Just how yellow is Indian cricket journalism?

[Xuhaib]

Some of the articles on cricinfo are horribly biased. Though it's not surprising considering where the majority of their revenue comes from

dude we live in times were so called credible media outlets like BBC and CNN can be biased and hugely one sided its all feeding the largest consumer.

 

[Bun]

examples needed fellas... it makes boring reading same thing repeated.

and would love what is the benchmark here also.

 

[Bun]

Some of the articles on cricinfo are horribly biased. Though it's not surprising considering where the majority of their revenue comes from

 

[ankitj]

+1 to that reaction

 

[shivfan]

They're paid well for what they say. Their comments are read worldwide, and are much respected. But on the topic of Indian cricket, a lot of them talk utter nonsense.

Take the recent case of the India-WI tour following the IPL. Gautam Gambhir has been labelled a mercenary and accused of treason, putting club over country, because he hid his injury during the IPL, where it got aggravated, causing him to miss the tour to WI, at least the ODI/T20 leg. The comments coming on that are at times dreadful for a paid, established unit.

To be honest, I agree with them about Gambhir....

 

[vcs]

To be honest, I agree with them about Gambhir....

Mercenary, based on one injury that got aggravated during the IPL? That's incredibly harsh. I am no fan of India sending a weakened team out to the WI due to the IPL wear and tear, but I don't think Gambhir's commitment to his country is in question here.

 

[honestbharani]

How is that yellow journalism?

Infact it is not sensationalist.

Sensationalist would have been calling them mercenaries and traitors and what not as some sections have gone out to do.
That would sell more and be read more than presenting the alternate view.

didn't find much wrong with the article at all.. Pretty well thought out and well written piece, tbh..

 

[Ikki]

Some of the articles on cricinfo are horribly biased. Though it's not surprising considering where the majority of their revenue comes from

Yeh, I am finding myself going on there less and less. Blatant bias at times.

 

[GotSpin]

dude we live in times were so called credible media outlets like BBC and CNN can be biased and hugely one sided its all feeding the largest consumer.

Except there are many media sources to choose from for world news. In cricket we essentially have one in terms of online reporting

 

[GotSpin]

Have a whinge all you want but cricinfo does not have a balanced selection of arguments

 

[chengliu]

Its similar the world over. Unfortunately, even with the sea of trash the media in sport is vital.

 

[Bun]

Have a whinge all you want but cricinfo does not have a balanced selection of arguments

thats rubbish bro without proper substantiation.

I felt cricinfo was pretty much balanced in coverage of ipl, in fact sometimes even wondered whether they have sum agenda agnst set max with constant talk of trps plummetting (which was as best an example u can get of selective reporting).

if anything, my only irk with cricinfo is the constant runs and reruns of articles on a set of players, incl ponting, broad, johnson, sachin etc.

otherwise it.s pretty much okay, with so much coverage for free...

 

[hang on]

is there really so much bias in cricinfo? haven't trawled thru all the stuff but find it somewhat surprising.

they publish a good slew of opinions from the major countries and the bcci regularly gets panned in there. i think that the cricinfo chappies are personae non grata as far as the bcci are concerned....or were at some time in the recent past.....for their criticism of the bcci's benighted ways.

 

[Spark]

Yeah I'm surprised at the cricinfo articles, I don't find them too bad at all.

At least they have the good sense to keep their articles to legitimately relevant cricket related topics of interest, unlike some.

 

[ankitj]

Not only are cricinfo articles fair and cover cricket in all countries, they also maintain a very good balance between various kind of features. They have articles on stories from yesteryears, have a good dose of stat articles and also have some humorous articles in page 2 section. Without cricinfo, it would've been impossible for me to stay closely updated and interested in cricket.

 

[Top_Cat]

To be honest, the standard of writing on Cricinfo is a bigger fish to fry than any worries about bias. Have found some to be barely grammatical.

 

[ankitj]

Talking of Yellow journalism, check the latest:

Tendulkar and Bradman: Beyond the average argument - Part I - The Times of India

Interesting the way the article opens:

On average, Donald Bradman is a genius. On all things average-related, no one comes anywhere close to him. His "average supremacy" is a mathematical truism and there can be no argument about it. Choosing the best batsman to have ever taken guard, however, is not an average concern and is a rather complex problem.

WTF?! These guys get paid for writing this! Such silly puns on the word 'average'

 

[vcs]

I saw that article. Pure unadulterated, meandering rubbish. Don't know how they managed to stretch that crap out to four pages. Decided it was too terrible to even bother posting it on here.

 

[ankitj]

I saw that article. Pure unadulterated, meandering rubbish. Don't know how they managed to stretch that crap out to four pages. Decided it was too terrible to even bother posting it on here.

Ya, I avoided it too but thought this was the right thread to share it on.

 

[Arjun]

Times of India is utter trash these days. They don't cover news, but only newsmakers, and seem to stamp their opinion all over certain issues. Worse, I find at least three typographical errors in each issue now. This is worse than the new media, such as DNA and HT. It's anybody's guess who pays the Times of India to publish stuff, as most of that doesn't deserve to be in a newspaper.