The Social Media Effect

Last weekend, I had a spirited debate about the validity of using Facebook (and by extension social media) as a respected and credible news source. While social media certainly has many attractive qualities, chiefly it’s speed and widespread reach, it has many downsides that override much of the good it can do. In fact, when look evaluated as a whole, social media has the ability to do serious damage.

The one conceit I have to make right up front is that social media, by virtue of the diverse user base, can bring nearly limitless points of view and sources of news to millions of people. Anyone that has viewed a Facebook or Twitter feed can appreciated seeing the numerous status updates and the various topics they touch on. Stories ranging from sports to politics can dominate a users screen, depending on the friends they have and the pages they subscribe too.

The problem with this setup is that it relies on the intelligence and discretion of users, something that has to be questioned every time there is a story about someone who decides to click a link that promises to make them rich or sell the great products for cheap only to have their computer infected with a massive virus. These situations are almost always a scam and too often dupe users into falling for them. The same unfortunate traits of users often apply to the propagation of news across social media. One only has to look at stories like this, about a miraculous cancer cure, that spread like wildfire on the internet and turned out to be completely wrong.

Certainly some blame should fall on the users of sites like Facebook that post stories such as this, only to find out later that what they shared was completely bogus. After all, users are the ones blindly posting these stores. But why should we blame average people for being, well, average? Average internet users aren’t trained researchers, nor are they wildly discriminant about what they post. People have been getting things wrong by word of mouth for as long as there has been word of mouth. The problem with social media becoming the 21st century word of mouth is the sheer amount of people it can reach in such a short time and that the information is posted to one of many recognized websites, such as Facebook, that, for good or bad, people put their trust in.

The other massive problem with social media news is the desire of users to get in on, or ahead of, the current hot trend. One of the downsides of the speed with which social media works is the unfortunate side effect of reducing the attention span of the average user to something akin to the average goldfish.

Three weeks ago everyone was talking about Jeremy Lin and his on court exploits in the NBA. Now he is a social media has been and the Kony 2012 movement has not only run it’s course, but we are already in Kony backlash mode. The problem with mentioning these two topics in the same sentence is that they are on such opposite sides of the spectrum of importance that it does a disservice to both by treating them the equally. Overstating the importance of Jeremy Lin in the world of basketball is a fair bit different than turning a Ugandan warlord, guilty of crimes against humanity, into an internet sensation.

Having such a weighty topic treated with cavalier abandon by so many is appalling. Many people feel that watching the Kony 2012 video or click a link to donate a few dollars is a good thing, but I see it as a tremendous act of disrespect and devaluing of ithe topic by marginalizing it and making Kony 2012 no more important than the latest sports or media sensation. Using social media for news requires very little investment in the subject matter. Everything is presented as over the top important, demanding immediate attention and designed for maximum emotional impact, rather than maximum dissemination of information which a more traditional curated and tiered news outlet would aim to achieve.

I hope, like many others, that the Kony 2012 phenomenon will prompt change, but not the change many others are hoping for. I hope that this will be a reflection point for our society about what we consider credible news and the validity of using social media as means to get information.

The Logical Fallacy of All Things Tim Tebow

To watch Tim Tebow and his fan base one almost has to have a degree in psychology to point out all the logical fallacies that are used to defend him and shape the discord on him. To some of his most loyal supporters, the simple fact that I'm relying on something as deep as psychology to make my case against him, is evidence of my bias towards him. I am just one of the many Tebow “haters” that attempt to tear him down, despite his numerous accomplishments. To address this, I'd like to say right up front that I am no fan of Tebow. I don't think he is a good quarterback. I don't believe him to be inspirational or humble. Having said that, he has had instances where he looks decent and he has won some games, most notably the Bronco's playoff game against the Steelers.

