Watford Observer v WD Sport

WD Sport going live last summer, tagged with the Watford Observer's loss of Frank Smith (and with him a lot of the paper's club sources), has meant we've got a bit of a jostle for position between the old guard and the new boys on the block (led by an 'old boy', Mr Kevin Affleck).

So, the fight for the WFC fans' first choice for Hornets news and so on has been going on a while, and what's the situation today? Has anyone actually begun to ignore one in favour of the other? It's refreshing to have two news-oriented outlets that focus on Watford, as previously if the Watford Observer didn't have it, it was very unlikely anywhere else did.

Exclusives and interviews now come from two local outlets - those're the main things to come out of this, as opinion pieces and so on are all over the net nowadays (ahem).

I have noticed the relationship between the two become a little bit hostile at times though - most recently this post on Facebook from Kevin Affleck:



Just wondering what everyone's thoughts are on each of the two's reputations and credibility. I'm sure there's nothing more than a friendly rivalry between the two, if anything at all, and it can only be a good thing for us supporters to have two outlets keeping each other on their toes.

I'm also wondering how WD Sport is able to fund itself in such a professional manner. At a time where the Watford Observer seems to struggle to stay afloat, or at least stay viable in the same way as in years gone by, it's impressive that WD Sport has been able to get up to speed and so on so quickly.

 

So they both quoted Deeney yet Affleck says they are copying? Comes over as a bit of a d*** if I'm honest.

If it's worth reading about then it'll be on here, what's the d*mn rush to be first?

 

Always go on WD Sport's live blog for the latest news: http://www.wdsport.co.uk/2015/07/live-rolling-hornets-news-bites/

A nice mix of interesting tidbits and actual news, with the occasional exclusive interview. Very handy.

I like that for the most part, WDS keep stuff like Carragher's recent comments to the live blog whereas the WO have recently started making whole articles for little stuff like that: http://www.watfordobserver.co.uk/sp...re_above_Bournemouth_in_Premier_League_table/

Started noticing quite a few mistakes and typos in WDS' work recently, which is a pet peeve of mine, but I imagine less anally retentive people than me wouldn't be bothered by it.


Overall, WDS win by a landslide.

 

The other thing i nether is an exclusive, it's selective quoting from a TalkSport interview that happened (I think) a fair while before either article went online. Agree that it comes across as a bit rude and unnecessary.

 

Those typos get me as well. More on WDS than on the WO recently.

I think being able to have a liveblog rather than writing full stories for little bits of 'news' is great.

For me it all begs the question about funding though. The WO are clearly having to up the advertising and so on because of their print version having to be paid for somehow, but WDS don't have that issue (despite being about a regular free print version when they first started... don't know what happened to that). I am impressed by WDS coming into the arena and doing this well. I don't know how they can possibly turn a profit though. Maybe I'm naive in some regard...?

 

I don't give a monkeys uncle as long as the info is accurate

 

I have adblock (if you don't you're a damned fool) so don't know how many ads WDS have on their site, but I assume that's their only source of revenue. I wouldn't be surprised if Affleck was running at a loss right now, whilst they get off the ground.

 

Affleck often appears to want to get one over on the WO. It's evident in a lot of posts like the one above and on Twitter and it bugs me a lot. They have done a lot of good interviews but I wish they wouldn't label them as "EXCLUSIVE" as this also seems to be a plea of "look how good we are". They also tend to speculate as if it's fact far too often, but hey, that's pretty much the hallmark of any kind of journalism.

I enjoy the extra coverage that WD Sport has brought to the table and they do seem to have slightly greater access in terms of interviews. The rumour articles in the Observer during the summer did become incredibly tiresome too. I just wish Affleck didn't appear so spiteful.

 

I'd love to know where WD is getting it's funding from. The Wobserver is part of a group which is obsessed with hacking away at costs; whence why the Wobserver was so late out for preseason as they were sponsored & it clearly only paid for a short trip

 

Frank Smith is a big loss and the WO has had a few negative Pozzo articles for no apparent reason, the Ollie Phillips one was embarrassing and he clearly has an axe to grind..

Some high at the club were unimpressed with the article about the EJ stand potentially being closed the day before the first game so iv been told, the WO needs to up its game a bit.

 

I can only assume that Affleck's WDS is running at a loss for now at least. Agree with that Talk. As for ads, it's minimal on WDS, especially when you compare it to the WO.

Also it does seem that way Tring. I mean even the idea of starting up a direct rival to the WO's sports coverage does seem at least a bit vindictive, considering that the industry is in decline right now and has been for a long while, as well as the fact that Kevin Affleck used to work for the WO. Would be an interesting thing to find out more about.

