Jump to content

   

News Feedback and Updates


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
614 replies to this topic

OFFLINE   Big Dan #21

  • 18,699 posts since
  • July 2003

Posted 22 January 2008 - 07:02 AM

QUOTE (Woz @ Jan 21 2008, 11:10 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I don't want to seem too much like I'm bitching, but some of the articles read about as well as the instruction manual for a $20 DVD player. I'm not being pedantic about the wrongful placement of a comma or spelling mistake, I'm talking about it seeming like there was absolutely no proof-reading done, which is just wacked.


If you don't mind me asking, were any of those articles you're referring to written by me? I do run a quick proof read before I publish them...
Wake up and smell the maple nut crunch!
Follow me on Twitter at @bigdan1985

OFFLINE   Woz #22

  • 4,966 posts since
  • May 2005

Posted 22 January 2008 - 07:39 AM

QUOTE (Big Dan @ Jan 22 2008, 08:02 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
If you don't mind me asking, were any of those articles you're referring to written by me? I do run a quick proof read before I publish them...
To be honest I don't take much notice of who authored each one, so couldn't say.

QUOTE
Discovery, TV mogul team up for the Oprah Winfrey Network; new channel may house her popular talk show, will kill Discovery Health. Oprah’s conquest to rule over all entertainment took another giant step today.
http://report.medias...infrey-network/
There's just no flow between sentences - makes it really hard to want to keep reading.
IPB Image

OFFLINE   TJ. #23

  • 10,723 posts since
  • June 2007

Posted 22 January 2008 - 08:17 AM

QUOTE (Woz @ Jan 22 2008, 07:39 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
http://report.medias...infrey-network/
There's just no flow between sentences - makes it really hard to want to keep reading.

I agree with you on this report, I remember reading it. The very first sentence made no sense to me what so ever.
QUOTE
Discovery, TV mogul team up for the Oprah Winfrey Network; new channel may house her popular talk show, will kill Discovery Health.


OFFLINE   regionaltv #24

  • 3,844 posts since
  • June 2005

Posted 22 January 2008 - 09:08 AM

The Spy Report is compulsory reading for me... I view the actual section several times a day, rather than just look at the headlines within the navigation. It is a great service, and I would like to see it continue as normal - or improve.

OFFLINE   Mark #25

  • 16,360 posts since
  • July 2005

Posted 22 January 2008 - 10:00 AM

QUOTE (regionaltv @ Jan 22 2008, 10:08 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
and I would like to see it continue as normal - or improve.


thanks, that's my prerogative. smile.gif

OFFLINE   icat #26

  • 7,173 posts since
  • February 2005

Posted 22 January 2008 - 10:13 AM

I never bother reading it.
Nine reasons to watch Titus Pollo on Rome.
Prison Break on 7

OFFLINE   regionaltv #27

  • 3,844 posts since
  • June 2005

Posted 22 January 2008 - 10:20 AM

Maybe you could put an additional section on, similar to the 'About Us' page... which has details of the ratings? So not as a post, but more as a page or section.

ONLINE   TV Head #28

  • 18,577 posts since
  • January 2006

Posted 22 January 2008 - 01:33 PM

QUOTE (tjkirk @ Jan 22 2008, 09:17 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I agree with you on this report, I remember reading it. The very first sentence made no sense to me what so ever.


Discovery, TV mogul team up for the Oprah Winfrey Network; new channel may house her popular talk show, will kill Discovery Health. Oprah’s conquest to rule over all entertainment took another giant step today.

It's a little confusing, that's how it was written I could of cleaned it up but I thought it sounded fine when I read it.

Discovery [channel], tv mogul [Oprah] team up for the Oprah Winfrey Network; new channel may...

It could of used "the" before new channel.

OFFLINE   TJ. #29

  • 10,723 posts since
  • June 2007

Posted 22 January 2008 - 02:05 PM

QUOTE (Mike 360 @ Jan 22 2008, 01:33 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Discovery, TV mogul team up for the Oprah Winfrey Network; new channel may house her popular talk show, will kill Discovery Health. Oprah’s conquest to rule over all entertainment took another giant step today. It's a little confusing, that's how it was written I could of cleaned it up but I thought it sounded fine when I read it. Discovery [channel], tv mogul [Oprah] team up for the Oprah Winfrey Network; new channel may... It could of used "the" before new channel.

This is how I would have worded it, placing the second sentence first:
''Oprah's conquest to rule all entertainment industries took another giant step today. Discovery and television mogul Oprah will team up for the launching Oprah Winfrey Network. The new channel may house her popular talk show and will ultimately replace the Discovery Health Channel.''

Edited by tjkirk, 22 January 2008 - 02:18 PM.


