League Express social media output

[Martyn Sadler]

6 minutes ago, Barry Badrinath said:

just out of interest, have you received much positive feedback regarding this change in content policy?

The positive feedback is the large increase in the number of visitors to the website.

People don't tend to comment on things they like, however.

[Jughead]

4 minutes ago, Martyn Sadler said:

The positive feedback is the large increase in the number of visitors to the website.

People don't tend to comment on things they like, however.

That’s a lot of words to say no. 

[RP London]

1 hour ago, JohnM said:

You are keen on investigative journalism.

The BIJ are investigative journalists 

Posters have highlighted stories they think worth investigating.

BIJ are providing contact details for people with genuine stories worth investigating.

Thats not the point though is it.. you know this you are just being difficult. 

an RL paper, any journalistic organisation, should be more than just a forum of opinion in print/on screen.. it should also be more than what you linked to which is reactive.. it should be active in going and getting the stories, as I am sure the BIJ do too.

It is akin to a business sitting around wondering why they are going bust because all they have is an email for sales rather than going out and knocking on doors. 

 

[Martyn Sadler]

21 minutes ago, Jughead said:

That’s a lot of words to say no. 

Quite true, but a big increase in readership is worth any number of individual comments, whether positive or negative.

[JohnM]

1 hour ago, gingerjon said:

Speaking of vital investigations. Your signature is a made up quote.

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2019/sep/26/viral-image/no-marcus-aurelius-didnt-say-about-opinions-and-fa/

Aren't they all?

Just pointing out that you can't believe everything you read on the Internet......

and as pointed out at the end of the piece you linked to, "We rate this post Fase."

Edited January 17, 2023 by JohnM

[Jughead]

31 minutes ago, Martyn Sadler said:

Quite true, but a big increase in readership is worth any number of individual comments, whether positive or negative.

Genuine question, is there any way to track time spent on a particular article? As in, are they being read or skim read to find the answer to the topic title?

[Barry Badrinath]

21 minutes ago, Jughead said:

Genuine question, is there any way to track time spent on a particular article? As in, are they being read or skim read to find the answer to the topic title?

or clicked on and then clicked off when a reader realises what an article actually is.

[JohnM]

51 minutes ago, RP London said:

Thats not the point though is it.. you know this you are just being difficult. 

an RL paper, any journalistic organisation, should be more than just a forum of opinion in print/on screen.. it should also be more than what you linked to which is reactive.. it should be active in going and getting the stories, as I am sure the BIJ do too.

It is akin to a business sitting around wondering why they are going bust because all they have is an email for sales rather than going out and knocking on doors. 

 

That doesn't hold. 

Being difficult?  Isn't that what investigative journalism is about?  LE should be difficult but no on else can can be challenging? 

[RP London]

6 minutes ago, JohnM said:

That doesn't hold. 

Being difficult?  Isn't that what investigative journalism is about?  LE should be difficult but no on else can can be challenging? 

yes thats exactly what I'm saying.. well done!

[The Blues Ox]

53 minutes ago, Jughead said:

Genuine question, is there any way to track time spent on a particular article? As in, are they being read or skim read to find the answer to the topic title?

 

31 minutes ago, Barry Badrinath said:

or clicked on and then clicked off when a reader realises what an article actually is.

They will have all these stats but as I imagine its clicks that they make money from then all that matters is that there has been an increase in people arriving at the website. I imagine most regular readers will be using adblockers anyway and theres a chance they may have stats on that as well so that would be intersting to know.

[Barry Badrinath]

1 hour ago, The Blues Ox said:

 

They will have all these stats but as I imagine its clicks that they make money from then all that matters is that there has been an increase in people arriving at the website. I imagine most regular readers will be using adblockers anyway and theres a chance they may have stats on that as well so that would be intersting to know.

well i ask this now as i've started getting a fair few weird google notifications on my phone, android phone, those weird google notifcation tabs that look like two rectangles that takes you to the google page where its nothing but click bait, and trash secondary articles, thats where i've fallen foul of these types of articles on LE, clicked on and then clicked off again.

But i've got it in my head now to avoid them entirely.

