There's been something bothering me for a while about the quality of RL journalism in our local rag.

If you take a trip around the internet to the areas where RL journalism exists in its current form, and specifically those outlets that report from their own geographic area. You generally get decent reporting and news items dealing with local Clubs. Certainly readable.

Then you get the MEN.

Now, I don't want this to turn into a general downer on the MEN, rather a reasoned study of why the MEN falls so very short of nearly all its contemporaries. There is certainly mileage in saying that RL coverage falls short due to the heavy influence of two heavyweight Premiership football Clubs which suck up most of the inches. Editors cut their cloth accordingly and I understand that RL will gain less inches. In fact, as a percentage per fan population we probably do pretty well to gain the coverage we do. The quality in the MEN (Online) is generally dreadful. It's not so much a story as a set of bullet points with empty lines between each to fill the inches. This is simply either lazy journalism or poor editing or both. It's certainly not going to grab a casual onlooker interested in the goings on with their local RL teams. Which brings me to another point. Creating stories out of thin air or with (Deliberate or otherwise) little research into the validation of such stories. A good example is in previous off-seasons being linked with EVERY player not nailed-down to a contract. Then recently this week the reporting of Lockes 'Done deal' with Scottish RU, to be hastily retracted after the player himself felt the need to say it was rubbish. Only for another story popping-up this morning that contradicts the retraction. This is not responsible reporting, it's the equivalent of reporting on Twitter all the rumours you heard down the Pub on Saturday night.

Where's the verification of information? Why don't journalists get information from both sides of a story before writing? Are they under pressure to provide something, anything, to a deadline? Is it that pressure to deliver making modern Journalists forego their job dignity in the effort to keep their jobs? Is modern media more interested in pumping-out titbits of waffle or are they just getting lazy? Why is there such discrepancy between similar publications? Is it simply down to individual journalists talents and abilities?

I'm not sure.

I think possibly there's a bit of everything going on with the MEN.

Now some would say that all coverage is good coverage. But I disagree. Especially in the modern age where news can travel at the speed of a button press. One look on social media will tell you that reporting, especially when it's poor, affects players and unsettles them. It riles and worries fans too. There's nothing wrong in reporting the truth. What happens with the MEN is that it prints Chinese whispers, and that's not really acceptable. As to who is at fault would be just a guessing game, and while I'm thankful that we get regular reporting in our local rag, it doesn't excuse it from criticism.

It's the result of the transfer from print to digital media. When your revenue model becomes almost entirely advertising based and the price you can charge for an advert is based on the number of clicks you get there's only one outcome. "Locke's off to Union!" Click. "Oh hang on, no he's not." Click. "Something contrary by Katie Hopkins." Click click click. The only way to fight it is to not follow the clickbait, but you're probably ing in the wind.

Butcher you couldn't have expressed my feelings on the subject any better.

It's lazy, poor journalism.

Take this gem from the MEN today - it would appear that Alex Murphy has been asked to give his opinion on Rangi Chase as a full back.

Among a variety of world shattering opinions we get this gem:

"‘I just wonder what persuaded Iestyn Harris to play him at full back." - says the maestro Murphy

Alex - he was moved to full back because Niall Evalds went off injured!

Were you at the bloody game?

My feelings on the MEN and the erstwhile journalist they have covering RL.

The MEN offers a valuable resource for the club, but where it does fall down is in the accuracy of what it reports and the images/names it uses. What does annoy me is the blatant constant rehashing of the same story, the MEN in the Doc have a wonderful resource right on it's doorstep and I'm bewildered why there isn't a weekly column featuring him, simple idea like the surgery or the Docs waiting room.

I often wonder if the reporting and stories used in the MEN would be more accurate and more insightful if one of our number on here wrote it.

I think the MEN neglects Rugby League, mainly because it focuses it's time and column inches on football instead. I can see that this makes sense, but in some respects it disillusions those who aren't interested in football.

If you take a look at the local papers in Warrington and Wigan, they are dominated by RL headlines and stories which have been well-researched and accurately written. The MEN has been sloppy with it's coverage of RL, but then again there probably aren't enough staff members devoted solely to covering Salford Red Devils in as much depth.

It would be nice if the MEN could bring us some positive attention and invest some time in writing-up some factual, accurate, well-edited stories. Give us some exposure please!

Great idea,and we'd know that every word was true

The good doctor has a column every week in the MEN: normally Thursday.

I pick up the free Thurs and Fri editions for colleagues at work. I also check it every day and buy it if I want to read the story at leisure.

The Locke story was poor, damnably so, but we do not do badly in inches. Sadly a story on a City player's underwear is more important than Salford signing Thurston (we haven't, by the way) when it comes to selling the MEN.

As for the Metro: read everywhere ..... sheesh

This is enough ammunition for the MEN to do an exclusive on Salford signing Thurston.

Butcher, I completely agree with all the points you have raised.

The problem I have is not with the amount of inches we get (which is far more than in previous years) but how poorly the articles are put together. So many spelling mistakes, grammatical and factual errors it's untrue. I'm not exactly perfect in that respect, but I don't work as a journalist!

Quite agree with the above. I think some journalists just make up stuff, certainly rehash a lot of stories
I went to a meeting years ago when Gus Risman was our manager/coach and he said,( regarding the late great journalist), Jack McNarmara
" you may not agree with everything Jack writes but we get plenty of columns/publicity in the MEN from him

I never read the rag personally. But speaking of journalism goes back to the Sky TV coverage of Super League. It's got to the point now where games are being reffed with SKY being the proxy! The way that Eddie Hemmings (a real journalist) goes on about certain decisions and WON'T let it go until one of his colleagues (usually Phil) chimes in and and "puts it to bed".....with the irritation very obvious in his voice(quite rightly) is ridiculous. They should take their lead from people like Ray warren and Phil Gould who rarely get embroiled in specific incidents. I think even Stuart Cummings get fed up with it sometimes.

I agree.
If the St Helens game hadn't been televised,I think Hock would still be with us,although I'm not sure how long for ,or whether it would've been a good thing anyway !
It's the same with soccer,the pundits are very entertaining and informative,but they're putting massive pressure on the authorities

I watch SL games without the SKY commentary for the reasons mentioned above, that and I find Carney the single most annoying person on TV.

When you watch the NRL coverage the presenters are much more informative, infinitely more entertaining and in Yvonne Sampson they have the next ex Mrs MR. Ray Warren exudes knowledge, Sterling is just entertaining, Ray Gould has done it all and even with his association to the Panthers offers the most subjective incite into the players/teams and even the most obviously biased commentator Wally Lewis speaks with such authority his bias towards Queensland/Brisbane doesn't really matter.

I've said it time and again SKY should invest and do what it takes to get Andrew Voss over here, he is quite simply brilliant and the partnership he struck up with Brian Noble when they both worked on the last RL world cup shows that some of the presenters we have over here are dragged down by the people they have working with them.

Living in HillBilly Land, I need teh MEN to keep abreast of Salford's [delwoes[/del news.

However to give the thead context, today's MEN (Wed 04/03/15) has a whole page on Salford with the bulk of it the good doctor's column. The other is the Locke story re not going to Scortland and the Chase story Mr BF referred to.

Not bad in space when the big boys are playing tonight.