasn't produced it? 3) allows themselves to effectively become the Daily Star's (or any other newspaper for that matter) ***** by writing an article for a fee and then having nothing to do with how it's published. Amateurish. I've said it before and I'll say it again. The standard of journalism in the country is declining rapidly. That is not and has never been the way newspapers work, sub-editors have always added the headlines. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
itchen Posted 30 June, 2015 Share Posted 30 June, 2015 Lot of experts on journalism here today. I'm not a journalist but I do know that subs always write the headlines, even for established top-name columnists. If a freelance starts getting uppity he/she will starve. Yes, Alex Crook and others do recirculate what they find locally whether that be press releases, gossip, lines from message boards or contacts with players. They are the ears of the nationals at provincial (sorry, face facts) clubs like ours and that's how they earn their living. You don't have to believe everything they write. Finally, the Star/Express are totally reliant on freelances because Dirty Desmond has sacked almost all the staff reporters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint_clark Posted 30 June, 2015 Share Posted 30 June, 2015 Listening to all the Utd supporters calling in talkSport and spouting off on forums that they don't think Morgan is good enough as he has no European and CL experience and that he is OK at best. I've seen a lot of them saying he will be understudy to Carrick until he retires Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
St. Neil Posted 30 June, 2015 Share Posted 30 June, 2015 Amy Lewis @SkySportsAmy 9m9 minutes ago Understand Man Utd bid for Schneiderlin 10 days ago (under £25m). Didn't meet Saints asking price & was rejected. Also told no contact since Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lorne Malvo Posted 30 June, 2015 Share Posted 30 June, 2015 I've seen a lot of them saying he will be understudy to Carrick until he retires 25m + Carrick. Be a good deal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sadoldgit Posted 30 June, 2015 Share Posted 30 June, 2015 The Sun and the Mail are both extremely profitable papers (in the Sun's case, a lot of that is down to the perceived quality of it's sports pages, esp match reports). They have huge staff levels concerned with the Star, not seen circulation figures for a while but the Star will be approx 1/4 of the Sun and 1/3 of the Mail. Small fry. The Mail's website gets unbelievable hits globally as well (they love a bit of click bait and celeb nonsense) and are one of the few newspaper groups to make a profit from online news. Far less need for Mail Group or News UK to outsource to freelancers like Crook (it happens, but way less than Express and Star) so will pay less and less often. Their staffers are extremely well numerated as well. Doesn't stop half of 'em being West Ham though (check out the Sun's massive coverage on anything West Ham, it cracks me up as I know half the sports desk are Hammers). Edit: Circulation figures for the Star are lower than I thought, 417,000 (according to May 2015 ABC's). 23% of the Sun and 25% of the Mail's circulation numbers for the same period. Still double the Guardian's though (Scott Trust still bailing them out). As I am sure you will know, circulation isn't the main driver for nationals, it is the readership profile. The "broadsheet" papers have never sold anywhere near the red tops but don't need to because they make more money from advertising. The Guardian's circulation figures have fallen back to what they used to be some time ago but the Scott Trust don't bail them out, the Trust is there to ensure that The Guardian remains to paper that CP Scott wanted it to be. The sole purpose of the Trust is to secure the financial and editorial independence of The Guardian. There is no Murdoch looking over the shoulder of the Editor telling them which Party to support. Long may that continue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sadoldgit Posted 30 June, 2015 Share Posted 30 June, 2015 Lot of experts on journalism here today. I'm not a journalist but I do know that subs always write the headlines, even for established top-name columnists. If a freelance starts getting uppity he/she will starve. Yes, Alex Crook and others do recirculate what they find locally whether that be press releases, gossip, lines from message boards or contacts with players. They are the ears of the nationals at provincial (sorry, face facts) clubs like ours and that's how they earn their living. You don't have to believe everything they write. Finally, the Star/Express are totally reliant on freelances because Dirty Desmond has sacked almost all the staff reporters. Spot on re the subs and headlines. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint-Armstrong Posted 30 June, 2015 Share Posted 30 June, 2015 That is not and has never been the way newspapers work, sub-editors have always added the headlines. Thank you, that just isn't how it works. The nationals can't just have freelancers turning in whatever they like to a national and it going straight onto the page. Sub-editors are important, and can obviously work either way. Some people have good relations with subs, some don't - there are numerous reasons as to why. To suggest that you really thought that writers get to choose their own headlines just shows a general lack of understanding. Lot of experts on journalism here today. I'm not a journalist but I do know that subs always write the headlines, even for established top-name columnists. If a freelance starts getting uppity he/she will starve. Yes, Alex Crook and others do recirculate what they find locally whether that be press releases, gossip, lines from message boards or contacts with players. They are the ears of the nationals at provincial (sorry, face facts) clubs like ours and that's how they earn their living. You don't have to believe everything they write. Finally, the Star/Express are totally reliant on freelances because Dirty Desmond has sacked almost all the staff reporters. Spot on. Nationals can't be employing an army of