Bloke off the telly likes forums but...

[Neverchair]

Bunce recently said he loves internet boxing forums but hates internet boxing writers after being nagged by a 19 year old to get him into big fights before cutting his teeth at the old fashion press.

Do internet boxing writers like the ones on ESB provide as good quality reporting/reading as the papers and mags?

Whaddya reckon?

[Bunce]

It's not quite what I said...but it's close.
There was no mention of whether or not the internet boxing writers provide a better service than the national press - it's a no brainer. My problem is with novice writers thinking that 100 words for a national paper on a Napa loss is somehow the poor relation to 1,000 words on Mayweather's sequins for a website.
It's in the June Boxing Montly.

Adios.

[Beeston Brawler]

As is your prediction that David Haye will beat Wlad in two rounds.

Get your crow ready ;)

[I'd love it to be true, but can't see it!]

[Neverchair]

Aah I see. Apologies.

Is it that the hardcore will probably read the 1000 words on Mayweather but not bother to scour the dailies for a Napa loss?

Obviously the latter is a lot more credible but how many people would scour the dailies for a Napa story when websites like ESB have 1000's of words on someone as big news as Mayweather (even if it is crap news)?

[theuppercut]

I started off writing on internet sites and to be honest it's the simplest way to get your work out there and a good foundation to start from. Since then I've been published in print in various publications and my career is going from strength to strength. I also have to thank Bunce because he's been a good source for advice and pointers.

Cheers


Shaun Brown

[Bunce]

No apologies. The writing is mostly total shite, self-indulgent shite of the highest order.
I'm an old-fashioned hack - No apologies for being able to spin a yarn in 100 or a 1,000 words and live and direct to copy takers. Bish, bosh and bash.

Adios.

[Beeston Brawler]

No apologies. The writing is mostly total shite, self-indulgent shite of the highest order.
I'm an old-fashioned hack - No apologies for being able to spin a yarn in 100 or a 1,000 words and live and direct to copy takers. Bish, bosh and bash.

Adios.

The key word being mostly.

Some of the articles are informative, written by people who actually understand the subject of which they are discussing.

A lot of the others are written on the back of a fag packet by some geek who lacks the ability to write a balanced article.

[Bunce]

#7...you are reading it right.

Adios.

[GazOC]

The key word being mostly.

Some of the articles are informative, written by people who actually understand the subject of which they are discussing.

A lot of the others are written on the back of a fag packet by some geek who lacks the ability to write a balanced article.

I know it sounds anal but my pet hate about online articles is the number of writers who can't even be arsed to run their piece though a spellchecker before they send it off. The front page on ESB is pretty bad for that sort of thing.

[Beeston Brawler]

I know it sounds anal but my pet hate about online articles is the number of writers who can't even be arsed to run their piece though a spellchecker before they send it off. The front page on ESB is pretty bad for that sort of thing.

:rofl

A lot of them don't set the scene for what they are trying to say.

It is like watching a movie and the gun getting pulled after two minutes..... WTF!!

I don't read the articles on the main page anymore to be honest..... I go to BS instead - I am probably missing out on a few good ones however.

Most of them are probably written by posters, of the nuthugger and hater variety!

[alba]

It's not quite what I said...but it's close.
There was no mention of whether or not the internet boxing writers provide a better service than the national press - it's a no brainer. My problem is with novice writers thinking that 100 words for a national paper on a Napa loss is somehow the poor relation to 1,000 words on Mayweather's sequins for a website.
It's in the June Boxing Montly.

Adios.

well i think the internet is taking off for boxing writing ?of the very few boxing magazines around is there circualtion as high as it was pre internet ?and the particluer magazine you wirte for is the circualtion of that as high as the hits you get on your setanta blog?

i do think though there are some internet writers who think they 'are a legend on there own laptop'

[LHL]

The Charles White ones on heavies are always good top poster as well. What i hate is when someone comes in who has never posted here before posts a link to his blog with some story about him being a sports writer which is utter crap.

[alba]

The Charles White ones on heavies are always good top poster as well. What i hate is when someone comes in who has never posted here before posts a link to his blog with some story about him being a sports writer which is utter crap.

aye there is quite a bit that goes on ,ive seen it myself with my own eyes .:hi:

[BURNLEYBLUE]

In the 90's a sound lad called James Bentley was sports writer for our local rag.His boxing coverage was spot on. He was a good runner, and used to train with myself and light-middle ****** stowe.He then went to work down south,his amition to work for BN.
Watched a doc. last yr called 'running with Joe' and there he was,running up the welsh hills with Joe Calzaghe,talking boxing,just as he had with us yrs ago. He's obviously still in the trade and prob even comes on esb. Does anyone on here know of him or what he's up to.Would be good to get in touch. cheers.

