Simon Gilbert - Click Bait (2 Viewers)

[Skybluesince82]

I think I saw @SimonGilbert with an account on here recently, not sure if it was genuine or not - but I'm sure he reads this forum (ego wouldn't allow him not to). I'd be really interested to know the reasoning and nature behind this article Simon if you're out there: Did CCFC co-owner Joy Seppala meet Gary Hoffman at the weekend?

Against my better judgement, I read this article. It was blatantly obvious it was click bait.
Low and behold I was absolutely right. The article stats off saying it is based on a rumour (started by who, the Telegraph?), but then goes on to answer its own question by saying apparently the meeting hadn't taken place.
Other than that the article covered stuff we already knew. So Simon, as the Chief Reporter at the CET, how is this not pure click bait? How can you possibly justify that this article purely based on a rumour that is scotched by your own sources in the next paragraph, is possibly in 'the public interest' which you and your paper continuously use as the justification for your derisory articles on CCFC (not just sisu, but CCFC).
I know I'm preaching to the converted with users of this forum on Gilbert, but I genuinely don't see how the editor at the CET can possibly thing this is newsworthy and know that it is purely about clicks.
I for one won't be bothering with the CET any more, not that I was anyway, but this article Simon is nothing more than absolutely pathetic and even an egotist like you must sure be a little embarrassed that you have put this out under the title of Chief Reporter.

 

---

[hill83]

Take the link out. Doing his job for him.

I've had this argument with him on twitter and to justify it he said to read the article not just the headline. Which is the very definition of click bait. It wasn't even a ccfc related article either. It was an NHS one about George Elliot hospital in Nuneaton with a picture of University hospital in Coventry as the lead picture.

 

[Skybluesince82]

I have had to click it twice myself now - I start getting wasps pop up adverts now on my screen.
Relevant bits copied and pasted:

Rumours of a meeting between Coventry City co-owner Joy Seppala and prospective CCFC purchaser Gary Hoffman have been scotched.
Online speculation mounted that the pair had met on Saturday after it was suggested Sisu chief executive Joy Seppala was in the city.
A consortium of local businessmen headed by Mr Hoffman had two takeover bids for the club rejected last week.
But sources close to Mr Hoffman have indicated that he did not meet Ms Seppala, who runs the London hedge fund with business partner Dermot Coleman, and was instead spending time with family.

 

[Astute]

I think I saw Simon with an account on here recently, not sure if it was genuine or not - but I'm sure he reads this forum (ego wouldn't allow him not to).

Would you like to name any side that you think doesn't check online what is being said?

Isn't it strange that we get an apology from SISU each time they want our money for season tickets and we are debating on to buy or not?

 

[Nick]

His job is measured on just number of clicks, not quality.

 

[torchomatic]

His job is measured on just number of clicks, not quality.

Yep, that's the Trinity Mirror model.

 

[hill83]

Yep, that's the Trinity Mirror model.

I wouldn't have too much of an issue with it if he kept his noise down.

 

[torchomatic]

Isn't it strange that we get an apology from SISU each time they want our money for season tickets and we are debating on to buy or not?

Well not that strange if they do it every year. And if as you say they do it all the time then people must be pretty stupid to fall for it if that means so much them on deciding whether to purchase or not.

People will buy STs or they won't. We have, but nothing to do with what Fisher has said or not. I think people are intelligent enough to make up their own minds.

 

[MusicDating]

Wikipedia's Jimmy Wales creates news service Wikitribune - BBC News Interesting...

 

[Astute]

Well not that strange if they do it every year. And if as you say they do it all the time then people must be pretty stupid to fall for it if that means so much them on deciding whether to purchase or not.

People will buy STs or they won't. We have, but nothing to do with what Fisher has said or not. I think people are intelligent enough to make up their own minds.

Exactly.

You have the choice on getting a ST. Just like you do with clicking on a non story.

 

[hill83]

Exactly.

You have the choice on getting a ST. Just like you do with clicking on a non story.

Slightly different though. You don't know it's a non story until you click on it.

Edit: actually you probably do if it's from that shower of shite but my point still stands. It's different.

 

[Nick]

Not bothered as long as people click on.

 

[torchomatic]

Exactly.

You have the choice on getting a ST. Just like you do with clicking on a non story.

Not quite the same thing really is it?

 

[Nick]

Telegraph blocked me because I pointed out that the story about the bouncer hitting the woman was both in Liverpool and in the national papers 2 days before

 

[Astute]

Not quite the same thing really is it?