full-time staff to cover clubs like Saints and now, Bournemouth. They'll always need to 'rent an ear' and get anything that happens passed on to them. Some of it goes into the papers, some of it doesn't - but it's all kept for the purposes of knowledge. The Desmond point is also correct - it's why they're prepared to pay a bit more to freelancers, to keep their paper filled with copy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackanorySFC Posted 30 June, 2015 Share Posted 30 June, 2015 As I am sure you will know, circulation isn't the main driver for nationals, it is the readership profile. The "broadsheet" papers have never sold anywhere near the red tops but don't need to because they make more money from advertising. The Guardian's circulation figures have fallen back to what they used to be some time ago but the Scott Trust don't bail them out, the Trust is there to ensure that The Guardian remains to paper that CP Scott wanted it to be. The sole purpose of the Trust is to secure the financial and editorial independence of The Guardian. There is no Murdoch looking over the shoulder of the Editor telling them which Party to support. Long may that continue. I'll take your word re' the Scott Trust, I know a few people that now work in their commercial department and they have a cushty life "profit seeking, not profit dependent". Guardian have, and have always had, a brilliant web strategy as well, Mail online the only UK site close to them in terms of traffic (as you know, mostly due to pay walls). The Guardian get some decent global ad' revenues as their site is extremely popular in the US. As for broadsheet/ tabloid ad' revenues, that may have been the case a long way back but in my first hand knowledge going back to 2003 I know for a fact that page yields in the Sun are approx 3x the Times and their ad' revenues have been propping up the Times for at least the last 10 years internally at News Int'/ UK. I also know that (using a simple analogy) Vauxhall/ Ford pay a LOT more to advertise ROP in the Sun than Mercedes/ BMW do in the Times (as well at car brands this is true across Travel, FMCG, Finance any any other vertical)! Back in pre internet days when the Times had a huge classified section this may have been different, but print buying agencies see as much value in a Sun reader as a Times reader, just target the right product to hit their profile. Desmond has taken the Express/ Star to pieces though, absolute rags these days. Heard some proper horror stories about him and his right hand man Stan from people that have worked at N&S! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasonb Posted 30 June, 2015 Share Posted 30 June, 2015 If only all thread digressions were as interesting as this one. No name calling or bickering, just some insightful posts into an industry I know little about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Matty 76 Posted 30 June, 2015 Share Posted 30 June, 2015 SSN saying our asking price is £30m apparently, seems more like it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Window Cleaner Posted 30 June, 2015 Share Posted 30 June, 2015 SSN saying our asking price is £30m apparently, seems more like it. We'll not get that so no need to look for any more DMs, explains why our "targets" seem to be drifting off elsewhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S-Clarke Posted 30 June, 2015 Share Posted 30 June, 2015 Maybe we should rename this thread? Seemingly they've not given us what we wanted, and they haven't been back since. So it's all still pretty much up the air, explains his presence at pre-season. It will probably happen I imagine, but as usual most media outlets have seemingly jumped the gun (Including Sky, who are backtracking as usual) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wade Garrett Posted 30 June, 2015 Share Posted 30 June, 2015 Looks like Morgan might be staying after all then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
svetigpung Posted 30 June, 2015 Share Posted 30 June, 2015 SSN saying our asking price is £30m apparently, seems more like it. HaHa thats more like it...this could make it interesting. Although it's probably only cow****. Now waiting for toys to get thrown out of a certain pram! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eddie Posted 30 June, 2015 Share Posted 30 June, 2015 Looks like Morgan might be staying after all then. source? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperSAINT Posted 30 June, 2015 Share Posted 30 June, 2015 source? Probably just basing it off the SSN report. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doddisalegend Posted 30 June, 2015 Share Posted 30 June, 2015 Looks like Morgan might be staying after all then. Bit early for me to get to excited just yet. The other issue is that if we don't cash in on him now will get a lot less next season.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint_Ash Posted 30 June, 2015 Share Posted 30 June, 2015 7 years of an amazing journey #saintsfc DESTROYED in 1 hour !!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Window Cleaner Posted 30 June, 2015 Share Posted 30 June, 2015 Thank you, that just isn't how it works. The nationals can't just have freelancers turning in whatever they like to a national and it going straight onto the page. Sub-editors are important, and can obviously work either way. Some people have good relations with subs, some don't - there are numerous reasons as to why. To suggest that you really thought that writers get to choose their own headlines just shows a general lack of understanding. Spot on. Nationals can't be employing an army of full-time staff to cover clubs like Saints and now, Bournemouth. They'll always need to 'rent an ear' and get anything that happens passed on to them. Some of it goes into the papers, some of it doesn't - but it's all kept for the purposes of knowledge. The Desmond point is also correct - it's why they're prepared to pay a bit more to freelancers, to keep their paper filled with copy. Well I think we should have a campaign for responsible sports journalism. It's all just about WI Coffee Morning gossip level now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now