So you guys are perfectly happy with the top three stories on the BBC's Rugby Union page all failing to reflect what people are generally a lot less interested in?
| + Visit Cardiff FC for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results |
So you guys are perfectly happy with the top three stories on the BBC's Rugby Union page all failing to reflect what people are generally a lot less interested in?
Yeah but isn’t maybe the case that a lot more people are interested in men’s sport because that’s what’s been publicised and reported on for all this time? So in ten years time and 3000 front page articles on the BBC Sport website later there might be a 50/50 split in interest between men and women’s? Not saying that’ll definitely be the case but going “there’s no interest in it” when it’s barely been reported on isn’t entirely fair. Give it a chance, it’s easy not to click on the things that don’t interest you, as proven by me never even knowing about the existence of those links until nowOriginally Posted by JamesWales
Also going back to footie, women’s football was getting crowds of 53000 in 1921, who’s to say where the game would be now had it not been banned https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-30329606
Indeed, but that is the point; it's pushing an agenda when that isn't the BBC sports websites job. It may be the RFUs, or Governments, but it's not the BBC Sports job, when people just want to read the news they generally are interested in, and the BBC is failing there.
I love the excellent coverage given to the Womens 6 Nations, but treating Harlequins womens team signing someone as greater than all the other transfers going on is just borderline gaslighting. We know that people aren't as interested so why pretend they are?
A particular concern given this is the BBC is whether the News values is also influenced by other agendas, ie giving greater prominence to certain stories over others.
The reality now is that I probably will turn to the BBC rugby pages for news less and less, so no one wins (except Planet Rugby perhaps)
The BBC is funded by taxpayers , half of whom are women. Women's sports should receive equal exposure.
Do you know that there are specific websites, sections of websites and other media dedicated exclusively to specific teams and gender specific sports. It is not difficult to find these sources.
Thats a fairly absurd take in my opinion - so the BBC should be driven not by news or what people are interested in, but by demographics? So Manchester City winning a game should have no more prominence than Arsenal ladies winning a game because ha;f the population are female?
The BBC seems to be going down that route, and if it does it will spell disaster as it will just become irrelevant to most.
So this is what this giant among CCMB threads has now become? Given the fuss you're making about this, I decided to have a look at the offending page and found that three of the most prominent stories did relate to women's rugby, but out of a total of forty two stories on the page, only less than a third (thirteen) were about the women's game. Furthermore, a couple of that thirteen were jointly about the women and men's games.
Furthermore, nearly all of the stories on the page had an accompanying picture that, in most cases, made it perfectly clear that the story was about women's rugby. Now I must say that I occasionally click on a link(without an accompanying picture) on pages of other sites because, for example, it's about a transfer from, say, Aston Villa to Man City, only to find out that it's a woman footballer who is moving clubs. However, my reaction is somewhat different to yours. I don't go off on one about "agendas", I just either read the story or head back to the main page - you should try it, much better for your mental health,
With respect Bob, when it comes to over-reacting to stories on CCMB, I shall refrain from taking advice from you
Technical ability is far more interesting and entertaining than people kicking lumps out of each other. There will be women in the future who are as technically good as Messi or Maradonna. When that day arrives and opinions like yours are consigned to the trash can of unsavoury elements that plagued out past , women's football will live alongside men's football as an equally attractive "product" , much in the same way it does in sports like tennis or athletics or something.
That to one side, Souness is really missing the point and comes across as a total cock. The OP's comments take that numbskullery to another level.
It's just a shame that my one year old daughter will probably have to put with this type of crap as people like this continue teach youngsters that it's acceptable to belittle someone based on the fact they have a vagina and not a "set of balls".
ok! it had to get to this eventually, what is a woman?
and a woman is?
adult human female ?
You need help. Desperately, it seems.
I'd think it funny if your assessment of me wasn't so stupid.
I see that we're now getting points on this thread about how a woman might one day be comparable to Ronaldo!
F@ck me, I must have woken up in an alternate universe. Since when were women physically comparable to Ronaldo?
I'm all for a good debate lads, but come on!!
I'm sorry man, genuinely I am, but I'm going to go to sleep still laughing at this
You've made my night, top marks
Are you scared of thinking ?I'm sorry man, genuinely I am, but I'm going to go to sleep still laughing at this
You've made my night, top marks
I genuinely could not care less about the top headlines on any website tbh pal. I honestly wouldn’t care if the top 3 headlines on football365 were about the gerbil World Cup.
It’s a complete waste of energy worrying about such insignificant shit.
I only care about it in the context of this discussion, which you seem to care quite a bit about as well to be fair..
It's about news values, agendas and whether this occurs elsewhere on the BBC. Surprised you can't see that. This is an extreme example from one part of the website, but it is totally out of kilter with what is actually the news most rugby fans would be wanting to read.
The bbc has always been driven by demographics, it’s license fee funded and has to cater for everyone not just what’s popular.
It’s why they can’t go all out for live football but also why their podcast output as well as bbc 4 and 6 music can get away with producing such different and interesting content.
Again you weren’t even on the news website but the rugby union website anyway.
Just noticed the poster called JamesWales started a WSL thread to try and make some kind of point, touch grass ffs.
I watch womens football William. Went to a game at the Euros.
You don’t think there’s any women that are stronger or faster than Ronaldo?
I'd think it funny if your assessment of me wasn't so stupid.
I see that we're now getting points on this thread about how a woman might one day be comparable to Ronaldo!
F@ck me, I must have woken up in an alternate universe. Since when were women physically comparable to Ronaldo?
I'm all for a good debate lads, but come on!!
Do you really think he said anything wrong though? Looking at this thread, I'm surprised that a pretty harmless comment has managed to attract such vitriol from both sides.
He could have chosen his words better. When he said it I thought that's not going to be well received.
I don’t think many people have said he said anything wrong really. Just people used it as a reason to say women shouldn’t be involved in men’s football at all and the lunatics extrapolated it from that to bbc pushing equality agenda because they are off their heads.
I’d read another website if something evoked that much annoyance in me tbh. The bbc website trying to cater to more people is something I agree with though but I wouldn’t care if it was any other website either because I know not everything is aimed at me.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote