Toggle sidebar

Another BS headline by NJ.com

N

NotInRHouse_anon

Heisman
Oct 17, 2007
69,704
47,620
0
mikemarc1 said:
I guess you’re just gonna ignore the positive stories I linked…

Be better my man!!
Click to expand...


A classic example. A newspaper prints a story saying a priest has been seen worshipping at a synagogue. It's not defamatory, but it places him in a false light.

All NJ.com has to do is say "Ex RU coach accused of abuse at Minnesota" or "Woman found dead at RU Newark campus"...they can still include RU. They still get a little dig in. They still can get off knowing it will appear in Google.

But they don't get to smear RU. You want them to have that right for some inexplicable reason. Surely, if it was you, or someone you cared about, you would have a problem with it.
 
M

Mikemarc

Heisman
Nov 28, 2005
69,080
17,742
97
NotInRHouse said:

A classic example. A newspaper prints a story saying a priest has been seen worshipping at a synagogue. It's not defamatory, but it places him in a false light.

All NJ.com has to do is say "Ex RU coach accused of abuse at Minnesota" or "Woman found dead at RU Newark campus"...they can still include RU. They still get a little dig in. They still can get off knowing it will appear in Google.

But they don't get to smear RU. You want them to have that right for some inexplicable reason. Surely, if it was you, or someone you cared about, you would have a problem with it.
Click to expand...

I care about RU and I have no problem with it..

Again, you think they’re trying to smear RU when they are not.

You didn’t think they wrote positive pieces on RU when they did.
 
N

NotInRHouse_anon

Heisman
Oct 17, 2007
69,704
47,620
0
mikemarc1 said:
I care about RU and I have no problem with it..

Again, you think they’re trying to smear RU when they are not.

You didn’t think they wrote positive pieces on RU when they did.
Click to expand...

No I said "when was the last positive piece" not that there never was. Yes, if you scroll down in sports you can see a nice piece from Todderick. And at the top is Politi hunting down former players with no minutes in Mexico.

What is the goal between "Ex RU coach" and "Ex RU Coach, Current Minnesota Coach"...one drives more clicks...why...ah yes. The false light. Either way, if someone googles RU the article surfaces. So the goal is the smear.
 
M

Mikemarc

Heisman
Nov 28, 2005
69,080
17,742
97
NotInRHouse said:
No I said "when was the last positive piece" not that there never was. Yes, if you scroll down in sports you can see a nice piece from Todderick. And at the top is Politi hunting down former players with no minutes in Mexico.

What is the goal between "Ex RU coach" and "Ex RU Coach, Current Minnesota Coach"...one drives more clicks...why...ah yes. The false light. Either way, if someone googles RU the article surfaces. So the goal is the smear.
Click to expand...

Wrong…ytesterday at 11:35 am you asked:

“Where's a positive piece they have written?”

…as if they haven’t written any.

And again, you can say they’re trying to smear RU all you want, it I'm telling you you’re incorrect..so long as you’re aware!
 
N

NotInRHouse_anon

Heisman
Oct 17, 2007
69,704
47,620
0
mikemarc1 said:
Wrong…ytesterday at 11:35 am you asked:

“Where's a positive piece they have written?”

…as if they haven’t written any.

And again, you can say they’re trying to smear RU all you want, it I'm telling you you’re incorrect..so long as you’re aware!
Click to expand...

Yesterday my girlfriend asked "where's my phone"

...as if her phone never existed.

Right?

Geez, they need to logic at NJ.Com training. Can you send me HR's email?

Well if you say it's not a smear while providing no evidence as well as failing to explain why they can't say Fleck is at Minnesota currently, it's legit!
 
M

Mikemarc

Heisman
Nov 28, 2005
69,080
17,742
97
NotInRHouse said:
Yesterday my girlfriend asked "where's my phone"

...as if her phone never existed.

Right?

Geez, they need to logic at NJ.Com training. Can you send me HR's email?

Well if you say it's not a smear while providing no evidence as well as failing to explain why they can't say Fleck is at Minnesota currently, it's legit!
Click to expand...

Don’t have HR’s email. Sorry.
 
M

Mikemarc

Heisman
Nov 28, 2005
69,080
17,742
97
NotInRHouse said:
Actually, should say former or alum.