[John Drake]

1 hour ago, The Blues Ox said:

I imagine most regular readers will be using adblockers anyway 

At the risk of wading into a subject I'd rather not wade into, herein lies an interesting general point that I think is worth making.

Regular readers who use adblockers - and assuming they haven't paid via a paywall to read content - are essentially depriving the websites they visit - not just this one - from generating revenue.

If websites generate no revenue, from a paywall or from advertising, unless they are subsidised by other means, they don't have any money to pay people to write content.

Ultimately, good journalists need to earn good (or even just reasonable, or even just any) money from their writing.

Where does that money come from, if not through purchases of print or digital newspapers and magazines, website paywalls or advertising wherever their work is published?

Next time you lament the quality of journalism, wherever you choose to read it, perhaps consider how much you directly contributed towards paying for it to be there in the first place.

[Josef K]

9 hours ago, RP London said:

For me the 4th estate is there to hold people to account. Its there to investigate and make sure that everything in the garden is rosy. Yet we have issues around governance, we have issues around the Refs and the disciplinary. We have questions from fans about IMG. We have questions around the international calendar and what is going on. 

The RL press don't seem to want to hold RL to account. I very rarely (and I am sure there will be a defence of "but look at this article or this one") see articles that do this, there is a lot of opinion pieces about what the writer thinks is going on or what they would change or what they think is wrong but never with the input and examination that IMHO there should be. 

Ralph, for example, should not have been allowed to go missing as much as he did. Why did the Refs situation stay where it was without questions being asked of those leaving. 

I may be wrong but the level of scrutiny the RL press (as a whole) give to RL is no longer what it was and lets its supporters down. 

I struggle to read a lot of it now as if I want someone's opinion that has no back up then I come on here, I don't expect someone to get paid to spout it. 

They’re probably afraid of losing their press passes and free entry into grounds, so they just toe the line. 

[Gav Wilson]

22 minutes ago, John Drake said:

At the risk of wading into a subject I'd rather not wade into, herein lies an interesting general point that I think is worth making.

Regular readers who use adblockers - and assuming they haven't paid via a paywall to read content - are essentially depriving the websites they visit - not just this one - from generating revenue.

If websites generate no revenue, from a paywall or from advertising, unless they are subsidised by other means, they don't have any money to pay people to write content.

Ultimately, good journalists need to earn good (or even just reasonable, or even just any) money from their writing.

Where does that money come from, if not through purchases of print or digital newspapers and magazines, website paywalls or advertising wherever their work is published?

Next time you lament the quality of journalism, wherever you choose to read it, perhaps consider how much you directly contributed towards paying for it to be there in the first place.

I've happily subscribed to TRL/LE for a number of years, but if the persistent 'Top 5 haircuts in Super League - Number 3 will surprise you!'  type articles continue once the off season has finished, I will have to reconsider.

[JohnM]

2 hours ago, RP London said:

yes thats exactly what I'm saying.. well done!

Thank you for your sneering and patronising response.

You want LE to be "difficult" then you accuse me of being "difficult"

So what issues do you want LE to be "difficult" about? 

How should it know what to be "difficult" about and how should it prioritise which social media "stories to follow up?

[JohnM]

6 minutes ago, Gav Wilson said:

I've happily subscribed to TRL/LE for a number of years, but if the persistent 'Top 5 haircuts in Super League - Number 3 will surprise you!'  type articles continue once the off season has finished, I will have to reconsider.

Are you not confusing LE with Seriousaboutrl?

Five of the most bizarre haircuts in Super League history - Rugby League News (seriousaboutrl.com)

Can you not just ignore things you don't like? I

It is not possible to satisfy everyone; someone will always complain or be displeased no matter what you do.

[Gav Wilson]

13 minutes ago, JohnM said:

Are you not confusing LE with Seriousaboutrl?

Five of the most bizarre haircuts in Super League history - Rugby League News (seriousaboutrl.com)

Can you not just ignore things you don't like? I

It is not possible to satisfy everyone; someone will always complain or be displeased no matter what you do.

