Gerard Whateley - Male caro?

Remove this Banner Ad

Godallblighty said:
Came to your board to check out your thoughts on Friday's game but find myself in this interesting side alley...

Whateley didn't say 'you can assume it's been swept under the rug'. He said, given the similar trajectory of the two stories (Cronulla and Essendon), it would be reasonable to ask if things had been swept under the carpet. I don't think he's out to hang Essendon. He just doesn't think it looks good for you.
Click to expand...

I didn't hear him say this. Just going of what others have reported. Thanks for the clarification.
Aside from this, he has done his best to bury essendon every chance he has had.
 
Fair enough. I haven't followed his comments on the situation closely. I like Gerard Whateley and think his views on football are generally intelligent and thoughtful BUT he is irritatingly sanctimonious at times. Having endured a similarly troublesome off season, I sympathise; the speculation can seem a little schadenfreud-ish.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

yodellinhank said:
3/4 of a page in the sun dedicated to geelong's recent dominance over hawthorn.
Click to expand...

No problem with that, at all. It's pretty funny, you have to admit. I laughed like a mad banshee when Hawkins kicked the goal after the siren last year. :D
 
Johnny619 said:
I honestly believe he is the most bias person in the media. Ex-player or journalist.
Click to expand...
No. Just no. Mark Maclure, Robbo, Caro, Walls, Sheahan are all incredibly biased, a lot more than Gerard
 
Johnny619 said:
Robbo NO. Caro NO. Sheehan NO. OK Maybe I will leave out ex-players like Maclure and Garry.
Click to expand...
yes, yes, yes. Gerard just loves football. I take it you have only ever heard him talk about Geelong? He si one of the least biased media personality in the AFL
 
Johnny619 said:
I honestly believe he is the most bias person in the media. Ex-player or journalist.
Click to expand...

No way. There's a long way to go before he even gets close to the bottom of that particular barrel.
 
He had a bad few moments but lets just put this back into context





She is in a league of her own and a f******* disgrace to anything that has ever been good about journalism. I'll never read, listen or watch anything that involves her ever again (other than this clip).


I've never noticed the look in Lloyds eyes before. He was a few moments from belting her...and so he should have been.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

eth-dog said:
yes, yes, yes. Gerard just loves football. I take it you have only ever heard him talk about Geelong? He si one of the least biased media personality in the AFL
Click to expand...
So he is the least biased, as long a he isn't commenting on the cats. Or bomber thompson. Or garra ablett. Or essendon, gold coast, hawthorn...
 
yodellinhank said:
So he is the least biased, as long a he isn't commenting on the cats. Or bomber thompson. Or garra ablett. Or essendon, gold coast, hawthorn...
Click to expand...
I've heard him on all three, and I haven't heard any bias in his commentary. I think people are trying to find excuses to hate him because he thinks we've mismanaged the whole drugs saga.
 
eth-dog said:
I've heard him on all three, and I haven't heard any bias in his commentary. I think people are trying to find excuses to hate him because he thinks we've mismanaged the whole drugs saga.
Click to expand...
He's been critical of the way our club has done everything since bomber's departure from geelong. Offsiders brought up calves blood injections as a questionable practice ger squirmed in his chair and went silent. Stark contrast to when the topic was the number of injections our players received.
 
Johnny619 said:
I honestly believe he is the most bias person in the media. Ex-player or journalist.
Click to expand...
Sorry to be that guy, but it's "biased".

If you have bias, or display bias, you are biased.
 
Lance Uppercut said:
s**t thread. Gerard is a quality, quality journalist. Just cos he might not be on our side on this one doesn't change a thing
Click to expand...
He's gone a long, long, loooong way downhill since he started doing tabloid stuff.
Used to be good. Very high horse now.

What made him good, back in the day, was he was a journalist. He watched what was happening, then wrote about it. No ego to uphold, and if something needed a half-page story to explain, he had it.
Now, he is a "media personality", across multiple platforms. He has opinions, which have to be easily digestible in newsgrab style, 30 second statements, and which he will repeat on half a dozen commitments.
Big difference.
 
Godallblighty said:
Fair enough. I haven't followed his comments on the situation closely. I like Gerard Whateley and think his views on football are generally intelligent and thoughtful BUT he is irritatingly sanctimonious at times. Having endured a similarly troublesome off season, I sympathise; the speculation can seem a little schadenfreud-ish.
Click to expand...
Are they comparable?
Convicted cheats can't really hope to escape criticism, can they? Or whinge about it, when criticised?
 
Slattery_20 said:
He's gone a long, long, loooong way downhill since he started doing tabloid stuff.
Used to be good. Very high horse now.