There, you see that? I gave him some credit. He does have certain skills and if he was a running back and not a quarterback, we probably wouldn't be having this discussion. Tebow has the reputation of being a winner. This stems from his success in high school and college as a top quarterback at Florida. I am not going to address those aspects of his career in depth, as my argument deals only with the belief that he isn't a good NFL quarterback and what props him up is a large system of smoke and mirrors. One cannot deny the fact that he has continued his trend of winning at the NFL level. He has won a number of games in his first year as a starting quarterback, but this is where the logical fallacies begin.

Fans of Tebow will point out that he won seven of eleven games as starter. This, however, falls into the category of an observational selection fallacy. In this type of fallacy a person will, “pointing out favorable circumstances while ignoring the unfavorable.” (http://nobeliefs.com/fallacies.htm) I can't deny that he won those seven games. What gets ignored in all of the talk about winning is that, in that stretch of games, Tebow and the Bronocs didn't beat a single playoff team. The playoff teams they did face in that time, the Patriots and the Lions beat them by a total of 86-35. All the teams that the Broncos did beat were either mediocre or bad. College has a stat called Strength of Schedule that helps rank teams based on quality of opponents. If we were to apply this metric to the Broncos, they wouldn't be ranked very high.

While it is fair to argue that a win is a win, I am judging the player and not the team. I have to examine the games in more detail in order to draw a clear picture. It isn't hating to want to examine everything in detail to see if it holds up to close scrutiny. I am also labeled a hater for not giving Tebow credit for his “miraculous” comebacks. Former Minnesota Viking great Cris Carter said on ESPN, “the guy that gets you out of a hole is usually the guy with the shovel.” He was alluding to Tebow's awful play until the very end of games where he made a few plays. To put some numbers onto how bad Tebow was during the eleven games he started paints an even bleaker picture. From week seven on Tebow was 79 for 195 for a 40% completion percentage. If this was baseball, Tebow would be the best hitter ever. Sadly, as a quarterback, those numbers are terrible. Between the Lions and Patriot games, Tebow had four turnovers. If you add in his turnovers from the Buffalo game, where he had three interceptions and two fumbles (one lost) and it gets even more grim. Yes, those games were against better defenses than most of the other teams he faced, but it also correlates to number of pass attempts. In the games where he had the most turnovers (Buffalo and Detroit), he was asked to throw the ball a lot. In fact, the pattern in his stats shows that if Tebow is asked to throw the ball more than approximately twenty times, the amount of mistakes he makes jumps measurably.

Now, you might say that asking any quarterback to throw more would result in more turnovers and you would be correct. However, his low attempt games have to be taken into consideration as well. In the win over Kansas City on November 13, Tebow was 2/8 for 69 yards and a TD. That is pretty terrible, especially when you take into account that he got 56 yards on one play to Eric Decker. Looking at the defensive stats tells you where the game was won. The Broncos recorded four sacks and twelve hits on the two Kansas City quarterbacks that played.

These numbers lead to the next logical fallacy that Tebow fans employ, which is that when they win it's Tebow playing well and when they lose it's the defense or the coaching staff fault in some way. Looking at the numbers, it seems that it has more to do with the defense in the wins and the lack of quarterback play in the losses. The defense averaged in the range of 55 – 65 tackles and 2-6 sacks with around 5 hits on the quarterbacks in all of those games. They gave up big numbers in the Detroit and New England games, but were held to fairly low point totals, with the exception being against New England where they put up 23 points. None of those 23 points came off a pass. They were all rushing touchdowns, of which Tebow had two (along with two fumbles). Didn't I say he was a good running back?

It can't always be Tebow doing the winning and everyone else doing the losing. Looking at the Broncos win against Pittsburgh, there is no denying that Tebow had some nice plays. He accounted for a ton of their offense. However, he only completed 10/21 passes en route to racking up 316 yards with 80 of that coming on the winning play. When you look further at the statistics, you see the Broncos receivers gave him a ton of help, having huge plays down field with long plays of 80 yards for Decker, 40 yards for Fells and 30 yards for Royal. Big plays and big numbers tell me what I saw while watching the game, the Pittsburgh defense looked horrible and couldn't tackle or cover. Pittsburgh implemented the wrong defensive scheme and it burned them. Watching the game, the Pittsburgh corners were routinely beaten down field and Tebow simply had to sling it.

