A not-very-important, yet instructive, series of events on Friday offers a cautionary tale about the allure of big data and the fashionable mistrust of local knowledge.
A small woodland creature takes on the man responsible for the technique-revolution in competitive eating. Whatever, I found it inspiring. [HT: RCM]
[I apologize in advance to regular Scatterplot readers and authors, as this post, like my last one, has an awful lot of “inside baseball.” I plan to return to writing on matters of academia and social science soon.]
A few years ago I was part of a group of UNC faculty who began meeting in the aftermath of the revelations about fake classes. Horrified at the misconduct perpetrated by a colleague and upset about the apparent disregard for academic quality that disproportionately helped student-athletes stay eligible to play, our group—which eventually became the Athletics Reform Group (ARG)—met and discussed how to voice our disapproval and advocate for educational opportunities and academic integrity with respect to athletes. I was proud to be one of the signatories of a statement we released at the first game of UNC’s new football coach, Larry Fedora, and of a set of principles we put out later. We had many discussions about the problems of college athletics and the compromises that are required. These included experts in the field of college sports as well as many of us who are simply concerned, informed faculty. We met with outside figures like Taylor Branch and Joe Nocera as well as current and former Carolina athletes. The group included many faculty leaders at Carolina, many of whom have ended up on different sides of the debates that have followed since.
I was quoted in last Sunday’s New York Times in an article about UNC’s ongoing athletics scandal. This article was specifically about the relationship between UNC and Dan Kane, the reporter from the Raleigh News & Observer assigned to cover the scandal. Predictably, the article amounted to one reporter fawning over another for just how important and groundbreaking the latter’s work has been, with my quote pretty much the only countervailing position offered. Later in the post I’ll paste in the full extent of what I told Sarah Lyall (the reporter on the story), and later this week or next I’m planning a much longer post about the state of the scandal. But here I want to think a little about my experiences with the media’s miserable coverage of this set of stories in relief with what we know, and I appreciate, about the current sociology of the media.
Princeton U Press editor Eric Schwartz has a great idea for this year’s ASA baseball trip. Why not go to a minor league game? Cheaper tickets, better seats, and a chance to see some great baseball. So this year, we have cooked up the following plan:
Staten Island Yankees: Friday, August 9 at 7pm
- tickets that cost no more than $25 plus fees
- two free rides on the Staten Island Ferry, which has the best view of the Statue of Liberty (especially now that you can no longer climb into her head)
- throwback jerseys given away to the first 2,500 fans
- amazing views of the Manhattan skyline
- friendly sociologists hanging out together
If we get a group of 10 together, we can get even cheaper tickets (I know, right?). Please email me at email@example.com if you are interested in joining us. Everyone is welcome; don’t be shy.
I have heard recently two concerns about training for job markets that might be called high-risk, high-reward jobs. The implication is that such training programs are unfair because they aim too high for students’ likely job prospects.
You know what sounds fun? A Scatterplot competition! I know it’s not exactly a sequel to the epic Mario Kart races of 2009, but it might still be fun. This time it is a guessing game. How many members will the NRA have in June of 2013? Continue reading “scatterplot competition: guess the nra’s membership”