Irish independent

Joxer_S

Is anyone else bothered by the Irish Independent promoting pictures of a seventeen year old in a bikini as news? I will admit to being biased, in that the Independent and its reporting has for a long time now turned my stomach with how pathetic it can be, but advertising soft porn for an underage girl is another level.

coylemj

Joxer_S wrote: »

Is anyone else bothered by the Irish Independent promoting pictures of a seventeen year old in a bikini as news?

You've only noticed this recently?

The Indo (to some degree) and Sindo (to a nauseating degree) have been gratuitously attaching pictures of pretty girls on to 'news' stories for years.

It's gotten so bad in the Sindo that you'd have to figure that the picture of the pretty girl is selected first, then they dream up pick a story to go with it.

Joxer_S

You're right, just something about a 17 year old just felt like another level.

Actually WW hit the nail on the head a few weeks ago

http://waterfordwhispersnews.com/2015/05/07/media-creepily-obsessed-with-17-year-old-girls-lips/

Elmo

Those paid for articles on newspaper websites are the problem.

They need to review their policy on advertising.

http://www.outbrain.com/uk

seachto7

The indo also have the problem of dolly birds writing sh*t vacuous stories.

20Cent

Indo really gone to the dogs. Chasing advertising money really leads to the lowest common denominator. The online app is close to buzzfeed standard.

IRE60

If you can come up with a reasonable alternative to 'chasing advertising' - they'd be delighted to hear that.

There are big areas to overcome in advertising - more importantly, from a publishers point the idea of whitelisting - as ads are being served programmatically some control seems to be slipping.

There have to be standards set as to what ads, or in this case sponsored content, can be shown and likewise, from a brands perspective, where there ad appears and in what content.

Joxer_S

IRE60 wrote: »

If you can come up with a reasonable alternative to 'chasing advertising' - they'd be delighted to hear that.

There are big areas to overcome in advertising - more importantly, from a publishers point the idea of whitelisting - as ads are being served programmatically some control seems to be slipping.

There have to be standards set as to what ads, or in this case sponsored content, can be shown and likewise, from a brands perspective, where there ad appears and in what content.

I understand that the need to chase ad revenue is a valid driving factor here, but when that results in something that is a parody of journalism then the influence is far too great. While having a fully worked out solution at hand would be fantastic, I don't have the expertise to do that. That shouldn't mean you can't still be critical about their content and how it is presented.
I'd much rather that an editorial standard would come from the company itself, rather than being imposed by regulation, which would only conceal the problem. Wishful thinking I reckon.

IRE60

Joxer_S wrote: »

I understand that the need to chase ad revenue is a valid driving factor here, but when that results in something that is a parody of journalism then the influence is far too great. While having a fully worked out solution at hand would be fantastic, I don't have the expertise to do that. That shouldn't mean you can't still be critical about their content and how it is presented.
I'd much rather that an editorial standard would come from the company itself, rather than being imposed by regulation, which would only conceal the problem. Wishful thinking I reckon.

Joxer - My flippancy may have been read as cynicism - and anyone around here will attest that I never resort to cynicism :eek:

I think its a very valid point you raise and one that's perhaps not been voiced:

One would expect that when a punter reads his/her brand online - there's a reasonable expectation that the content reaches a particular standard and one in keeping with the ethos of the brand.

But modern technology allows content to be pushed/pulled and, at times, is not in keeping with the expectations of the readers - that's a serious issue.

The Indo use Outbrain (I think) to provide those stories in that panel - when it appears. Some of the yarns are puerile rubbish - "ten celebs who got fat" or the likes.

I think they really mess up any seriousness in a news site. I'm not saying that automated related content messes up a site - it can actually be very relevant. I just think that content with not a high enough bar set is terrible.

Elmo

IRE60 wrote: »

I think they really mess up any seriousness in a news site. I'm not saying that automated related content messes up a site - it can actually be very relevant. I just think that content with not a high enough bar set is terrible.

It's not just the Independent, the Irish times do it also.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/europe/greeks-arrive-bearing-no-gifts-new-plan-may-be-submitted-wednesday-1.2276155

The problem that traditional media is how to sell advertising online and to convince advertisers that advertising on their websites is more valuable than the cheap advertising on google or smaller entertainment websites.

Just because consumers view traditional media online does mean that the adverts are worth less than those in traditional form.

honeybear

Opened indo today to see another feature on weddings (I am nearly certain that they had wedding feature yesterday/Monday). Think it's ridiculous as they had a big feature on weddings in last Saturday's paper. Lazy, imo.

Joxer_S

The comprehensiveness of their Royal Family coverage is almost impressive

Elmo

Joxer_S wrote: »

The comprehensiveness of their Royal Family coverage is almost impressive

Who the O'Brien's or the O'Reilly's? :pac:

jack presley

Another annoying thing about the Indo is their obsession with emphasising the impact to families on any story.

For example today they're on about the AirBnb thing with Revenue and the heading is "Families to get tax bill for AirBnb earnings". So people living on their own or couples with no kids aren't going to get a bill? Only families?

Elmo

jack presley wrote: »

Another annoying thing about the Indo is their obsession with emphasising the impact to families on any story.

For example today they're on about the AirBnb thing with Revenue and the heading is "Families to get tax bill for AirBnb earnings". So people living on their own or couples with no kids aren't going to get a bill? Only families?

Now, now Lindsay just because you've had to re-organize in most countries: Singles, Seniors, Childless Couples and Teens(SSCCT)

Keyzer

20Cent wrote: »

Indo really gone to the dogs. Chasing advertising money really leads to the lowest common denominator. The online app is close to buzzfeed standard.

Couldn't have said it better myself. I'm getting rid of this app and deleting the link from my bookmarks.

Final nail in the coffin is the addition of a promoted article when you swipe back up through an article. Who the fúck thought that would be a good idea? Huge ads which you have to carefully navigate around for the fear they will open and absolute nonsense articles written by what appear to be celebrity obsessed chimpanzee's.

Suck my balls Indo.