Finally, we come to the Bronco's vs the Patriots playoff game. A wonderful 45-10 drubbing at the hands of one of the top quarterbacks of the era, Tom Brady. Brady broke records galore in this game and Tebow could only muster 9/26 for 136 yards and zero touchdowns. That is terrible, even if Tom Brady doesn't have a night like he did. While the victory over the Steelers was a nice feather for Tebow's cap, this is the same Patriots team that has been ranked at the bottom on defense all season and gave up 23 points to the Bronco's the last time they played. This speaks back to who the Bronco's actually beat during their “magic” run. That is to say no one. It also speaks to the fallacy that when the Bronoc's lose it isn't Tim Tebow's fault it must be the coaching or the defense. Watching the Patriots systematically take apart Denver in all aspects of the game should quiet that theory a bit.

I held off on posting this, until the end of Tebow's run had come, because stories like this need an ending to give them perspective. Having Tebow's run end on a bad note allows us to look back at all the other bad notes he has had with some real perspective on the football he played and not the person he is, because that is the last defense Tebow and his supporters have; he is a good person. I'm not concerned with Tebow as a person and have never tried to directly attack that aspect of Tebowmania, but I have to make an exception here.

Several great points were made in the article, It's Ok to Hate Tim Tebow about the general fallacy and fairy tale surrounding Tim Tebow. To summarize some of the most salient points of the article, Tim Tebow was a top ranked quarterback while in high school. He won two National Championships while as a member of the Florida Gators and was taken in the first round of the NFL draft. As the author, Andrew Sharp, points out all of those facts would qualify him as an accomplished athlete, not the underdog his supporters would like to believe he is. He has been on top for his entire football playing career and now that he plays at the top and has been found lacking we are to feel sorry for him? I don't buy it. I don't feel sorry and I don't feel bad levying just criticism against him for his failings. His resume dictates such criticism. All other men with those credentials have had that criticism put against them and rightfully so. The moral fiber of their character should never enter into the equation of judgment when assessing their football skill.

Lastly, I would like to address the fallacy of Tim Tebow as a role model. He certainly looks and sounds the part. In many ways he is better than a lot of pro athletes that make headlines for shooting up strip clubs, but describing him as, “the best person ever” as Rick Reilly pretty much did in his slobbery love note, I'm sorry, article, I Believe in Tim Tebow, is ridiculous. Really? Ever? Better than teachers and doctors? Better than people who devoted their entire lives to a laboratory to bring us cures for Polio and other diseases? Better than every Nobel Peace Prize winner ever? Better than Pat Tillman, a football player who gave up the game he loves, millions of dollars and safety to join the military to fight and die for the values and country he believed in? The answer to all of those questions, in my book, is a resounding no. Tebow may be many things, it just seems to me that a lot of the things we hold him up as don't hold up to scrutiny. A line from the movie, A Knight's Tale, sticks in my head when I think about Tim Tebow. “You have been weighed. You have been measured. And you have been found wanting.”

Hater, by Calvin Klein

Many ridiculous blog posts ago I wrote about how I define the word, and usage of the word, "hater." My definition of hater can be summed up by the Harry Truman quote, "I never did give them hell. I just told the truth and they thought it was hell." When someone gets called a hater, it's usually because they are saying something of truth that the other person knows has truth, but can't or won't admit to.

Some of this inability to admit to things comes from the hard line stances people take, seemingly now more than ever. Most debates have become , "either/or" propositions. Some debates necessitate such stances because the two sides are diametrically opposed to each other, while other debates devolve into hard line stances because people seem to have a need to search for ultimate truth. Once someone has found his or her ultimate truth, it follows that everything else must be opposing to what he or she has found to be truth. To oppose someone's ultimate truth is to be a hater.

