Oppo Camp General AFL and other clubs discussion thread. **Opposition fans not welcome** Part 5

[Milkshaker]

Maybe the coaching staff changes? Both seem petty excuses for his If/then. Probably knows it is petty which is why he doesn't actually go into specifics. This makes it a s**t inclusion, as only him and the club seem to know what he is on about, reducing it to having zero relevance to the general reader.

A truly shitful journo even at the best of times.

Every single one he puts up is a potshot at the club or Clarko. It is possible to not click on them. The amount of will power required is quite small.

 

[savagelunchbox]

Maybe the coaching staff changes? Both seem petty excuses for his If/then. Probably knows it is petty which is why he doesn't actually go into specifics. This makes it a s**t inclusion, as only him and the club seem to know what he is on about, reducing it to having zero relevance to the general reader.

A truly shitful journo even at the best of times.

While most on here think there is an anti-Hawthorn bias in the media because there's stories written about them that aren't heaping praise on the club; Damien Barrett has some very close sources within the club walls that are both close to Clarkson and were still at the club when most of the staff were furloughed.

He doesn't hate the club. He just reports what his sources tell him and when he reports the facts and not conjecture, he's usually right.

 

[Davo23]

Every single one he puts up is a potshot at the club or Clarko. It is possible to not click on them. The amount of will power required is quite small.

Yep, It's just like all the daily "insider" stories on the Royal Family (the British one, not the Burgoyne family!)
Always best to just ignore the scumbags - he's just another gossip merchant trying to be noticed.

If he doesn't get a reaction, he doesn't get paid.

 

[cryptor]

Shouting to whom?

And if anyone was listening, what would they then do?

AFL owns the League & the media. They’ll do what they want.

The AFL Commission serve the league. They have power to make decisions but they aren't unaccountable for those decisions. They're not untouchable if the majority of clubs aren't satisfied with them, and they know that. If they (as they did) say that no matter what happens Sydney will have Buddy's salary counted against their salary cap, but then they go back on that in an unreasonable way then it's important that they're called out on it.

Other clubs (their boards, not the fans) aren't going to think "well it only hurt Hawthorn so haha", they're going to see that the commission lacks integrity to stay true to their word. That next time it might be their club that cops the rough end.

And the AFL have control over aspects of 'AFL media' but they don't control what the media says about the AFL. And the media love controversy. And when Kennett speaks out against the AFL it is controversial.

 

[MrPremiership]

While most on here think there is an anti-Hawthorn bias in the media because there's stories written about them that aren't heaping praise on the club; Damien Barrett has some very close sources within the club walls that are both close to Clarkson and were still at the club when most of the staff were furloughed.

He doesn't hate the club. He just reports what his sources tell him and when he reports the facts and not conjecture, he's usually right.

He doesn't get a lot right about our club, so I doubt he has quality sources, if any.

 

[DEECEE]

Does anyone know when will we find out how much of our personal account data has been compromised by the BF server data breach?

 

[Davo23]

Does anyone know when will we find out how much of our personal account data has been compromised by the BF server data breach?

What will they do with all the fake information?

 

[Argy]

Does anyone know when will we find out how much of our personal account data has been compromised by the BF server data breach?

They might find *'s spreadsheets.

 

[Snakelilbandit]

While most on here think there is an anti-Hawthorn bias in the media because there's stories written about them that aren't heaping praise on the club; Damien Barrett has some very close sources within the club walls that are both close to Clarkson and were still at the club when most of the staff were furloughed.

He doesn't hate the club. He just reports what his sources tell him and when he reports the facts and not conjecture, he's usually right.

Damo's burner account?

Sent from my CPH1979 using Tapatalk

 

[savagelunchbox]

He doesn't get a lot right about our club, so I doubt he has quality sources, if any.

Quite the opposite.

Since the club never responds to media stories about them, most here choose not to believe, even if it's true, and go into full outrage mode.

Barrett is a heavy fact checker, unlike the likes of Browne, McClure, et. al. Doesn't mean he's going to be right 100% of the time, but he has a better accuracy rate than a lot of the others. Barrett often sits on a story for months because he hasn't fact-checked to what he feels is at a standard of being comprehensive enough to be worthy of publishing.

Don't let the rose-coloured glasses and the faux outrage cloud your judgement.

The outrage he gets is similar to what Caro used to get. Then suddenly she started reporting the facts about the dopers, contrary to what the rest of the AFL media were reporting, in a similar way in which she used to report on Hawthorn related things, and people on here started to realise that she knows what she's reporting and is thorough in her research before she publishes.