Nothing is the same if you don't want it to be.

You can click to see if there is a story. You can buy a ST and hope that Fisher keeps to his word.

 

[shmmeee]

I'll play my role as Devil's Advocate as has become my job on this site.

Firstly, normally reporters don't write their own headlines. They're done by another person whose sole job is to improve click through, shouting at the reporter is like shouting at the wholesaler of potatoes because you don't like the packet McDonalds sells them in.

Secondly, yes 21st century news is shit. The money is flowing out of it and people aren't paying for it. Local news especially. The main driver is ad revenue, just like commercial TV, just like free websites. That means views, that means clicks. Guardian does it, Mail does it, Telegraph does it and local papers do it more because they have fewer viewers, even the darling of the clique here the Coventry Observer. Hence half the headlines on that site starting with "BREAKING:" even though it's a two day old story. Over the last decade the CT has been shrunk to virtaully nothing and almost amalgamated with other bigger papers. If you don't like they way they're going then you need to buy the paper because proper circulation is the only thing that'll stop them going full click bait. The other alternative is like the Observer to be a free paper also supported by ads.

Thirdly, I do wish people would stop misusing "fake news", it's not just a shit story or one you don't like, it's a story made from whole cloth with the specific aim of influencing people or making ad revenue.

Edit: What annoys me most about the rhetoric on this site is that I fucking hate the CT. I've personally been on the end of their shit inaccurate reporting. Yet because of the frothing at the mouth on this site I end up defending them.

 

[Nick]

Nothing is the same if you don't want it to be.

You can click to see if there is a story. You can buy a ST and hope that Fisher keeps to his word.

People don't buy a season ticket based on Fisher's words.

They do click to read a story.

 

[Nick]

I'll play my role as Devil's Advocate as has become my job on this site.

Firstly, normally reporters don't write their own headlines. They're done by another person whose sole job is to improve click through, shouting at the reporter is like shouting at the wholesaler of potatoes because you don't like the packet McDonalds sells them in.

Secondly, yes 21st century news is shit. The money is flowing out of it and people aren't paying for it. Local news especially. The main driver is ad revenue, just like commercial TV, just like free websites. That means views, that means clicks. Guardian does it, Mail does it, Telegraph does it and local papers do it more because they have fewer viewers, even the darling of the clique here the Coventry Observer. Hence half the headlines on that site starting with "BREAKING:" even though it's a two day old story. Over the last decade the CT has been shrunk to virtaully nothing and almost amalgamated with other bigger papers. If you don't like they way they're going then you need to buy the paper because proper circulation is the only thing that'll stop them going full click bait. The other alternative is like the Observer to be a free paper also supported by ads.

Thirdly, I do wish people would stop misusing "fake news", it's not just a shit story or one you don't like, it's a story made from whole cloth with the specific aim of influencing people or making ad revenue.

Edit: What annoys me most about the rhetoric on this site is that I fucking hate the CT. I've personally been on the end of their shit inaccurate reporting. Yet because of the frothing at the mouth on this site I end up defending them.

Apart from Gilbert has said how proud he is of headlines he has done...Does he not also write what shows up in his tweets?

I fully understand it's his job and he has a family to feed, although you would think that approach would get him further rather than the straight up denial and misleading.

It isn't much other than a scaled down version of the Lad Bible.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

I'll play my role as Devil's Advocate as has become my job on this site.

Firstly, normally reporters don't write their own headlines. They're done by another person whose sole job is to improve click through, shouting at the reporter is like shouting at the wholesaler of potatoes because you don't like the packet McDonalds sells them in.

Secondly, yes 21st century news is shit. The money is flowing out of it and people aren't paying for it. Local news especially. The main driver is ad revenue, just like commercial TV, just like free websites. That means views, that means clicks. Guardian does it, Mail does it, Telegraph does it and local papers do it more because they have fewer viewers, even the darling of the clique here the Coventry Observer. Hence half the headlines on that site starting with "BREAKING:" even though it's a two day old story. Over the last decade the CT has been shrunk to virtaully nothing and almost amalgamated with other bigger papers. If you don't like they way they're going then you need to buy the paper because proper circulation is the only thing that'll stop them going full click bait. The other alternative is like the Observer to be a free paper also supported by ads.

Thirdly, I do wish people would stop misusing "fake news", it's not just a shit story or one you don't like, it's a story made from whole cloth with the specific aim of influencing people or making ad revenue.