The other contributing factor to the labeling of the hater is the new way of the world to accept things, almost blindly, as they are sold to us at an ever quickening pace. There seems to be so much superficiality now that true quality has all but been erased in the name expedience and marketability. To question anything is to be called a hater, when in years past that person may have only been a skeptic.

I am a skeptic. I like calling something what it is and having an honest talk about the pros and cons of something. For me, it always goes back to sports for examples because I feel that sports encapsulates what is happening in the greater society.

I have to turn now to sports to put Tim Tebow squarely in the example crosshairs. Tim Tebow is a polarizing figure. To criticize him is to be a hater. I can understand this, because he engenders strong emotions from his supporters. I am a confessed hater of the media creation known as Tim Tebow: Legendary Quarterback. This is entirely different from hating the person. I take issue with the media obsession with him and their unfettered desire to proclaim him legendary. Can't we call him what he is? He is likable, and by all accounts works very hard in practice and games; he just isn't good at quarterback. Can't I say that he isn't a good quarterback without it being an attack on the other stuff? Can't I want to take a wait and see approach on him to see if he can make a career out of how he plays? Why does it have to be I either accept all of it or none of it? I just want to see if his skills can match his marketability.

This is just one current example of the problem of the search for ultimate black and white truth. There is no ultimate truth, there is only truth with all the shades of gray that come with it. To be a hater is to understand that it's ok to take issue with something and talk about it. A hater understands that truth is found in the gray between the sides of ultimate black and white truth.

Sci-Fi

I constantly wonder why people dismiss sci-fi movies and books as geeky flights of fancy. In years past I could understand this, but in 2011 it boggles my mind. Here I sit, typing this blog on a personal computer in preparation for posting it on my Facebook page; until a few years ago this was a notion that would only have been from the realm of geeky sci-fi ideas.

Saying sci-fi isn't your thing while you are checking news, stocks and pictures on your smart phone while posting on Twitter is such a contradiction I don't even know how to address it.

Usually people that say they don't like sci-fi will also say that they like books and movies that are more "real." My question would be, what could be more real than stories that incorporate interesting new sciences and technologies that fundamentally alter the way the world works? The old saying goes that truth is stranger than fiction; the proof of this is all around us. If I was to show the people of the 1960's Facebook and tell them a story of a world of people obsessed with posting updates of their lives in pursuit of a level of narcissism that has no equal in human history, they would ask me if Asimov or Bradbury wrote that one.

So much of our current culture has been informed and shaped by sci-fi; just look to Star Trek and it's portable communicator for the inspiration of the cell phone. Give sci-fi a chance. After all, one day it may be Scotty on the other side of that cell phone making preparations to beam you up.

Perspective

Perspective is a funny thing. Being able to grasp the larger picture is often difficult, especially when emotion plays a role. This is the only reason I can imagine the Penn State students and alumni are so outraged over the Joe Paterno firing. It is obviously a political decision, given the current circumstances, but that doesn't mean it isn't the right one as well.

Yesterday I wrote a lengthy post about Joe Paterno needing to be removed immediately and that he should not be allowed to go out on his terms after the end of this season. Despite horribly screwing up every decision of importance related to this case, Penn State got that one right. This decision was more than just political necessity, it was moral duty.

We find ourselves talking about perspective in the wake of Joe Pa's firing. Many people are arguing that this is unfair and that we must keep perspective and remember that Jerry Sandusky is the criminal and not Paterno. Students have begun rioting and tipping over cars in State College because their beloved demi-god is being removed. I ask those people, and anyone that still supports Paterno to have some perspective of their own and consider this: did Joe Paterno fulfill his bare minimum legal obligation and report what he was told to his superior? Yes. Did he fulfill his role as a man, as a father, as a role model? In no way shape or form can you answer yes to that. He failed completely.

Many of his supporters will point to all the work he has done. They will tell you he and his family have donated more than $4 million dollars to the school and that his program is clean and his players graduate. All of that is fine. Those things are what he has done with people watching. Those things were done to enhance his own legacy. I don't judge him on those things. I judge people on what they do when they don't believe anyone is watching. No one knew of the allegations when they were first reported, and clearly the goal was to keep it quiet. It ended there because it was not brought to public light.

