The Athletic

[Babylon]

Can we have a thread about how shit the Athletic is?

[Frost]

I liked it at first but in all honesty it's not value for money.

 

Don't really think Tanner's articles are up to much either. Only exclusive I've seen from him is the 'Evans in contract talks' which anyone could've guessed at. Pay £1 a month for six months but will be cancelling afterwards.

[Babylon]

4 minutes ago, Frost said:

I liked it at first but in all honesty it's not value for money.

 

Don't really think Tanner's articles are up to much either. Only exclusive I've seen from him is the 'Evans in contract talks' which anyone could've guessed at. Pay £1 a month for six months but will be cancelling afterwards.

They hired some decent writers, the problem was for me that the ones attached to certain clubs purposely became so myopic to appeal the the fans of those clubs. You ended up with good writers essentially pumping out warped click bate to appeal to an army on nobhead "big six" fans. It's like Sky Sports in written form. 

Edited 11 November 2020 by Babylon

[CosbehFox]

21 minutes ago, Babylon said:

They hired some decent writers, the problem was for me that the ones attached to certain clubs purposely became so myopic to appeal the the fans of those clubs. You ended up with good writers essentially pumping out warped click bate to appeal to an army on nobhead "big six" fans. It's like Sky Sports in written form. 

I had it for the first year but then got rid. 

 

I know of one of the journos on it - they started out with a genuine attempt to write really well research pieces but with falling numbers, then changed their strategy to clickbait 

[Adster]

5 hours ago, Cardiff_Fox said:

I had it for the first year but then got rid. 

 

I know of one of the journos on it - they started out with a genuine attempt to write really well research pieces but with falling numbers, then changed their strategy to clickbait 

Got a point though on one thing though. I've had the Athletic for about 2 months now and some of the articles are so fvcking long its like reading a book. 

 

Clickbait trash has started to pop up though more recently. Will be cancelling my subscription soon. 

[ALC Fox]

I subscribed for the long-form, in-depth articles that give real insights, such as Michael Cox's pieces. I still think it's good value for that, although journalists like Miguel Delaney (The Independent) provide comparable analysis.

 

For what it's worth, I like Rob Tanner's articles. I don't know what the standards of the other local reporters are, but he's decent. He's clearly not Michael Cox level but it's worth being able to read a decent length article going into reasonable depth without having to deal with all the crappy ads and the awful build quality of the Mercury's website.

[Collymore]

I don't get the appeal anyway, it's not like anything had ever been said on there (from what I can tell) that even a reasonably informed fan couldn't figure out for themselves.

 

There's plenty of interesting information and insight on Foxestalk if you know where to look and which posters to watch. 

[The People's Hero]

7 hours ago, Babylon said:

They hired some decent writers, the problem was for me that the ones attached to certain clubs purposely became so myopic to appeal the the fans of those clubs. You ended up with good writers essentially pumping out warped click bate to appeal to an army on nobhead "big six" fans. It's like Sky Sports in written form. 

Its like a mirror being held up to society really.

 

Supply and demand right? We as a society get what society wants. Society has spoken.

 

This is why we can't have nice things.

 

Christ, I'm clever.

[Wymsey]

Is it worth a subscription fee?

Edit: Please delete; found another topic for it in the LCFC sub-forum.

Edited 9 February 2022 by Wymsey