Jump to content
IGNORED

Media Has Changed, but Golf Isn't as Bad as Other Sports!


Break80
Note: This thread is 3636 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Recommended Posts

Case in point ... http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/10682317/josh-gordon-pretty-sure-cleveland-browns-draft-quarterback

How in the hell is this a story on the front page of espn.com???

That's absurd.  Not only is it ridiculous because it's just one guys opinion on something that hasn't even happened yet ... but it's not even a strong one.  He's "pretty sure" they might draft a QB.  Thanks for the info, espn.

Also noticed that it was a report of an interview on Sportscenter.  The next step would be Anchor 1 interviewing JOsh Gordon, and then 30 seconds later, Anchor 2 saying "This just in, Breaking News, Josh Gordon has an opinion on the draft."

Wait, now that I think about it ... CNN already kind of does that.  Don't they put "Breaking News" headlines along the bottom of the screen a lot with headlines that match what the guy being interviewed just said...

"This just in:  Josh Gordon wants a QB"

"This Just in:  Josh Gordon had a cheesesteak for lunch"

"This just in:  Josh Gordon wears a size 12 shoe."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

That's absurd.  Not only is it ridiculous because it's just one guys opinion on something that hasn't even happened yet ... but it's not even a strong one.  He's "pretty sure" they might draft a QB.  Thanks for the info, espn.

Also noticed that it was a report of an interview on Sportscenter.  The next step would be Anchor 1 interviewing JOsh Gordon, and then 30 seconds later, Anchor 2 saying "This just in, Breaking News, Josh Gordon has an opinion on the draft."

Wait, now that I think about it ... CNN already kind of does that.  Don't they put "Breaking News" headlines along the bottom of the screen a lot with headlines that match what the guy being interviewed just said...

"This just in:  Josh Gordon wants a QB"

"This Just in:  Josh Gordon had a cheesesteak for lunch"

"This just in:  Josh Gordon wears a size 12 shoe."

Hey, let's leave my team alone! Any media coverage of the Browns is good coverage, literally.

On a side note, you're right that this isn't news. But, it's refreshing to see something other than Johnny Football on ESPN! Oh, wait.. nevermind, he's doing his pro day in a HELMET AND PADS! Breaking news and is now being broadcast live, live tweeted, live blogged and analyzed by several different networks. Cleveland will be more of a circus if we draft him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


"This Just in:  Josh Gordon had a cheesesteak for lunch"

"Sources say Josh Gordon may be Philly-bound."

In my bag:

Driver: Titleist TSi3 | 15º 3-Wood: Ping G410 | 17º 2-Hybrid: Ping G410 | 19º 3-Iron: TaylorMade GAPR Lo |4-PW Irons: Nike VR Pro Combo | 54º SW, 60º LW: Titleist Vokey SM8 | Putter: Odyssey Toulon Las Vegas H7

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

"Sources say Josh Gordon may be Philly-bound."

"Adam Schefter now reporting that HIS sources reported this craving first, which led to his sources citing sources that he is in fact traveling to Philly. Stay tuned"

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Another thing that really gets under my skin in this internet-its-all-about-the-clicks age is when writers or editors (not sure who's to blame for this one) assign titles to stories that entice you to click on them, and then you read the story and the title turned out to be a blatant lie.

(I can't find a good example right now, but I have definitely seen it more than just a few times)  It would be something like your Tiger Woods story - with that title that mentioned him mulling retiring, but all the story is about is that he has a bad back, and the writer ponders whether or not he should retire, or some random golfer who hasn't played in 20 years said he should retire, or something else entirely different than the title.

Here's a current example of one like this:  https://shine.yahoo.com/love-sex/self-magazine-cancer-survivor-monika-allen-181452496.html

When you hover on the thumbnail on the yahoo frontpage, the headline says: "Magazine mocks cancer Survivors lame outfit"

Once you click on it, the headline says "Self magazine sorry for mocking cancer survivors marathon tutu"

This is like if they wrote a story about Brandel's "cavalier" comments about Tiger and put the headline on the front page as "Tiger's a cheater."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

I'd say 'NewtoGolf' and 'Spyder' probably have this about right

Conventional news reporting has had to retreat in line with 'real time' developments of the instant access platforms that ensures that they're otherwise absolete within hours of going to press. The print media are the biggest victims in that they can no longer report the news as a consequence. What they do instead is try and manage our emotional response to a topical issue, by taking a story that is already out of date and then inviting the readr to judge it through a moral prism that they endeavour to frame themselves. Typical modus operendi is two steps

Step 1 -  take an unrepresentative minor story and attempt to inflame our outrage through their reporting of it, encouraging us to judge the subject

Step 2 - Having provoked our revulsion, then try and find someone to blame who the reader is invited to hold responsible (usually has a political angle to it)

Spyder is also correct though in saying that if the people didn't fall for this lame reporting and lap it up, (and there's a whole genre of televsion shows that invite audiences to judge things ranging from deviant behavious of others, to sponge cakes) then we wouldn't have our media dominated thus. Sure, the people who consume this garbage are equally culpable

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites


And don't get me started on "sources". Any reporter can literally say anything they want and attribute it to a source, and are under no obligation to ever name that source (assuming the reporting isn't libelous/slanderous).

"an unnamed White House official," "an anonymous source inside the Senator's office," "a team official that asked not to be named,"  or, they just say **** it all to heck and go with "a credible source."

Says who???

I'm inclined to agree with you that non-attribution can lead to reckless reporting if the journalist lacks ethics.  But I'll counter that protection of sources is necessary in most cases when getting legitimate, important information from government and is privileged under the law in most states.  I'll further counter that some responsible, reputable journalists (Woodward comes to mind) are able to gain incredible access precisely because they offer absolute protection to their sources.