But do you not see the difference in that it's obvious someone only signs a NFL contract after school...unlike Fleck where it was clearly trying to link his current alleged acts to RU falsely?
Click to expand...

No it’s not trying to do that…
 
N

NotInRHouse_anon

Heisman
Oct 17, 2007
69,704
47,620
0
mikemarc1 said:
No it’s not trying to do that…
Click to expand...

Right. They couldn't say "Current Minnesota coach". The M is broken on their keyboard.

Why provide facts? That's not what NJ.com is for.

They should stick to listicles. "The top 10 Hoagies in New Gretna- You Won't Believe #3!"
 
M

Mikemarc

Heisman
Nov 28, 2005
69,080
17,742
97
NotInRHouse said:
Right. They couldn't say "Current Minnesota coach". The M is broken on their keyboard.

Why provide facts? That's not what NJ.com is for.

They should stick to listicles. "The top 10 Hoagies in New Gretna- You Won't Believe #3!"
Click to expand...

No reason to include that in the headline.

Just like no reason to include -current Minnesota Viking…in the positive headline I linked
 
M

Mikemarc

Heisman
Nov 28, 2005
69,080
17,742
97
NotInRHouse said:
If they're not paying you, they should, even though you can't explain their behavior.

Rutgers still appears in the search.

But still, credit for defending the absolutely indefensible.
Click to expand...

Just defending truth. Whether it be nj.com, politics, sports, etc. when there is incorrect info posted on here, I’m going to clarify it when I know it’s false.
 
N

NotInRHouse_anon

Heisman
Oct 17, 2007
69,704
47,620
0
mikemarc1 said:
No reason to include that in the headline.

Just like no reason to include -current Minnesota Viking…in the positive headline I linked
Click to expand...

Right. No reason for context.

Considering the Vikings are not a regular opponent for local teams ofc it's not included. Minnesota is in our conference and they're removing divisions so we're going to play them more.
 
N

NotInRHouse_anon

Heisman
Oct 17, 2007
69,704
47,620
0
mikemarc1 said:
Just defending truth. Whether it be nj.com, politics, sports, etc. when there is incorrect info posted on here, I’m going to clarify it when I know it’s false.
Click to expand...

The next time you do that it'll be the first time, but that you see a reason to defend a lying website justifiably detested by actual fans says EVERYTHING.
 
M

Mikemarc

Heisman
Nov 28, 2005
69,080
17,742
97
NotInRHouse said:
Right. No reason for context.

Considering the Vikings are not a regular opponent for local teams ofc it's not included. Minnesota is in our conference and they're removing divisions so we're going to play them more.
Click to expand...

Local teams probably will play Vikings more than rutgers will play minnesota this next decade.
 
Y

yesrutgers01

Heisman
Nov 9, 2008
121,612
37,273
113
Was PJ also the coach that was banging either the AD's wife or the Mom of a player. I thought it was hime but cant remember
 
MADHAT1

MADHAT1

Heisman
Apr 1, 2003
30,654
15,628
113
yesrutgers01 said:
Was PJ also the coach that was banging either the AD's wife or the Mom of a player. I thought it was hime but cant remember
Click to expand...
While he was at WMU there was a rumor spread on message boards about him having an affair with a booster's wife. Nothing , that I can remember, was proven that was true and many put it down as the usual message board BS. But that did seem to be considered one of the reasons his first marriage ended
The women alleged to have an affair sued some message board posters over it and thought I don't know if she received the money she was suing for I found 3 retractions on the MSU message board (Bronco Stamped ) when trying to find out if affair did happen.

I found some retractions on that site
link to retractions:
Retractions regarding the rumors involving the Zeiglers and Mr. P.J. Fleck
https://csnbbs.com/thread-711516.html
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: yesrutgers01
N

NotInRHouse_anon

Heisman
Oct 17, 2007
69,704
47,620
0
mikemarc1 said:
Local teams probably will play Vikings more than rutgers will play minnesota this next decade.
Click to expand...

Ofc you don't have the schedules, but OK.

I look forward to your work on the SL's next piece: "Gilgo Beach killer attended RU football game while living in New Brunswick. Should Schiano resign?"
 
M

Mikemarc

Heisman
Nov 28, 2005
69,080
17,742
97
NotInRHouse said:
Ofc you don't have the schedules, but OK.