He must be judged for that terrible indiscretion as much as anything else he has done in his career. He is Joe Paterno. He had the clout and power to go over people if needed and do the right thing to protect the children that were being abused by Sandusky. He chose to do nothing. Make no mistake, this wasn't about the kids or the school, this was about Joe Paterno covering his own ass. He did his legal duty and was off the hook.

The American President is one of my favorite and most often quoted movies. One of my favorite lines comes at the end when Michael Douglas gives his big moving speech. He starts the speech by saying,

"That's all right, you can keep your seats. For the last couple of months, Senator Rumson has suggested that being president of this country was, to a certain extent, about character and although I have not been willing to engage in his attacks on me, I've been here three years and three days, and I can tell you without hesitation: Being President of this country is entirely about character."

Being a leader of any kind, let alone an iconic football coach at a major university, has to be about character as Douglas suggests. A failing of character like this has to count heavily against someone. It must overshadow many of the other things because this type of failure goes to the very core of who Paterno is and what he was supposed to stand for.

Finally, the students and alumni that continue to treat themselves and the larger Penn State community as victims need to have some perspective. The Penn State family lost a long time football coach who failed to protect young boys when he had the chance. He may not have raped the children, but he stood by and did nothing while it was going on under his roof.

The victims lost the chance to have a happy life. The damage done to them is many times more serious than having a football coach fired. Students and alumni should feel terrible not for his leaving, but for why it was that he left.

When I see people writing comments like,

"Aside from the fact that the blame doesn't belong on Paterno here in the first place, Joe Paterno is a legend, whereas a few boys are just that, a few boys. Paterno deserves more respect." (actually taken from the ESPN comments section), it's clear people are missing the point.

People writing things online like," Joe Pa shouldn't go, Penn State Forever!" clearly don't have any perspective on what they are saying.

You can't want to keep Joe Paterno and continue to take pride in your institution. Paterno represents everything that is wrong with big program football. He put himself above the school and above the safety of children He failed himself and everything he claimed to have stood for. If he was allowed to stay, it would be just another black eye to the tradition that everyone involved wants so badly to protect. Try to keep that in perspective the next time you yell, "We are...Penn State."

WE ARE...PENN STATE!....And That's the Problem

I am angry over the Penn State scandal for a number of reasons. We can start with the obvious reasons like Jerry Sandusky molesting kids in Penn State showers. Or the fact that Sandusky was on campus as recently as last week after having free run of the campus for years after the initial allegations against him were made.

Some of my anger goes toward the school administrators that covered this up and the board of directors that seems to be concerned now with covering their own asses. They have been formally charged and will, most likely, pay for their role in the cover up. The one person caught in limbo is, the head coach, Joe Paterno.

Though it seems clear that, when Paterno became aware of the situation he passed it along to his superiors thus fulfilling his legal obligation, he stopped there. He never followed up and more importantly let Sandusky continue on in the school for years. For Paterno to say now that if the allegations are true, "we were all fooled" is a total joke. He obviously knew about something. It shouldn't come as a surprise to him, since he was involved in the legal chain when the allegations were first brought to him.

Now Paterno is going to retire and save the school the effort of asking him to resign, right after he coaches the last game of the season because he is, "devastated." Is this guy for real? Talk about not getting it. The school shouldn't let him get away with walking out on his terms, given the situation. They should remove him immediately pending a full scale investigation.

Finally, my extreme anger is directed at the Penn State family and a large number of the students. I'd like to take a moment to acknowledge that I have a number of friends who went to Penn State. They should not count themselves as part of this tirade as I've not seen or heard them say anything along the lines of the following. With that out of the way, let's take a moment to consider what the student body and alumni have done since this scandal unfolded. They have taken to organizing outside Paterno's house in show of solidarity and support as well as echoing the Penn State rallying cry, "WE ARE...PENN STATE!" I can understand the love for Paterno, he is nearly a god in Happy Valley, but the support is misplaced. He may not have molested anyone, but he certainly has to be counted as an accomplice to the cover up for not taking more steps to ensure something was done about Sandusky. He should not be supported and should not be allowed to get off so easily.