Doesn't it really come down to ethics?  I think journalists still want to investigate and fight for real news.  Nobody aspires to be completely full of shit.  The profit driven industry, and the manner in which news outlets have been consolidated, have resulted in corporate climates that directly compete with individual ethics.  The wrong things are being rewarded.

I would analogize it to the law firm fee scandals that were rampant in the 80s and 90s.  The ever-expanding law firm had a business model that required everyone to stack billable hours.  Whether you made partner was literally (and still is unfortunately) dependent on your ability to bill 2,000+ hours per year.  The result was institutionalized overbilling--with multiple instances of people routinely billing more than 24 hours in a single day.  No law student dreams of robbing people some day, but the incentive structure fed the culture.

  • Upvote 1

Kevin

Titleist 910 D3 9.5* with ahina 72 X flex
Titleist 910F 13.5* with ahina 72 X flex
Adams Idea A12 Pro hybrid 18*; 23* with RIP S flex
Titleist 712 AP2 4-9 iron with KBS C-Taper, S+ flex
Titleist Vokey SM wedges 48*, 52*, 58*
Odyssey White Hot 2-ball mallet, center shaft, 34"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • 3 weeks later...

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/mlb-big-league-stew/don-t-just-stand-there--mike-moustakas-s-mental-error-at-plate-ends-game-162755304.html

There is a great example of the annoying, click-generating nonsense that you get online nowadays.  The implication of the headline on the front page - Team loses when player forgets unwritten rule - is that he cost his team the game.

Not until after you click do you realize that it's a complete non-story.  At the MLB level, the catcher makes that catch 99.5%** of the time when they aren't tripped by the batter so if the guy gets out of the way, he's still going to be out, and the games still going to be over.  And even for the 1 out of every 200** that he misses, its still a foul ball, and nothing positive or negaitve happens.

**I pulled those stats out of my butt.  Point is, they always make that play. :-P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • iacas changed the title to Media Has Changed, but Golf Isn't as Bad as Other Sports!
Note: This thread is 3636 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • TST Partners

    TourStriker PlaneMate
    Golfer's Journal
    ShotScope
    The Stack System
    FlightScope Mevo
    Direct: Mevo, Mevo+, and Pro Package.

    Coupon Codes (save 10-15%): "IACAS" for Mevo/Stack, "IACASPLUS" for Mevo+/Pro Package, and "THESANDTRAP" for ShotScope.
  • Popular Now

  • Posts

    • Makes sense.  Like I said, I wouldn't have been upset at their original offer either, and based on the fine print it seems like they've held up their end of the deal.  
    • If you've only had to adjust retroactively one time in 8 years and have around 5 people each year without handicaps, that's like 40-50 people total so it sounds like you're doing a pretty good job. I think your questions give enough to go off of. This might be a good way to get new people to actually post a few scores during the 6 weeks leading into the first event. Something like "New members will be eligible for tournament money once they have at least 3 posted rounds in GHIN" or something like that. If they can get 3 rounds in prior to their first event, then they're eligible. If not, they'll soon become eligible after an event or two assuming they play a little bit outside of events.
    • This is a loooooong winded narrative so if you don't like long stories, move on. 😉 Our senior club typically gets about 25 new members each year. We lose about 25 members each year for various reasons (moved to FL/AZ, disabled, dead, too expensive). Of the new members, usually 20 have an active GHIN handicap. About 5 each year do not have a GHIN handicap. When they join our club, we give each member a state association membership that includes GHIN handicapping services. We play a series of handicapped tournaments over the summer. When we sign up a new member who does not have a GHIN handicap, we attempt to give them an estimated index until they have sufficient scores posted to have an actual GHIN index.  Our first event typically is around May 15 so, in theory, a new member has about 6 weeks to post a few scores. Posting season in the Mitten starts April 1. Inevitably, several of the unhandicapped individuals seem  to either not play until the first tournament or can't figure out how to enter scores (hey, they are seniors). That situation then leads to my contacting the new member and asking a series of questions: a. Did you ever have a GHIN handicap? If yes, which State and do you recall what it was? b. Do you have an alternate handicap through a non-GHIN handicap service or a league? c. What do you think your average score was last year (for 9 or 18) d. What was your best score last year? Where did you play and which tee was used? e. What do you consider a very good score for yourself? Based on their responses I attempt to give them an index that makes them competitive in the first couple events BUT does not allow them to win their flight in the first couple events. We don't want the new members to finish last and at the same time, we don't want someone with a "20" playing handicap to win the third flight with a net 57. In the event some new member did shoot a net 57, we also advise everyone that we can and will adjust handicaps retroactively when it is clear to us that a member's handicap does not accurately reflect their potential. We don't like to adjust things retroactively and in the 8 years I have chaired the Handicap Committee, we have only done it once. So here are the questions to the mob: Any ideas how to do this better? Any questions one might ask an unhandicapped individual to better estimate their index/handicap? Would it be reasonable to have a new player play once (or more?) without being eligible to place in the money?
    • Wordle 1,013 4/6 ⬜🟨⬜🟨🟨 ⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜ 🟩🟩🟩🟩⬜ 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
    • Awesome! I got that a while back with my start word! Wordle 1,013 4/6 ⬜⬜🟨⬜🟨 ⬜🟨⬜🟩⬜ ⬜⬜🟩🟩🟨 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Welcome to TST! Signing up is free, and you'll see fewer ads and can talk with fellow golf enthusiasts! By using TST, you agree to our Terms of Use, our Privacy Policy, and our Guidelines.

The popup will be closed in 10 seconds...