Just popping by on way to the water-cooler..
GME - what other options do you have for discussing your idea that: 'the media reporting of ascents may contribute to a lowering of standards among top sport-climbers in the UK by lowering expectations of what constitutes a significant performance level'?
You could write an article for a mag, the pro's of that are you could possibly go into more detail than on here, although I doubt it, as long as you're prepared to ignore every little comment and focus instead on staying on topic you can have more detail on a forum. The cons of a mag article are no-one is talking back to you so it isn't dynamic, it's just your idea up to the point of publishing.
You could write a blog. Pro's - you can go into as much detail as you like although you'd lose a percentage of readers if it's too long and/or bland. Also it's more dynamic than a mag article. Con's - less people will see it than here or in a mag, although probably more now than if you hadn't started the topic here first.
You could keep it to yourself and talk among friends at the crag/wall and just accept that's how it is.
I think airing ideas on a forum like this is a good way to do it, but perhaps better is if it's linked to a well-researched blog post or article. And you don't have to respond to every little comment. Most people can see if a poster is missing the point you're trying to make or going off on a tangent. People will read what you write and the silent majority will take away what they will from it. And if people want to pink anasazi/pain o'raisin the thread there's not a lot you can do about it.
Even though I agree in parts with your idea, I don't think you've made a very strong argument. What you haven't done so far is back up your idea with any compelling evidence, either in terms of how we compare overall with other countries - someone else had to find out the numbers for you and I'm still not clear how we compare below 9a; nor given an alternative for how the media could report stuff in a way that you think would encourage higher expectations - obviously higher grades, but what's your cut-off for Men/Women, and Youths - what age? What about sponsors driving news stories (of 8cs and E9s that aren't?), whose interest is that in and what's the alternative? Or what about sponsors driving climbing websites in general - and their news - because websites and mags are largely paid for by advertising? How do you suggest to change editorial policy and what should it be like?
One sure-fire way to improve standards quite quickly would be if there were a significant financial incentive to climb very hard - say £6-8K per calender year? (so 1K each from some main UK companies connected to climbing) - open to all-comers. To be the first Uk male to repeat 3 9as in a calender year or one 9a+, and for each of the first two women to climb both a confirmed 8c and a confirmed 8c+ in a calender year. Two women, to promote greater depth of talent. Routes could be in any country but perhaps a 15% bonus for including a UK route, 30% if all in the UK. That should raise expectations and standards.
<leaving for lunchbreak>