I look forward to your work on the SL's next piece: "Gilgo Beach killer attended RU football game while living in New Brunswick. Should Schiano resign?"
Click to expand...

You continue to confuse the Star Ledger and NJ.com.....sigh.
 
M

Mikemarc

Heisman
Nov 28, 2005
69,080
17,742
97
NotInRHouse said:
It's like confusing two trash cans on the street.

Whichever misleading headlines you prefer to defend, let us know. I'm comfortable either way.
Click to expand...

All good.

As i've said above, if the headline that we're discussing appeared in the Star Ledger, there would be no defending it.

But cause it was written for digital, yes, no problem with it. There's a big difference between the two.
 
N

NotInRHouse_anon

Heisman
Oct 17, 2007
69,704
47,620
0
mikemarc1 said:
Are you in the legal field?
Click to expand...

I've talked about what I do before yes. But other than match donations to RU or working for alums, don't believe anyone I've worked for is involved in speaking on RU. Never mind smearing them.

And I've talked about when, in my opinion, RU erred- not firing Flood and Rice for cause come to mind. I don't say RU is perfect at all.

Is that related to misleading headlines?
 
N

NotInRHouse_anon

Heisman
Oct 17, 2007
69,704
47,620
0
mikemarc1 said:
All good.

As i've said above, if the headline that we're discussing appeared in the Star Ledger, there would be no defending it.

But cause it was written for digital, yes, no problem with it. There's a big difference between the two.
Click to expand...

So it's OK to mislead on the internet for clicks?
 
  • Like
Reactions: MADHAT1
M

Mikemarc

Heisman
Nov 28, 2005
69,080
17,742
97
NotInRHouse said:
I've talked about what I do before yes. But other than match donations to RU or working for alums, don't believe anyone I've worked for is involved in speaking on RU. Never mind smearing them.

And I've talked about when, in my opinion, RU erred- not firing Flood and Rice for cause come to mind. I don't say RU is perfect at all.

Is that related to misleading headlines?
Click to expand...

We have two different definitions of misleading headlines, so i cant answer that.
 
M

Mikemarc

Heisman
Nov 28, 2005
69,080
17,742
97
NotInRHouse said:
So it's OK to mislead on the internet for clicks?
Click to expand...

Again, I don't think its misleading, and I'd think many would agree. We have two different opinions, all good.

But the FACT is NJ.com doesn't hate RU and isn't trying to smear them no matter how much you seem to want it to be true. If you take anything out of this discussion, i hope thats it.
 
N

NotInRHouse_anon

Heisman
Oct 17, 2007
69,704
47,620
0
mikemarc1 said:
Again, I don't think its misleading, and I'd think many would agree. We have two different opinions, all good.

But the FACT is NJ.com doesn't hate RU and isn't trying to smear them no matter how much you seem to want it to be true. If you take anything out of this discussion, i hope thats it.
Click to expand...

You're saying it'd be wrong in the paper, but OK online. Written is written. Clicks are not grounds to fabricate or mislead.

Within the past week in this thread alone I shared two misleading headlines from them. You can say they don't hate until you're blue in the face, it's quite obvious most people don't agree and with excellent reason. No one could be that horrifically lazy on the same subject time and time again. And that's forgetting the fake scandals they tried around Mulcahy which ultimately led to his firing which was wholly unjustified. If that was the SL it was NJ.com who had it on their site. That's before Politi's jaunt to Tijuana among other attempts.

The reality is, we have had two major scandals with Rice and Flood that were absolutely fair game. But their appetite to go after RU is so insatiable that it's not enough. It's disgusting and why they have the reputation they do. Is there anyone aside from you here who feels they have fair coverage? I would love to hear from them.
 
M

Mikemarc

Heisman
Nov 28, 2005
69,080
17,742
97
NotInRHouse said:
You're saying it'd be wrong in the paper, but OK online. Written is written. Clicks are not grounds to fabricate or mislead.

Within the past week in this thread alone I shared two misleading headlines from them. You can say they don't hate until you're blue in the face, it's quite obvious most people don't agree and with excellent reason. No one could be that horrifically lazy on the same subject time and time again. And that's forgetting the fake scandals they tried around Mulcahy which ultimately led to his firing which was wholly unjustified. If that was the SL it was NJ.com who had it on their site. That's before Politi's jaunt to Tijuana among other attempts.