Edit: What annoys me most about the rhetoric on this site is that I fucking hate the CT. I've personally been on the end of their shit inaccurate reporting. Yet because of the frothing at the mouth on this site I end up defending them.

Don't disagree with most of this (not entirely sure the Observer gets much of a free pass around these parts, mind!). I do fear local journalism is dead however, and when we end up with shitstorms like our club, that's when we miss it!

 

[torchomatic]

Nothing is the same if you don't want it to be.

You can click to see if there is a story. You can buy a ST and hope that Fisher keeps to his word.

But as people like you tell he is lying all the time why would they do that if they felt that strongly about it. Fisher doesn't stop me buying one regardless of what he promises or says as I like to think I'm intelligent enough to make my own informed decision on spending £300 on an ST. I'm under no illusions.

Buying a ST for £300 is far different from reading a headline "did joy and hoff meet?" only to read in the article that they didn't. Why not: "Despite rumours they did not meet" as the headline?

If you can't see the difference then I give up as it's not worth discussing with you.

 

[Captain Dart]

Yep, that's the Trinity Mirror model.

Isn't it all papers? That is probably why Reid is at the Observer too, lots of outraged clicks.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

What I would say ref: Gilbert is the reporting and the twitter ego is unhelpful, in my view.

That being said, from his POV you could argue he's grasped exactly what he has to do to keep his job, in the modern age. Only he'll know if the overload on twitter actually works, mind. Personally I'd think a little less-is-more, but he has access to the stats...

 

[CovFan]

Isn't it all papers? That is probably why Reid is at the Observer too, lots of outraged clicks.

It is all papers but it only seems to be the Telegraph that gets called out on it on this website.

 

[Astute]

But as people like you tell he is lying all the time why would they do that if they felt that strongly about it. Fisher doesn't stop me buying one regardless of what he promises or says as I like to think I'm intelligent enough to make my own informed decision on spending £300 on an ST. I'm under no illusions.

So you are like most and don't believe him then.

With the way you are posting it seems that you think I have said you shouldn't buy one. You couldn't be further from the truth if so.

The thing they have in common is bullshit. Bullshit headlines and bullshit comments. If you don't agree then say which one it doesn't concern.

 

[torchomatic]

So you are like most and don't believe him then.

With the way you are posting it seems that you think I have said you shouldn't buy one. You couldn't be further from the truth if so.

The thing they have in common is bullshit. Bullshit headlines and bullshit comments. If you don't agree then say which one it doesn't concern.

To be honest I don't hang on his every word and froth at the mouth about it. Like SISU he says what he wants when he wants and one day he will be a distant memory.

People will take the piss and have a go but really at the moment all I care about is buying a ST and spending 90 minutes every other week with my son doing something we enjoy together. The rest will sort itself out whether I start a thread called "More Fisher Lies!!!!!!" or not.

 

[Moff]

I'll play my role as Devil's Advocate as has become my job on this site.

Firstly, normally reporters don't write their own headlines. They're done by another person whose sole job is to improve click through, shouting at the reporter is like shouting at the wholesaler of potatoes because you don't like the packet McDonalds sells them in.

Secondly, yes 21st century news is shit. The money is flowing out of it and people aren't paying for it. Local news especially. The main driver is ad revenue, just like commercial TV, just like free websites. That means views, that means clicks. Guardian does it, Mail does it, Telegraph does it and local papers do it more because they have fewer viewers, even the darling of the clique here the Coventry Observer. Hence half the headlines on that site starting with "BREAKING:" even though it's a two day old story. Over the last decade the CT has been shrunk to virtaully nothing and almost amalgamated with other bigger papers. If you don't like they way they're going then you need to buy the paper because proper circulation is the only thing that'll stop them going full click bait. The other alternative is like the Observer to be a free paper also supported by ads.

Thirdly, I do wish people would stop misusing "fake news", it's not just a shit story or one you don't like, it's a story made from whole cloth with the specific aim of influencing people or making ad revenue.

Edit: What annoys me most about the rhetoric on this site is that I fucking hate the CT. I've personally been on the end of their shit inaccurate reporting. Yet because of the frothing at the mouth on this site I end up defending them.

You write fair points, sadly diminished by the crap line that the Observer is the 'darling of the clique' I could argue the Telegraph is the darling of the clique for people like you, (not my personal opinion as this is an internet forum and there's no cliques only in peoples minds) but that's just a shit argument, and its only used for finger pointing, and point scoring.