What made him good, back in the day, was he was a journalist. He watched what was happening, then wrote about it. No ego to uphold, and if something needed a half-page story to explain, he had it.
Now, he is a "media personality", across multiple platforms. He has opinions, which have to be easily digestible in newsgrab style, 30 second statements, and which he will repeat on half a dozen commitments.
Big difference.
Click to expand...
Such a good point. This is one of the problems with the spread of the modern footy media - the pool of established, quality journalists is so shallow that guys like Whateley get strung out, forced to repeat themselves endlessly or ad-lib with half-baked ideas. There just isn't that much to talk about, and yet we've got this smorgasbord of panel and chat shows on TV, radio and the web all universally flogging whatever bollocks is the flavour of the week. No wonder journalistic integrity and ideals get compromised in that situation.
 
m7jebus said:
Such a good point. This is one of the problems with the spread of the modern footy media - the pool of established, quality journalists is so shallow that guys like Whateley get strung out, forced to repeat themselves endlessly or ad-lib with half-baked ideas. There just isn't that much to talk about, and yet we've got this smorgasbord of panel and chat shows on TV, radio and the web all universally flogging whatever bollocks is the flavour of the week. No wonder journalistic integrity and ideals get compromised in that situation.
Click to expand...
A proper journalist reads, watches, interviews, researches, digs, composes a piece, then writes it.
A lot of the talking heads barely go to games, let alone interview the key people.
Gerard's gone from the former to the latter, over maybe 18 months.

The effort-for-reward equation for journalists is so poor, compared to 'personalities', that they'd rather become parodies of themselves as soon as anyone offers.

ie - Caro has been caught before, having the nads to criticise people for not addressing point XYZ at a press conference, that she didn't even ask about.... because she didn't actually attend the press conferences. And she used to be a very, very good, tenacious, journalist.

So it becomes a pretty easy question. Why bother doing all that research?
When you can just talk absolute crap & get famous for it, good bad or indifferent?
 
Slattery_20 said:
A proper journalist reads, watches, interviews, researches, digs, composes a piece, then writes it.
A lot of the talking heads barely go to games, let alone interview the key people.
Gerard's gone from the former to the latter, over maybe 18 months.

The effort-for-reward equation for journalists is so poor, compared to 'personalities', that they'd rather become parodies of themselves as soon as anyone offers.

ie - Caro has been caught before, having the nads to criticise people for not addressing point XYZ at a press conference, that she didn't even ask about.... because she didn't actually attend the press conferences. And she used to be a very, very good, tenacious, journalist.

So it becomes a pretty easy question. Why bother doing all that research?
When you can just talk absolute crap & get famous for it, good bad or indifferent?
Click to expand...
Yep, pretty much spot on.

I used to work as a behind-the-desk sports writer. As long as you're getting hits on a web page, it's all 'legal' and you're up to speed with whatever the rivals are doing, the bosses don't give a toss about much else. Grabs, headlines and SEO take priority over fact-checking, copyediting and overall quality. When it comes to 'media personalities'... well, I question how much work they actually do even on their own columns when they get to that stage. How can they properly research a story when they spend most of their time in make-up rooms?
 
m7jebus said:
Such a good point. This is one of the problems with the spread of the modern footy media - the pool of established, quality journalists is so shallow that guys like Whateley get strung out, forced to repeat themselves endlessly or ad-lib with half-baked ideas. There just isn't that much to talk about, and yet we've got this smorgasbord of panel and chat shows on TV, radio and the web all universally flogging whatever bollocks is the flavour of the week. No wonder journalistic integrity and ideals get compromised in that situation.
Click to expand...

You've got it. The biggest problem is the 24 hour news cycle and it's insatiable demand for new stories. The other problem I see is that Footy shows/panels can be really profitable because people like to watch them but every channel has bought into it now and and they need a point of difference. In the absence of a lot of things to report on they are digging up nothing stories and sensationalizing them just to fill a time slot. It's ok to report on a nothing story, but you start to look like a hack when you try to make it look like a big deal to justify it's place on the back page.
 
Slattery_20 said:
He's gone a long, long, loooong way downhill since he started doing tabloid stuff.
Used to be good. Very high horse now.
Click to expand...

That may be true and whilst my only exposure to him is 360 I still find him to be one of the best going around and I find myself agreeing with just about everything he says.

What made him good, back in the day, was he was a journalist. He watched what was happening, then wrote about it. No ego to uphold, and if something needed a half-page story to explain, he had it
Click to expand...

Pretty sure he still watches what's happening and writes about it. He just speaks about it too now. His opinions are well thought out, well articulated and he does a reasonably good job of being unbiased as far as I'm concerned.


Now, he is a "media personality", across multiple platforms. He has opinions, which have to be easily digestible in newsgrab style, 30 second statements, and which he will repeat on half a dozen commitments.
Big difference.
Click to expand...

You can't expect him to write something different for every commitment. His opinion is still his opinion. Sometimes people who are good at what they do tend to get popular. Being a "media personality" doesn't have to be a bad thing by definition if you're good at what you do.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top