Sunday, November 30, 2008

Blogging Expert Twaddle: Half a Dozen Broken Links Remain

In our last story yesterday we pointed out someone writing ex cathedra as a blogging expert had run a story about this expert writing they'd done and quoting it in full on their own blog. It had LOTS of broken links in it. In the original post we said around 50% of the 31 links. That was based on a rather quick count, but it was certainly closer to the mark than the author's own contemporaneous count:

Blogger Iain Dale said...

God you're an incisive critic. No wonder you are regarded as a joke by the blogging community - even Labour bloggers.

So the worst criticism you can come up with is that there are four broken links in an article of 2400 words. Jesus. You crack me up!

29 November, 2008 18:28

"There are FOUR broken links ..." Remember that. You can surely count on Iain when it comes to arithmetic? And say it's not true about those sniping Labour bloggers!??!

At just around midnight there was a further exchange:

Anonymous said...

What a shit blog

29 November, 2008 23:37

Blogger Chris Paul said...

Where's yours anon 23:37?

29 November, 2008 23:41

Blogger Iain Dale said...

There were four broken links. Not 15. Idiot.

30 November, 2008 00:12

Everybody Hates Chris said...

And that's fewer broken links than there are on Chris Paul's list of 'Alpha Blogs' on his own home page, Iain.

30 November, 2008 00:30

Naturally "Everybody Hates Chris" anonymous like Anon 23:37 has been deleted. They are barred. But clearly they are wrong in so much as (a) several bust links in my blogroll are annotated as such and (b) unlike Iain's links they were right at one time. Blogs come and go is all. Send broken link messages to the usual etc etc ... two (not four, certainly not ten+) have been corrected 12:16.

Anon 23:37 appears to emanate from the IP Address one of Iain's very very loyal-est sock puppets, "they" just couldn't resist their potty mouthiness as their master throws his potty toys.

(above two paras were one, amended for improved sense 12:06)

Iain may still be rather tense and clenchy jawed around midnight. But notice, he has changed tense too. "There WERE four broken links" which suggests that he's (a) been and mopped up at least four broken links and (b) he doesn't understand that the unamended HTML is still out there in hyperspace and (c) he is as careless as he is over confident.

Let's be generous for one moment shall we? Let's assume that just this once Iain is telling the truth when he suggests that he has corrected just four links. Can we all do that? Yes, I know it's hard, but let's just try shall we?

This means that with the SIX THAT ARE STILL WRONG NOW (twenty hours on and counting) the total figure was merely TEN. Just over 30% blog links wrong in an article about blogging from a blogging expert in a magazine for budding student journalists. So that's OK then. If four was trifling ten remains trivial, isn't it? There were 2400 brilliant words there after all. What do they want? Pay monkeys, get peanuts.

The British Journalism Review is published by the University of Luton. Don't sneer. They're coy about their rates: "Payment: by arrangement". But has to be a lot more than a Ton for 2400 accurate words of wisdom aka head emptying careless blether from an expert of Iain's calibre?

Surely not an Archer or even a Grand, but surely a Monkey? The BJR is sponsored after all by half of Fleet Street, and Reader's Digest:

BBC | ITV News | Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday | News International
The Daily Telegraph | Reader's Digest | The Economist | Trinity Mirror
The Guardian | Unite (T&G)

They should really, strictly speaking, demand their money back because even linkless this piece was pot boiling, put the kettle on I'm nearly finished but they're paying well twaddle. No matter. To help Iain out, in the spirit of blogger solidarity, the SIX that are STILL WRONG are:

We say: The Daily Kos, not Iain's Toss;

We say: Do You Write In Your Own Name, not Yeah Iain, Do You ...;

We say: Gastronomy Domine, not Dale's Burnt Stew;

We say Three Line Whip, not Dale Should be Flayed;

And finally, we say: Tim Worstall, not Dale's Worst of All.

Fly quickly my little winged monkeys! Iain Dale will soon be there pooper scooping up his own mess and very likely denying it ever existed.

Bit of a doggy stink remains, but hey ho, it'll pass with time.

Blogging expert? My arse! As Jim Royle might say.

Incidentally Dale's continuing evidence-less campaign against The Sun's Whip Column and The Mail's Ephraim Hardcastle "nicking blog stories" continues to grate. There are stories out there mate. Why on earth do you or for that matter Guido have the gall to think you're the only ones to spot them?

It's not as if you don't run stories uncredited hours, nay days sometimes, after other bloggers or even printed media and simply protest that "I haven't read XYZ today, yesterday, this week". Still, if you live by the sword with these attacks on professionals you can be put to the sword yourself, without compunction.

UPDATE ALPHA LINKS 12:06: Have updated Lakelander, which was an HTML error on my part, and Mad Nad Dorries which was a swerve from the parliamentary commissioners on her part but is not really a blog so who really cares? Have left Guido old school address as it still aliases to the new. Also the "resting" links as annotated.

Any more corrections please let me know. We are still girding up loins for a long-awaited re-design and if you'd like to be blog-rolled then or now please get in touch. Particularly if you have an un-reciprocated inward link.


Anonymous said...

If you actually think anyone cares about this nonsense you need more help than usual.

By the way, your html title string is broken. Let's blog about it!

Anonymous said...

Why am I reading this drivel? Madeleine was right - you really are a w....................

can't be arsed

Chris Paul said...

Blogging expert Mr Dale can't be bothered to visit ...

Sock puppets not seen for a while do turn up ...

Why ever is that?

Seriously Mr Dale:

Huge cock up so mea culpa would be the right response, not calling me names ...