Always remember, just because the masses on here call it bullshit, doesn't make it bullshit.

 

[Mitchell Madness]

Quite the opposite.

Since the club never responds to media stories about them, most here choose not to believe, even if it's true, and go into full outrage mode.

Barrett is a heavy fact checker, unlike the likes of Browne, McClure, et. al. Doesn't mean he's going to be right 100% of the time, but he has a better accuracy rate than a lot of the others. Barrett often sits on a story for months because he hasn't fact-checked to what he feels is at a standard of being comprehensive enough to be worthy of publishing.

Don't let the rose-coloured glasses and the faux outrage cloud your judgement.

The outrage he gets is similar to what Caro used to get. Then suddenly she started reporting the facts about the dopers, contrary to what the rest of the AFL media were reporting, in a similar way in which she used to report on Hawthorn related things, and people on here started to realise that she knows what she's reporting and is thorough in her research before she publishes.

Always remember, just because the masses on here call it bullshit, doesn't make it bullshit.

Barrett isn't a fact checker. He's a politician. He says just enough of nothing to make everyone hate him.

 

[Davo23]

Barrett isn't a fact checker. He's a politician. He says just enough of nothing to make everyone hate him.

Barrett's an idiot!

 

[Mercy Seat]

Quite the opposite.

Since the club never responds to media stories about them, most here choose not to believe, even if it's true, and go into full outrage mode.

Barrett is a heavy fact checker, unlike the likes of Browne, McClure, et. al. Doesn't mean he's going to be right 100% of the time, but he has a better accuracy rate than a lot of the others. Barrett often sits on a story for months because he hasn't fact-checked to what he feels is at a standard of being comprehensive enough to be worthy of publishing.

Don't let the rose-coloured glasses and the faux outrage cloud your judgement.

The outrage he gets is similar to what Caro used to get. Then suddenly she started reporting the facts about the dopers, contrary to what the rest of the AFL media were reporting, in a similar way in which she used to report on Hawthorn related things, and people on here started to realise that she knows what she's reporting and is thorough in her research before she publishes.

Always remember, just because the masses on here call it bullshit, doesn't make it bullshit.

Either way the "Sliding Doors" If / Then article segment is the cringe worthiest thing in footy media.

 

[MrPremiership]

Quite the opposite.

Since the club never responds to media stories about them, most here choose not to believe, even if it's true, and go into full outrage mode.

Barrett is a heavy fact checker, unlike the likes of Browne, McClure, et. al. Doesn't mean he's going to be right 100% of the time, but he has a better accuracy rate than a lot of the others. Barrett often sits on a story for months because he hasn't fact-checked to what he feels is at a standard of being comprehensive enough to be worthy of publishing.

Don't let the rose-coloured glasses and the faux outrage cloud your judgement.

The outrage he gets is similar to what Caro used to get. Then suddenly she started reporting the facts about the dopers, contrary to what the rest of the AFL media were reporting, in a similar way in which she used to report on Hawthorn related things, and people on here started to realise that she knows what she's reporting and is thorough in her research before she publishes.

Always remember, just because the masses on here call it bullshit, doesn't make it bullshit.

If he was a fact-checker, wouldn't he be right 100% of the time?

Should it be a badge of honour that he checks facts? Isn't that a minimum level of credibility for anyone in that field?

He's no Tom Browne, but he's a Hutchy disciple none-the-less.

Barrett sensationalises like every other journo. He has agendas and he think he's bigger than the game. His history with Bevo shows his true colours.

The Club is very secretive and gives very little to journos, but that doesn't excuse journos like Barrett trying to smear the club.

 

[Falco131415]

Fed ink-um any poster coming on here & spruiking that, that four-eyed F**k Stick Barret is a competent Journo should be black banned for keeps!
Yes Caro & himself don't need much to have a dig at the Hawks at any opportunity!
Both sit very high on the peak of the journalist s**t mound.

 

[MrPremiership]

Fed ink-um any poster coming on here & spruiking that, that four-eyed F**k Stick Barret is a competent Journo should be black banned for keeps!
Yes Caro & himself don't need much to have a dig at the Hawks at any opportunity!
Both sit very high on the peak of the journalist s**t mound.

Harsh.

I don't mind Caro, even when she has a dig at the Club. She has her biases but she doesn't gun for the story as much as McLure, Browne and co.