[Bunce]

# 11 - correct - I love the sites and they help the business.
# 12 - I agree.

Adios.

[LHL]

aye there is quite a bit that goes on ,ive seen it myself with my own eyes .:hi:

Not yourself you are the ones with the scottish ones i think they are good :good:D

[sugarrayhatton]

# 11 - correct - I love the sites and they help the business.
# 12 - I agree.

Adios.
Buncey, aren't you on in a minute?

[alba]

Not yourself you are the ones with the scottish ones i think they are good :good:D


cheers mate,i apprciate the feedback!

have a cyber beer from me!:happy

[threethirteen]

A lot of them don't set the scene for what they are trying to say.

Depends what you mean by that: if you mean, provide a load of background then it's poor journalism.

If you mean, sum up the key theme and information of the piece in the first paragraph - then that's good journalism.

Too many do the first and not enough do the last.

[rumour24tiger]

there are some good, some bad writers on the internet. i wrote on the internet, leanred my stuff and went on to write for one of the magazines, and got a chance to interview some cracking fighters. internet writing isn't all bad

[rumour24tiger]

pasted this for Terry D, re Wide Mouth (Bunce) comments on Internet writers:

I disagree with the big man on this one, to an extent. I got my BM yesterday, saw the gist of Steve's column in the contents page and thought, 'Tremendous, the Big Man is going to have a rant', only it was more of a lament.

Internet boxing writing is, by and large, poop. As mentioned some people cannot even be arsed checking for spelling. There is also a tendency, as Steve does point out, for people to have a few articles online and declare themselves 'boxing writers', that is not the case, I would be acutely embarrassed if someone referred to me a 'boxing journalist', as I am not.

You do get some good stuff, and the medium allows for a longer word count. Earlier this month I produced an exclusive interview with Billy Graham, well over the accepted word count, but people read it anyway (putting it out on a Friday afternoon was a big help). A few print publications ripped out random quotes and used them in articles, not for the first time, so it is a two-way street. On the other hand you can get tortuous articles that go on for ever (a lot like this post) but have very little real content. If a boxer gives me 4,000 words, good words, then I will put them online, and let the reader choose. Skip my bits and go straight to the source.

Steve and the guys at BM and BN aside, a lot of the print stuff on boxing is terrible. I have access to newspaper databases stretching back 200 years, and the modern stuff is dreadful in comparison, a good few of the guys can bang out 100 words, and have to, as they cannot read a fight for toffee, so they give a banal overview. In the modern age you can download a lot of fights, and analysis, people are getting into the technical aspects of the sport, these aspects take time, and words, to explain, so there is scope for a higher word count.

All said and done I think there is a place for guys who do not want to be journalists but do want to be around boxing, they can put stuff out and let the browser decide. Ultimately all boxing writing is flawed, it is 80% incorrect speculation and gossip, there is nothing you can learn from an article that you cannot learn from the fights, so I tend to watch fights, and avoiding reading about the sport. There is a place for 100 words (especially when Buncey does them), but when someone like Thomas Hauser puts out 6,000 words of what I, humbly, consider to be real journalism, well I am not going to complain.

The pot of print gold is being impinged, there are only so many places at the trough, especially in boxing, Steve keeps asking for exclusives from the guests on his show, well we did a lot of exclusives over at BBN, and they came about because the people providing them understand the immediacy of the Internet, unlike TV it can go out at any old time, and you see instant responses on the boards. A lot of people in boxing, some of them old-school, recognise this, and are using it. So there is competition for quotes/exclusives. I've done stuff for websites, this lead to offers to do some ghostwriting work, which I am enjoying, it is a nice little side-earner to my regular income.

Keep up the good work Steve, but times are changing, the print market is feeling the impact of the Internet, and the Internet, in turn, needs to ensure that its output is accurate, polished and relevant, sadly this is not often the case.

[theuppercut]

I completely agree with that statement to be honest. If I was referred to as a boxing journalist I'd be horrified. All I'm doing at the moment is aiming for that status.

I'd rather read a 100 word bit on Napa than a 4,000 word rant on why FMJ will beat JMM for example but there is now a place for that. Websites like ESB and others take work in left, right and centre. I don't know if they proof it or not. But as I said before i started writing on sites like this and it was a great foundation and confidence builder for me. Since then things have went from strength to strength.

[Guy]

It's a fair point...... the worst of fucking all is ........

"Biased axe to grind?Bullshit to regurgitate? write for BoxingSnooze 24.com!!!:dead"