mediabeatup.net

  • We had an issue with background services between march 10th and 15th or there about. This meant the payment services were not linking to automatic upgrades. If you paid for premium membership and are still seeing ads please let me know and the email you used against PayPal and I cam manually verify and upgrade your account.

Dan

Kim Jong Dan
Staff member
Administrator
Tipping Member
Hi all,

Whilst I am still building the FAQ's and other parts of that site, I wanted to open it up for article submission and rating so that we can start seeing content in there.

The process is all quite simple and the higher you vote the worse the article is. So if you were to give an article 5 boxing gloves out of 5, this would indicate that the article was an absolute beat up.
There is place for you to add your comment as to why you think the article is a beat up as well.
Please refrain from profanities and any form of slander or liable as always you are responsible. Try to be more discerning in your reasoning of why the article is a beat up, don't just post it because you have a general hatred for the journalist, the more detail and reasoning you can give, the more likely others will agree and discuss.

The site isn't just for the beat ups it would be nice to get some good quality article too and mark them with lower scores.

All of this will help us gather a list of articles, journalists and media outlets that are worth avoiding or taking with a grain of salt whilst also providing us with list of articles etc worth reading and listening to.

So jump over to http://www.mediabeatup.net and start submitting your stories and rating others

Any questions let me know
Dan
 
Daniel said:
Hi all,

Whilst I am still building the FAQ's and other parts of that site, I wanted to open it up for article submission and rating so that we can start seeing content in there.

The process is all quite simple and the higher you vote the worse the article is. So if you were to give an article 5 boxing gloves out of 5, this would indicate that the article was an absolute beat up.
There is place for you to add your comment as to why you think the article is a beat up as well.
Please refrain from profanities and any form of slander or liable as always you are responsible. Try to be more discerning in your reasoning of why the article is a beat up, don't just post it because you have a general hatred for the journalist, the more detail and reasoning you can give, the more likely others will agree and discuss.

The site isn't just for the beat ups it would be nice to get some good quality article too and mark them with lower scores.

All of this will help us gather a list of articles, journalists and media outlets that are worth avoiding or taking with a grain of salt whilst also providing us with list of articles etc worth reading and listening to.

So jump over to http://www.mediabeap.net and start submitting your stories and rating others

Any questions let me know
Dan

Do you mean http://www.mediabeatup.net
 
i do. I was distracted with someone at the door. Cheers
 
No a mate from around the corner, he left his phone here yesterday
 
Good luck with this, an interesting concept.
By the way, in the blurb you say you have noticed a rapid incline in the quality of articles, did you mean incline or decline?
 
Do you mean like the other night when Weidler rabbited on about the reason NSW will win the third SOO is that they have a number of players who have beaten up women. The item then went on to list a few, including Brett Stewart. I would have thought that would be libelous. Weidler is just a hack.
 
DSM5 said:
Do you mean like the other night when Weidler rabbited on about the reason NSW will win the third SOO is that they have a number of players who have beaten up women. The item then went on to list a few, including Brett Stewart. I would have thought that would be libelous. Weidler is just a hack.

yes that would be one example. The articles around Stewarts case were another clear media beat up.
The Todd Carney stuff last year was another example as well as the stuff about our board
 
For me it was this one from last year.

TAB suspends finals betting over Manly Sea Eagles salary cap breach rumour by: Brent Zerafa
From: The Daily Telegraph
July 05, 2011 10:40AM
Increase Text SizeDecrease Text SizePrintEmail
Share Add to DiggAdd to del.icio.usAdd to FacebookAdd to KwoffAdd to MyspaceAdd to NewsvineWhat are these?
ShareFacebookTwitterEmailUPDATED: The NRL this morning hosed down suggestions that Manly have breached the salary cap and assured punters the premiership front-runners wonÂ’t be docked competition points this season.
Alarm bells were ringing late last Thursday when a string of bets were placed on the Sea Eagles to miss the top eight _ almost identical circumstances which brought the Melbourne Storm salary cap rort to light.

TAB Sportsbet immediately suspended the betting option but are expected to re-open the market today.

``We took some bets late Thursday night, we thought they were a little unusual given Manly's position on the ladder, so we took the precaution, suspended the market and let the NRL know,'' said TAB Sportsbet's Matt Jenkins.

...
``It wasn't anything major but there were a few rumours flying around that Manly had breached the cap and maybe some punters were just trying to get the overs.''

The first bet was $250 at $41, for a collect of $10,250. A few smaller bets followed before the option was suspended.

Eskander’s Betstar no longer takes bets on who'll come last at the end of the regular season.

“We did not bet on NRL Wooden Spoon as we lost faith in the NRL," a spokesman said.
 
if you have the link still then post the link on mediabeatup with your comments. I havent been tracking any articles lately as I have been busy developing different things so any that you have to start kicking it off would be great.

The full article should not be posted on the site, just a link to it and you blurb
 
Dan is there a typo in the 'latest tweets' section? When it's loading it says 'loading twitts'! lol
 
Team P W L PD Pts
5 4 1 23 10
5 4 1 14 10
6 4 2 48 8
6 4 2 28 8
5 3 2 25 8
5 3 2 14 8
6 3 2 38 7
6 3 2 21 7
6 3 3 37 6
6 3 3 16 6
6 3 3 -13 6
5 2 3 -15 6
6 3 3 -36 6
6 2 4 -5 4
6 2 4 -7 4
5 0 5 -86 2
6 1 5 -102 2
Back
Top Bottom