There was a very salient point made by someone on another thread last week about the news content on the BBC website and how there is a tendency to report incidents concerning BBC programmes as news items. This is a really good point and it is probably worthwhile taking in to account how often programmes like Dr Who or Strictly Come Dancing are perceived by the BBC as having some significance to the news agenda. Unfortunately, I think that the website is not as unbiased as the TV channels and,whilst there is a lot of news reporting on the website that is decent enough in it's content, I think that there a a significant proportion which just perpetuates the whole echo-chamber feel to the BBC's web output. The articles seem to be tailored to a younger audience and you can strongly sense that there is very much a generational thing at play insofar that trivial issues are given too much attention. BBC News is no longer challenging issues in the manner of Channel Four news, for example.
In my opinion, Garth Crooks fall perfectly into this rather unthinking agenda. Unfortunately he is an articulate and persuasive speaker which tends to mask the fact that a lot of what he writes is both lazy and condescending. Of all the football pundits, there are none on the BBC who deliver their opinions with such a degree of gravitas which is out of proportion to the message he is putting across. Anything concerning Saints either relates to games were did not deserve to win or, more frequently, players that are too good for Southampton and would be better served by the likes of Liverpool / Spurs /Arsenal , etc, etc for whom they would be a "perfect fit." I have long since ignored his column as he comes across like a pub bore who is only interested in the top five clubs. The BBC has some excellent pundits in their team (don't know why Dion Dublin does not get the praise he deserves as he is balanaced in his views and extremely sensible.) For my money, Crooks is "click bait" and like an intellectual version to Robbie Savage's village idiot. What I dislike about Crooks is the condescending tone of his output and it is a shame that he is never put in a position where he has to come down from his ivory tower and deal with supporters of teams outside the Top Five. There is a perception within his articles that implies he has watched each game in depth but by skimming the surface as he does, so much of what he writes is simplified to the extent to present something too removed from reality.
In my opinion, Garth Crooks fall perfectly into this rather unthinking agenda. Unfortunately he is an articulate and persuasive speaker which tends to mask the fact that a lot of what he writes is both lazy and condescending. Of all the football pundits, there are none on the BBC who deliver their opinions with such a degree of gravitas which is out of proportion to the message he is putting across. Anything concerning Saints either relates to games were did not deserve to win or, more frequently, players that are too good for Southampton and would be better served by the likes of Liverpool / Spurs /Arsenal , etc, etc for whom they would be a "perfect fit." I have long since ignored his column as he comes across like a pub bore who is only interested in the top five clubs. The BBC has some excellent pundits in their team (don't know why Dion Dublin does not get the praise he deserves as he is balanaced in his views and extremely sensible.) For my money, Crooks is "click bait" and like an intellectual version to Robbie Savage's village idiot. What I dislike about Crooks is the condescending tone of his output and it is a shame that he is never put in a position where he has to come down from his ivory tower and deal with supporters of teams outside the Top Five. There is a perception within his articles that implies he has watched each game in depth but by skimming the surface as he does, so much of what he writes is simplified to the extent to present something too removed from reality.