 

[cryptor]

Barrett isn't a fact checker. He's a politician. He says just enough of nothing to make everyone hate him.

Remember some years back in 2015 or 2016 when he had that huge "exclusive" story he broke on the Footy Show about how the AFL was auditing a few Hawthorn star's deals from during our premiership years?

Turns out it was completely true. But he also failed to make clear in this report that it was standard practice for the AFL to audit player deals like that. That there was nothing notable about these particular instances, but the way he built it up and presented the news made everyone think that there must have been something more to it.

Fact checked, sure. Intentionally misleading at best. A malicious lie by omission at worst.

 

[Mitchell Madness]

Barrett's an idiot!

So he's a politician

 

[savagelunchbox]

If he was a fact-checker, wouldn't he be right 100% of the time?

Should it be a badge of honour that he checks facts? Isn't that a minimum level of credibility for anyone in that field?

He's no Tom Browne, but he's a Hutchy disciple none-the-less.

Barrett sensationalises like every other journo. He has agendas and he think he's bigger than the game. His history with Bevo shows his true colours.

The Club is very secretive and gives very little to journos, but that doesn't excuse journos like Barrett trying to smear the club.

First off, he's not a Hutchy disciple. They both briefly worked together at the Herald Sun and friends through that. Hutchy is Croc Media and Barrett is AFL Media. I don't think Barrett has ever worked for Croc Media other than the Sounding Board Podcast.

It's impossible for journo's to be right 100% of the time. Ask anyone in any form of journalism and they'll tell you that thy have to have stories published or they won't have a job, and if they sit around waiting until they have all the facts and have them verified by every source known to man to ensure they're never wrong; they'll never get published. Unfortunately there are outside influences that stop them from getting everything they need and that can lead to mistakes.
Barrett has spoken a number of times about times he's gone too early with a story and had it backfire and how he uses those experiences to make sure he's as close to right as he can be before he publishes.

The If/Then article is not his idea. It's an AFL clickbait article he has to do. Barrett is not an independent journal so he has to tow his company's line. He's never done this type of story in his journalistic career before joining AFL House. So when you have to do a snippet on every club, and a club like Hawthorn don't give out much inside information, you have to go with the bits you get from your sources within the club. Unfortunately the sources aren't going to Barrett to say "Player 'X' is tearing it up' as they have more pressing issues that they want put out there.

Now ask yourself these:
1. Why do people close to Clarkson use Barrett as their media source? And the answer is not because they know if they feed him lies, he'll go with that. If that was the case, Ash Browne would be their go-to media person.
2. Why would they go to Barrett with what he's been saying? This is the key to understanding what he writes.

He doesn't have an agenda against the club. In fact he's respect within the walls of the club and by Clarkson. His history with Bevo is because he reported Tom Boyd's mental health problems. Turns out he was right. Bevo was just angry he reported it. Bevo should have been angry at the source who leaked it to him, but he doesn't know who it is. It was news and it's Barrett's job to report AFL news.
Barrett was also the first to report the problems with Tracey Goudry. Like now, he had so much s**t flung on him by posters on this board. Turns out he was right.

If the club refuses to give access to journo's which can allow for puff pieces of OTT praise, then you're going to have to put up with stories that are leaked from within.

I know I'm not going to change anyone's mind, but at least think about what could be going on inside the club walls before you jump to the conclusion that the club is faultless and all journo's are hate-filled and jealous.

 

[TylerDurden]

IF ...
the Hawks were prepared this week to break an embargo that they had requested on a properly sourced story by a media outlet ...

THEN ...
the tip-toeing within that club around the control freak Clarko seems to have no bounds.

Can only think the story the club broke was JOM's injury......but surely he can't be referring to that. Must be something else I've missed

Yep. JOM.

 

[TylerDurden]

 

[Mitchell Madness]

Interesting they call him former Essendon c9ach...

 

[hamohawk1]

2013 prelim replay on at the moment.....and Dwayne was chosen to commentate with Mooney and Lewis, would've even preferred Ed.

Love this game though.

 

[hamohawk1]

Argh we used to always just bomb it in high and hope....

 

[Collins-Langford-Ayres]

Yep, It's just like all the daily "insider" stories on the Royal Family (the British one, not the Burgoyne family!)
Always best to just ignore the scumbags - he's just another gossip merchant trying to be noticed.

If he doesn't get a reaction, he doesn't get paid.

Well played Sir !!!!