Jump to content

Its official, our posters know far more about the Bills than half the

Webster Guy
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 42
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Delete This Account Veteran

Delete This Account

Posted
Posted
Sure, "regular folk" on message boards face no constraints, but how many of them are doing more than speculating or opining? Isnt' that the nature of message boards?

 

And why can't the media talk about what they know?

we do talk about what we know. they're called published stories.

 

what Beerball might be referring to are snippets of information we gather that are either off the record but more often unsubstantiated, which falls into speculation. more often than not, off the record stuff can be published. but it's a better practice to use a named source than not. as exotic as it might sound to use "according to sources," having a name behind that source provides far more oomph for the story to be believed.

 

also, i am not in the business to speculate. and any story that i break, i do so on the wire, and through the oversight of editors. it is not my job to break stories here.

 

jw

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Offside Number 76 Veteran

Offside Number 76

Posted
Posted

1. I'm not going to trust information coming from someone who doesn't know the difference between the words "there" and "their." That's not me being a grammar policeman; that's simply refusing to trust a source of information who either is unintelligent or fails to pay even the slightest attention to detail (or both). So, as far as I'm concerned, the traditional media still has a job.

 

2. The posters here probably know more about the current Bills team than most media personnel who aren't based out of WNY, because the posters here probably watch more Bills games than do media personnel in other areas. That doesn't mean that the posters here know more about football or about upcoming transactions, draft picks, etc. Clearly, the traditional medial has more connections on the insides of 30 organizations. That's another reason why the traditional media still has a job.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Steely Dan Hall of Famer

Steely Dan

Posted
Posted
yet, i have faith that there will always be a national and local media, in one form or another. i say this because there will always be a demand for informed information, and businesspeople who will figure out a way to distribute it for a profit.

The AP, for example, was essentially the Internet before there was an Internet.

 

i have no problems with Coach Sal, Nevergiveup et al. they've proven they have certain insights.

the key is to maintain that reputation by breaking stories and then, somehow figuring out a way to make a living out of it.

 

the trouble with the modern age, i find, is that it is far too easy to spread disinformation and speculation by calling it fact.

 

jw

 

and yes, let's all pray that the Jameson well remains full.

 

The "Ralph is dead" rumor is just one example. Writers are trusted because they have journalism degrees and know how to ferret out information and verify it before publishing it. If I see Jim Kelly and someone at wherever I could be mistaken about either of them. (a.k.a George Seifert at the airport)

 

At the rate you seem to go through it I think the well is danger of running dry. 0:)

 

we do talk about what we know. they're called published stories.

 

what Beerball might be referring to are snippets of information we gather that are either off the record but more often unsubstantiated, which falls into speculation. more often than not, off the record stuff can be published. but it's a better practice to use a named source than not. as exotic as it might sound to use "according to sources," having a name behind that source provides far more oomph for the story to be believed.

 

also, i am not in the business to speculate. and any story that i break, i do so on the wire, and through the oversight of editors. it is not my job to break stories here.

 

jw

 

What he said. :wallbash:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Delete This Account Veteran

Delete This Account

Posted
Posted
Dude you're one of the negative ones i was talking about. Obviously on any open forum message board there will be incorrect information, I was referring to the good stuff here. Duh.

if this board, as you claim, is so superior to the baloney some of us in the media distribute, well, i for one am left wanting in this discussion which you yourself began.

my problem with some posters is how they're capable of taking an initial stand and, when challenged, seem to fail to back it up. you suggest that i've been negative and, by the inference made in your initial post, out of touch with the team that i cover.

 

i've questioned your statement and gotten nothing in response.

 

if you have valid criticisms, i'd be happy to respond. imperfect as i am, what i don't like is being called "negative" without you explaining why you think so.

 

sincerely,

 

jw

Link to comment
Share on other sites
R. Rich All Pro

R. Rich

Posted
Posted
if this board, as you claim, is so superior to the baloney some of us in the media distribute, well, i for one am left wanting in this discussion which you yourself began.

my problem with some posters is how they're capable of taking an initial stand and, when challenged, seem to fail to back it up. you suggest that i've been negative and, by the inference made in your initial post, out of touch with the team that i cover.

 

i've questioned your statement and gotten nothing in response.

 

if you have valid criticisms, i'd be happy to respond. imperfect as i am, what i don't like is being called "negative" without you explaining why you think so.

 

sincerely,

 

jw

 

 

You're negative if you don't agree w/ me. C'mon now, jw. You should know this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...