Edwards beats the wild-cards
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
'''''
Joined
·
337 Posts
The Fox is being too nice, so I will be the jerk:
#$%#! MO! I haven't been able to watch the tape of the race yet, so I logged into MO, thinking "They don't give away race results on the front page." Well, yes they do. Thanks guys, now the "thrilling 25 lap encounter" won't be so thrilling anymore.
#$%#! MO! I haven't been able to watch the tape of the race yet, so I logged into MO, thinking "They don't give away race results on the front page." Well, yes they do. Thanks guys, now the "thrilling 25 lap encounter" won't be so thrilling anymore.
Re: Uhhh, guys...
Ironically, in the race he didn't win, he was beaten by a wild card rider... so it still doesn't make sense.
What I don't get is why anyone would want any headline other than something like:
2002 WSB Sugo, Japan Results
With the current titles, how can you search to find anything, when you need it 6 months later?
Ironically, in the race he didn't win, he was beaten by a wild card rider... so it still doesn't make sense.
What I don't get is why anyone would want any headline other than something like:
2002 WSB Sugo, Japan Results
With the current titles, how can you search to find anything, when you need it 6 months later?
If you guys don't want the news, don't look at the site until after you have seen the tapes. We had this conversation over and over on the WERA site with J Ulrich. Ultimately, these guys are in the business of news. Part of that includes eye-grabbing headlines. Again, if you don't want to know, don't log in!
Joined
·
337 Posts
there was a long debate about this a year or so ago and MO agreed that it wasn't too much to ask that the headline read something like "Thriller at Sugo Results."
Look at it from MO's perspective. Do they really want to have a chunk of their readership avoid their site some days just because they'd rather write "Edwards beats the wild cards?"
Look at it from MO's perspective. Do they really want to have a chunk of their readership avoid their site some days just because they'd rather write "Edwards beats the wild cards?"
I disagree. When you go to news.motorcycle.com, it's not like you're looking at a bunch of disparate topics, each trying to lure your eyes away from the others. This isn't a newsstand, and it's not designed to catch the eye of someone rapidly flipping channels. (The last thing we need is for MO to start putting flash in the news page.)
If you're here, you came here on purpose. You're here for motorcycle news. The news items are in a plain vertical list, newest items at the top. You start at the top and work your way down, reading the headlines, one after another, until you find one you're interested in reading about in more depth.
The purpose of the title should be to make it easy for people to identify which articles they want to read, and which they want to skip. As I said in my previous post, titles like "Edwards beats the wild cards" just make it annoying to identify the article contents, especially next year, when you're trying to find the 2002 Sugo WSB results.
So, I really do not see any valid argument for putting the race winner's name in the title, and I don't see any reason for the intros that do nothing but harp on the fact that they didn't put the winner's name in the title. Glenn Le Santo often wrote entertaining intros that didn't give away the results. What was wrong with that?
If you're here, you came here on purpose. You're here for motorcycle news. The news items are in a plain vertical list, newest items at the top. You start at the top and work your way down, reading the headlines, one after another, until you find one you're interested in reading about in more depth.
The purpose of the title should be to make it easy for people to identify which articles they want to read, and which they want to skip. As I said in my previous post, titles like "Edwards beats the wild cards" just make it annoying to identify the article contents, especially next year, when you're trying to find the 2002 Sugo WSB results.
So, I really do not see any valid argument for putting the race winner's name in the title, and I don't see any reason for the intros that do nothing but harp on the fact that they didn't put the winner's name in the title. Glenn Le Santo often wrote entertaining intros that didn't give away the results. What was wrong with that?
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
Join the discussion