ONLINE   TelevisionAU #30

  • Forum Administrator

  • 11,585 posts since
  • November 2005

Posted 22 January 2008 - 02:14 PM

QUOTE (tjkirk @ Jan 22 2008, 03:05 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
This is how I would have worded it, placing the second sentence first:
''Oprah’s conquest to rule all entertainment industries, took another giant step today. Discovery and television mogul Oprah, will team up for the launching Oprah Winfrey Network. The new channel may house her popular talk show, and will ultimately replace the Discovery Health Channel.''


take out the commas silly.gif

OFFLINE   TJ. #31

  • 10,723 posts since
  • June 2007

Posted 22 January 2008 - 02:17 PM

QUOTE (TelevisionAU @ Jan 22 2008, 02:14 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
take out the commas silly.gif

Yes, you were right, I have removed them.

Edited by tjkirk, 22 January 2008 - 02:18 PM.


OFFLINE   Woz #32

  • 4,966 posts since
  • May 2005

Posted 22 January 2008 - 03:42 PM

TV mogul Oprah Winfrey has teamed up with Discovery Channel to form her own channel. The Oprah Winfrey Network will replace Discovery Health and may house her popular talk show.
IPB Image

OFFLINE   Tranquility #33

  • 7,152 posts since
  • May 2003

Posted 22 January 2008 - 04:32 PM

QUOTE (icat @ Jan 22 2008, 11:13 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I never bother reading it.

Why not?
Tranquility | Forum Moderator and The Spy Report Editor
Media Spy | tranquility@mediaspy.org | mediaspy.org

OFFLINE   Moses #34

  • 1,360 posts since
  • June 2003

Posted 22 January 2008 - 05:09 PM

QUOTE (Woz @ Jan 22 2008, 03:42 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
TV mogul Oprah Winfrey has teamed up with Discovery Channel to form her own channel. The Oprah Winfrey Network will replace Discovery Health and may house her popular talk show.

Almost identical to the way I would have worded it. I heart Woz silly.gif

"Television superstar Oprah Winfrey has joined forces with the Discovery Channel to launch her own network. Winfrey's channel will replace Discovery Health and may house her popular talk show."

See, it's not that hard to rewrite press releases and media statements into a proper article. I think that's how all Spy Report articles should be handled.

Edited by Brentus, 22 January 2008 - 05:10 PM.


OFFLINE   bacco007 #35

  • Deputy Chief Administrator

  • 9,182 posts since
  • February 2005

Posted 22 January 2008 - 05:20 PM

QUOTE (Tim Graham @ Jan 21 2008, 08:42 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
One thing that I think people are confused about is the criteria for rating - what do you base your star rating on? The quality of the article itself or the news it contains?


The ratings should be about the content of the article - in order to assist TSR writers to target areas of interest to readers

ONLINE   TV Head #36

  • 18,577 posts since
  • January 2006

Posted 22 January 2008 - 05:55 PM

QUOTE (Brentus @ Jan 22 2008, 06:09 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
See, it's not that hard to rewrite press releases and media statements into a proper article. I think that's how all Spy Report articles should be handled.


To be pedantic that was not a press release or media statement. silly.gif

QUOTE (bacco007 @ Jan 22 2008, 06:20 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
The ratings should be about the content of the article - in order to assist TSR writers to target areas of interest to readers


I always imagined it to guide what sort of stories people want posted.

Edited by Mike 360, 22 January 2008 - 05:56 PM.


OFFLINE   curious #37

  • 466 posts since
  • August 2006

Posted 22 January 2008 - 06:07 PM

I very impressed with the spy report, i read it whenever a new story comes through.
One thing i would suggest though is maybe updating it more regularly.
Sometimes i find new media news on other sites that hasn't been mentioned in the spy report.
I say the more media news the better and it doesn't bother me if some stories are less important then others.

OFFLINE   bacco007 #38

  • Deputy Chief Administrator

  • 9,182 posts since
  • February 2005

Posted 22 January 2008 - 08:07 PM

What is everyones opinion on the amount of overseas content that is appropriate for an Australian audience?

OFFLINE   Lepatron #39

  • Retired Admin

  • 8,864 posts since
  • September 2002

Posted 22 January 2008 - 08:22 PM

QUOTE (bacco007 @ Jan 22 2008, 09:07 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
What is everyones opinion on the amount of overseas content that is appropriate for an Australian audience?

I think there is too much at the moment. I'd like to see just Australian news or major international media news. Stuff about the writers strike and Neighbours on UK TV etc doesn't interest me at all
<strong class='bbc'>Lepatron</strong> | Deputy Chief Administrator<br /><br />Media Spy | lepatron@mediaspy.org | mediaspy.org

OFFLINE   regionaltv #40

  • 3,844 posts since
  • June 2005

Posted 22 January 2008 - 08:41 PM

I am satisfied with the current amount of international content.