Oh my goodness I can't believe that's an actual article... I was being facetious for effect! 

Spot the common denominator though... 

I could easily ignore things I don't like, hence me reconsidering my subscription. 

[Martyn Sadler]

1 hour ago, Gav Wilson said:

Oh my goodness I can't believe that's an actual article... I was being facetious for effect! 

Spot the common denominator though... 

I could easily ignore things I don't like, hence me reconsidering my subscription. 

Gavin, you are clearly a very serious person who wants to read serious articles while avoiding trivia.

It's actually quite easy to do that on Totalrl.com, while leaving some of the lighter stuff to others to read.

The great thing about the website is that it caters for all tastes.

For example, our RL Heroes feature with Gary McKee will appear there at 8.00pm, which I'm sure you will enjoy.

[Gav Wilson]

3 minutes ago, Martyn Sadler said:

Gavin, you are clearly a very serious person who wants to read serious articles while avoiding trivia.

It's actually quite easy to do that on Totalrl.com, while leaving some of the lighter stuff to others to read.

The great thing about the website is that it caters for all tastes.

For example, our RL Heroes feature with Gary McKee will appear there at 8.00pm, which I'm sure you will enjoy.

1 or 2 fun/nonsense/trivia articles a week I don't mind, in fact I would even enjoy - especially in the off season.

3 or 4 a day - tweeted several times - not so much. 

 

I look forward to reading Rich's regular feature tomorrow. 

[Hull Kingston Bronco]

1 hour ago, Gav Wilson said:

1 or 2 fun/nonsense/trivia articles a week I don't mind, in fact I would even enjoy - especially in the off season.

3 or 4 a day - tweeted several times - not so much. 

 

I look forward to reading Rich's regular feature tomorrow. 

Just ignore the tweets, and read the articles you want to read

God knows why people are taking this so seriously. It’s a magazine, not a public service like the NHS with some sort of wider accountability to the community. If it’s trying another angle to get new readers, why do we care? The stuff you still got before is still there 

[gingerjon]

1 minute ago, Hull Kingston Bronco said:

If it’s trying another angle to get new readers, why do we care?

Because RL gets very little traction in the regular media, it matters *a lot* how the sport's own media acts and presents itself.

If that media is filled with Gledhills and other failures then that is the main view of the sport that outsiders see.

And, trust me on this, the awful clickbait listicles with their noughties hook headlines look *really bad* to anyone who isn't invested in the sport.

[Martyn Sadler]

19 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

Because RL gets very little traction in the regular media, it matters *a lot* how the sport's own media acts and presents itself.

If that media is filled with Gledhills and other failures then that is the main view of the sport that outsiders see.

And, trust me on this, the awful clickbait listicles with their noughties hook headlines look *really bad* to anyone who isn't invested in the sport.

I'm constantly amazed by your ability to read other people's minds.

Usually you do that on an individual basis, but now you are claiming to be able to see into the minds of all those people in the world who are not "invested" in Rugby League.

I don't know whether God exists, but if he does I'm sure he would be jealous of your remarkable gift.

[Gav Wilson]

41 minutes ago, Hull Kingston Bronco said:

Just ignore the tweets, and read the articles you want to read

God knows why people are taking this so seriously. It’s a magazine, not a public service like the NHS with some sort of wider accountability to the community. If it’s trying another angle to get new readers, why do we care? The stuff you still got before is still there 

For the avoidance of any doubt, I'm not telling Martyn what he should do with his publication. I'm just voicing my views as a paying punter as to why I'm not enjoying the content as much. I fully understand why he's taking the website down the clickbait route - it's sad and a wider reflection of the issues faced in all media, but it is what it is.

[meast]

Does this Walker chap get paid by the amount of ###### articles he can post per hour?

Really sad to see what's happened to League Express, although he only writes for totalrl.com I think

Edited January 17, 2023 by meast

[Martyn Sadler]

54 minutes ago, meast said:

Does this Walker chap get paid by the amount of ###### articles he can post per hour?

Really sad to see what's happened to League Express

You seem to be rather confused.

Callum contributes to the Totalrl.com website but only marginally to League Express.