Local news is shit on both sides and it is click bait shit, like you said its both national and local and the world we live in, but isn't a reason for us to accept it. At a time when we need good local journalists we are sold short by petty back biting and point scoring.

As for your Edit, if you fucking hate the CT, but defend them because of comments on this site then perhaps you need to step back a bit, its just a forum.

 

[Astute]

To be honest I don't hang on his every worth and froth at the mouth about it. Like SISU he says what he wants when he wants and one day he will be a distant memory.

People will take the piss and have a go but really at the moment all I care about is buying a ST and spending 90 minutes every other week with my son doing something we enjoy together. The rest will sort itself out whether I start a thread called "More Fisher Lies!!!!!!" or not.

Which is how it should be. The one thing I miss about Coventry is the football. I would be the same as you and taking my youngest lad all the time. I will have to wait until retirement until I can go to every game again. Less than 11 years to go at the most.

But as I said the pair of them are very similar. Both come out with bullshit because it is what their boss wants. I wouldn't think that they would do the same if they didn't have to.

 

[Greggs]

We're signing Ryan Kent.............

 

[Silsden]

The Telegraph website's articles are so littered with with adverts and pop ups it's practically unreadable.

If you do make sense out of it, turns out to be more tripe like this and you wish you hadn't bothered...

 

[Nick]

I think people get more annoyed about this rather than the "You will never guess what ex Steps star H looks like now" type crap is because a lot of it is being done around the football club we support. Fans are being misled left, right and centre.

The same as the announcement for a book where there were people thinking for a week there was big CCFC news coming.

If there was a young journo sat at home it's change for them to really make a name for themselves isn't it? Dig, hound and hold everybody to account and they could be onto something. I thought Coventry Today might, but it's a big thing to do

For example the whole "sisu paid a pound", "sisu have put in 100m". All it takes is a journo to speak to an accountant and then just deliver facts.

I guess actual journalists aren't about as much, it is content writers who just look for somebody to tweet something, send them a message and make a story about it.

 

[dongonzalos]

I think I saw Simon with an account on here recently, not sure if it was genuine or not - but I'm sure he reads this forum (ego wouldn't allow him not to). I'd be really interested to know the reasoning and nature behind this article Simon if you're out there: Did CCFC co-owner Joy Seppala meet Gary Hoffman at the weekend?

Against my better judgement, I read this article. It was blatantly obvious it was click bait.
Low and behold I was absolutely right. The article stats off saying it is based on a rumour (started by who, the Telegraph?), but then goes on to answer its own question by saying apparently the meeting hadn't taken place.
Other than that the article covered stuff we already knew. So Simon, as the Chief Reporter at the CET, how is this not pure click bait? How can you possibly justify that this article purely based on a rumour that is scotched by your own sources in the next paragraph, is possibly in 'the public interest' which you and your paper continuously use as the justification for your derisory articles on CCFC (not just sisu, but CCFC).
I know I'm preaching to the converted with users of this forum on Gilbert, but I genuinely don't see how the editor at the CET can possibly thing this is newsworthy and know that it is purely about clicks.
I for one won't be bothering with the CET any more, not that I was anyway, but this article Simon is nothing more than absolutely pathetic and even an egotist like you must sure be a little embarrassed that you have put this out under the title of Chief Reporter.

Gotta say and I know I won't be popular on this.
I thought it was useful to have it confirmed from Gary Hoffman that he had not met Joy over the weekend.
However the rest of the article is the same as what Les Reid does, awhile regurgitation of the history. Totally pointless and just padding out. Just put a link on for someone if they don't know the history.

 

[chiefdave]

There was a good one at the weekend. Simon posted the link to the CT live feed on the Hoff potential takeover which said something along the lines of takeover latest and the accompanying tweet said they've done it.

The tweet was apparently referring to the U18s win.

 

[torchomatic]

Gotta say and I know I won't be popular on this.
I thought it was usual to have itconfirmed from Gary Hoffman that he had not met Joy over the weekend.
However the rest of the article is the same as what Les Reid does, awhile regurgitation of the history. Totally pointless and just padding out. Just put a link on for someone if they don't know the history.

So why headline it "did they meet" when he knew they hadn't?

 

[Nick]

So why headline it "did they meet" when he knew they hadn't?

"Hoffman says joy meeting rumour is false"

 

[dongonzalos]

So why headline it "did they meet" when he knew they hadn't?

Yes the headline is designed to make you read.
Although I think most would have looked anyway if the headline said 'Hoffman denies meeting'