The reality is, we have had two major scandals with Rice and Flood that were absolutely fair game. But their appetite to go after RU is so insatiable that it's not enough. It's disgusting and why they have the reputation they do. Is there anyone aside from you here who feels they have fair coverage? I would love to hear from them.
Click to expand...

I'm saying there'd be no reason to write it like that in the paper. I wouldn't say it would be WRONG..but there'd definitely be a question why.

There's ZERO question, anyone involved in digital media, why it was written like it was online.

It seems like most people who don't think their coverage is fair..are the same people who haven't clicked on a story or picked up the Ledger in years...so its kind of hypocritical.

And again, I don't know why I have to continue to repeat this, but they don't have an appetite to go after RU. They want RU to succeed...
 
N

NotInRHouse_anon

Heisman
Oct 17, 2007
69,704
47,620
0
mikemarc1 said:
I'm saying there'd be no reason to write it like that in the paper. I wouldn't say it would be WRONG..but there'd definitely be a question why.

There's ZERO question, anyone involved in digital media, why it was written like it was online.

It seems like most people who don't think their coverage is fair..are the same people who haven't clicked on a story or picked up the Ledger in years...so its kind of hypocritical.

And again, I don't know why I have to continue to repeat this, but they don't have an appetite to go after RU. They want RU to succeed...
Click to expand...

Right, so your position is misleading for clicks is fine.

We get it.

It's just disgusting.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Section124
M

Mikemarc

Heisman
Nov 28, 2005
69,080
17,742
97
NotInRHouse said:
Right, so your position is misleading for clicks is fine.

We get it.

It's just disgusting.
Click to expand...

I’ll say again I don’t think it’s misleading. That’s where we differ.

I will agree that headlines I find misleading are disgusting
 
N

NotInRHouse_anon

Heisman
Oct 17, 2007
69,704
47,620
0
mikemarc1 said:
I’ll say again I don’t think it’s misleading. That’s where we differ.

I will agree that headlines I find misleading are disgusting
Click to expand...

Ok. So then why would it be fair to question in the paper, but not online?

What would be wrong with the headline in the paper, in your own words? Could it be that it didn't mention where the alleged acts occurred? Gee, that seems important.

Imagine a headline like this on realignment; "School to join same conference as RU." I'm sure you would agree that misses context. This is no different.
 
M

Mikemarc

Heisman
Nov 28, 2005
69,080
17,742
97
NotInRHouse said:
Ok. So then why would it be fair to question in the paper, but not online?

What would be wrong with the headline in the paper, in your own words? Could it be that it didn't mention where the alleged acts occurred? Gee, that seems important.

Imagine a headline like this on realignment; "School to join same conference as RU." I'm sure you would agree that misses context. This is no different.
Click to expand...

Because I work in the digital media field and know that they way this headline was written is fine. I don't work in the newspaper field and would be curious why a published article uses an SEO headline.

"School to join same conference as RU" is a terrible digital headline. Agree.
 
N

NotInRHouse_anon

Heisman
Oct 17, 2007
69,704
47,620
0
mikemarc1 said:
Because I work in the digital media field and know that they way this headline was written is fine. I don't work in the newspaper field and would be curious why a published article uses an SEO headline.

"School to join same conference as RU" is a terrible digital headline. Agree.
Click to expand...

Great, so share that knowledge and tell us why it's OK to omit the fact he's the HC at another school where the issues took place.

"I'm in the field" with no explanation isn't a justification. if you don't want to say, just say that, but then understand why people will not believe you.

Much like "Former New Brunswick resident arrested in Gilgo Beach killings" would be garbage.
 
N

NotInRHouse_anon

Heisman
Oct 17, 2007
69,704
47,620
0
yesrutgers01 said:
And this is why it is BS

Current Minnesota HC >>>>>>>>>Rutgers assistant almost 15 years ago

and the headline makes no mention of Minnesota and in the very first line- again, they lead with former Rutgers coach and toxic etc...
Click to expand...

I don't understand what's so hard about this...really...like how can anyone not see it. If there's allegations why should the headline omit where they happened? We would never accept that on anything else.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom