Nick
Administrator
A fairly decent chunk would be CCFC based whether football or non football. Will be screwed when SISU go and they have to be positive about CCFC in every article
Doesn't show how much is generated by CCFC and the SISU disaster.... I would think that alone accounts for some proportion of interest generated..
A Gilbert-esque reply.
Anything to do with masses of misleading clickbait? If judged just on how many people have opened a page it doesn't take quality into consideration so not sure how it's a reply when people discuss quality.
If employing people solely to copy and paste articles and then hammer the shit out of them on social media with misleading titles then of course daily views will go up. It's the lad bible approach.
It's up there with just screenshotting "most read" as a reply when somebody says anything about the quality or how it's unrelated to Coventry.
I said something seems to be working for them. (Not me)
I prefer it how it used to be.
I also feel it has become very regionalised recently. We get a lot more news both nationally and regionally. When actually I prefer it to be just news that affects Coventry and Warwickshire. I get the other news elsewhere.
I know, it's just how the "you are wrong because views are up" is the standard response. The same as "well thousands who have read it disagree" as if they have been asked what they thought about the article.
That would be correct if the statement was "I bet page views are down" but not relevant when going on about quality
That's because they bring in content from say Liverpool and use the headlines so people click thinking it's in Coventry, but really the woman hitting the bouncer is in Liverpool so nobody is bothered.
They blocked me because I asked what an article had to do with Coventry.. Their usual reply is "thousands of people were interested".
They will just be judged on how many people open the site, that is all of the willy waving that goes on is about.
Better not to look.I use an adblocker, if I had to face all that shite I wouldn't ever look.
I do wonder if it's the best long-term however. Undoubtedly short-term it works, but if (when!) they lose their reputation and authority, will it slip?Welcome to capitalism. This approach is the most efficient form of making money from journalism so it’s what prevails.
Short of funding it out of taxation and all the issues that go with state media I’m not sure what can be done. It’s clickbait or die these days.
I do wonder if it's the best long-term however. Undoubtedly short-term it works, but if (when!) they lose their reputation and authority, will it slip?
A bit like bands who get big label backing, they might get one big album, but then having sold-out, they lose the loyal base who buy regardless.
I dug into this a bit the last time they announced big gains as it seemed a bit suspect. Turns out the methodology they use to arrive at these figures is seriously flawed and has been binned by pretty much everyone. Read that the Australian equivalent press body dumped it when the figures were showing far more people than the entire population of Australia were supposedly reading small town local papers!Something seems to be working for them read to the end of the article.....
Web ABCs: Sun fastest-growing national press website as daily regionals also make big gains – Press Gazette
I dug into this a bit the last time they announced big gains as it seemed a bit suspect. Turns out the methodology they use to arrive at these figures is seriously flawed and has been binned by pretty much everyone. Read that the Australian equivalent press body dumped it when the figures were showing far more people than the entire population of Australia were supposedly reading small town local papers!
Its also a nonsense to compare it to old circulation figures. You can click on the home page, take 30 seconds scanning it, decide there's nothing to read and close the site. You've been counted. The print equivalent was one sale, yet how many print copies sold were read by just 1 person?
To me its the equivalent of counting everyone who glanced at the headline board outside the newsagents as a reader.
And of course how much revenue does a click on the website bring in compared to a paper sale?
Trinity Mirror will have more meaningful data such as the amount of time each person spends on the site, how many stories they click on etc but that doesn't get realised. Given the rate at which Trinity Mirror are closing local papers you have to think it doesn't make good reading.
Outside?No such problems with the printed version...just cut it into small squares, attach them to a meat hook and hang it in the lavvy.
I've been starting to watch euronews a little lately.Better not to look.
I have tried lots of news sites & BBC & Guardian are the least commercial I found at the time.
BUT recently I decided to try Reuters - and hurrah! Low on ad's & seems very low on bias.
The articles are more political, economy or military related. None of this celebrity tittle-tattle so if you wanna know who is in bake off or strictly you have to look elsewhere
Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk
Outside?
Outside?
That's because they bring in content from say Liverpool and use the headlines so people click thinking it's in Coventry, but really the woman hitting the bouncer is in Liverpool so nobody is bothered.
They blocked me because I asked what an article had to do with Coventry.. Their usual reply is "thousands of people were interested".
They will just be judged on how many people open the site, that is all of the willy waving that goes on is about.
Non of what they do bothers me at all really. They can fill their boots. What does annoy me is their employees insisting they don't do what they clearly do do. Admit the majority of it is clickbait nonsense and be done with it.
Yep...I watch that too sometimesI've been starting to watch euronews a little lately.
Just short punchy peices about shit that happens daily on the planet.
No real slant on people or personalities
Is this thread football related ?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?