The Penn State alumni that are portraying the PSU community as the victims are crazy for this and their continued admiration for the disgraced leader is absurd. Paterno must shoulder blame and using the rallying cry in this context should be re thought. Paterno put the school, and to an extent himself, above the welfare of children. The collective attitude of "We are!..." is the mindset that school officials subscribed to when they swept this under the carpet in the first place. I don't even know what it means that PSU folks are using this as some kind of rallying cry. Basically these actions amount to them saying, "we just found out one of our uncles was a child molester and our dad and other uncles have kept it hush hush all these years, but we are still a determined happy family and have some sympathy for us that we just found out there is a wolf in the fold." Have some humility and respect for the victims. This isn't about you and the school right now. If anything I would be ashamed to count myself as a part of this family right now. Blindly flocking to support the school is the worst possible action that can be taken right now.

To me, this is an indirect endorsement of the what has transpired. If I was part of the student body or alumni, I would be calling for people's heads and for those responsible to be tossed out the door at the first opportunity. The rallying cry starts with, "we are..." Perhaps it is time for PSU to take a hard look and find out what they are.

That's All Folks! (Porky Pig Voice)

It's always easier to have an argument when you have the truth on your side. For the last few years and, more intensely, the last few weeks there has been a constant argument on whether Tim Tebow is any good at, well, anything. This week pretty much sealed the deal. I'm right. When you get hosed by Detroit 45-10 and look bad doing it, that tells us something.

This week there would be no Miracle in Miami, no late game "heroics", just total dominance by the Lions. In this ass chewing, I'd like to say the Lions held Tim Tebow to 18/39 and two turnovers, but that would imply Tebow's own suckage didn't factor into it. Make no mistake, he is bad and lacks basic skills that are needed to play quarterback. Routine overthrowing of receivers and bad decisions can't all be placed on solid Detroit defense. A lot of the blame has to be place on Tebow for his total inability to play the position. Maybe he didn't pray hard enough before the game this week. Maybe he didn't stretch enough without all that time on the sideline to undermine Kyle Orton.

I'm sorry that was petty. Good. I hate this guy. He is totally undeserving of a shot at being a starting quarterback in the NFL. I would be this mad at any other person getting a job they shouldn't get. You need only look to my outrage about Mike Brown being hired to coach the Lakers or Mike Shanahan being hired to coach any team without John Elway at quarterback.

My hate for Tebow goes slightly further because I hate all his religious bullshit too. If you want to be religious fine. Do it on your own time and keep it out of the workplace. You don't see cops getting down on one knee every time they write a parking ticket, do you? That might be funny, and I would pay to see Nick Maletto do it, but it shouldn't happen. If there is a god, he doesn't pick sides or favorites in football.

This is perhaps the part that drives me nuts about this clown even more than his offensive play (you love that pun). When he wins it's all prayers and getting down on one knee. What about when he loses? Does he love his god a little less? Tebow supporters, who often conflate his beliefs and his play will point to his religion and the fact that he is one of the few good people in the NFL. What? Are you overlooking the size of the ego that is needed to believe that the all powerful being you believe in is backing you over other people in a football game? Please. And don't tell me that Tebow doesn't play this to his advantage.

You only need look to his comments after the game. "I'm just going to get up early and go to work and try to get better tomorrow and consistently improve and be the best person-slash-quarterback for this organization," Tebow said. What does that mean? I don't care about you as a person and your play at quarterback has nothing to do with it. Cut the shit. Being a good person doesn't mean anything if you can't throw the ball.

I despise that is his defense. He plays the sympathy card like no other while at the same time being one of the most subtly ego-maniacal, "I think I'm better than everyone" people in the league. One can only hope that he is brushed into the footnotes of bad quarterback history as soon as possible while hopefully continuing to look terrible while doing it.