 

My life seems to consist of randomly flicking between wfcforums, WO, WDsport, Twitter and even the clubs website in no particular order.
This was a particularly bad in the closed season, international break and towards the end of the transfer season.

A specialist would probably suggest that I limited the above neurotic activity to a Watford twitter search twice a day.

 

I have the same problem but with my personal niche in tumblr porn :sad2:

 

Newsnow 1st - links to WO/ WD and most of their sources.
This site (plus mini homepage twitter feed) 2nd
Occasionally then WD. I'd never go on the Wobby website without being linked to a specific article.

 

Personally think the Watford Observer needs to massively up its game

Used to be the first place I would go for match reports and general news about the club

Sadly the Observer seems to be lacking in exclusives and woefully out of touch when talking about transfer news and the comments sections end up in regular inane slanging matches

 

Agree with this.

Sad,especially for someone who was a trainee reporter there many years ago.

 

Affleck is insufferable.

A man defined by bitterness and insecurity.

 

Funding ... or rather sponsorship by the club probably plays a part IMO so don't expect too much negativity when all is not quite so rosy in our garden.

 

Tbf, inane slanging matches is, depressingly what most newspaper comments sections are

 

WDSport is excellent IMHO. The key thing is it is a web service with low overheads, it could virtually run as a hobby site if you had another source of income. The WO is a dying force, the paper has got rid of virtually all it's established staff, and is run with young reporters many probably starting out. The paper probably only exists because of residual property sale adverts and the sales due to having a football club in its catchment area. I think WDSports is the future and the WO the past. Once upon a time you heard the news about the Hornets in the pub or in the Friday WO, now everything is instant with social media. As I type Luke Shaw is already responding on social media about his unfortunate injury ( get well soon Luke for England), waiting to buy a paper once a week is the past. If the WO web content declines in content then it will die.

 

Does this mean the future doesn't include professional journalists at a local level? If so, that's quite sad.

It could be run as a hobby site for sure, but the content they provide includes stuff gleaned from press conferences and interviews - these are things that require a lot of time, so surely a hobby site couldn't match this level of detail.

 

I think WD Sport is better but mainly because WO is so poor, although Kev Affleck is a bit of an annoying pr1ck.

I can see now why Boothroyd used to call him The Little Weasel.

 

Hilarious that Affleck should fire that accusation as I've seen a number of tweets from him that are quite obviously taken from this forum and BHappy.

 

RE the typos. The guy is a blog journalist and so doesn't have the same attention to detail that his forebears would have done.

Hobby horse journalism is probably his level.

 

Yeah , I've been using newsnow too , can thoroughly recommend. Noticed that a few stories from pre season that WD sport 'broke ' were actually on newsnow first.

 

Since Frank left the WO - it has gone down hill.

 

WD isn't a hobby site, but I'm not sure if it has any employees other than K Affleck, in which case it'd be unbelievably cheap to run. I know issues of it were being sold outside of the Sheffield Wednesday game but I don't think it has a regular print edition. In which case, it's running costs are minimal. Certainly compared to something like the Observer, which obviously has a much larger focus.

 

Sorry I didn't mean to suggest that it might be a hobby site, I meant to say that such a site would be vaguely possible as a hobby.

I'm sure there's at least one other writer for WD Sport, and it's not run as a hobby but as a profession.

Also, the Sheffield Wesneaday promotion edition that you're on about is the only printed edition that's ever come out as far as I'm aware. Definitely an expensive endeavour, and one that's sort of unnecessary when you consider there's the WO already doing it, and what with the well documented issues with print journalism today. It almost seems completely geared towards getting one over on the WO when you look at the start of WD Sport.

 

Haven't got time for either to be fair. I'll occasionally follow a link form here or Facepage to a wobby article but the advertising is so obtrusive that it just puts me off. Often the articles are lacking in substance anyway and most stuff is broken here first.

I do have an adblocker but only use it when sites go over the top. Peopel do need to understand that the internet is not free. For example, if we didn't have adverts, this site wouldn't exist. The ads are at a level to pay enough to run the servers, pay for software and offer up the occasional competition prize.

 

There'll always be people without adblocker, so you and the rest of the internet will be fine. I can't imagine ever not having adblocker on though, it's great.

 

I notice that Facebook is following the trend started on here in adding a "dislike" facility!

WFC Forums lead, others follow....!

 

"Obsessed with hacking away costs" is probably best understood as "like all local papers, desperate to cut costs to stay afloat." The times they are a-changin'.

 

Haven't read the whole thread, but WDS for me as well. I'm not a member of the grammar police etc, and nor is my spelling or use of the English language the best, but I really, really hate the mistakes and typos the Wobby makes. As I say, I'm no expert - but these are meant to be professional journalists and if they can't be f**ked to proof read their articles, then why should I be f**ked to read them?