sports journalism is broken
July 26, 2008
As bad enough as the clip is, this is not even the worst thing I have seen, heard or read in relation to sports. Today, thanks mainly to ESPN, sports writers have degraded themselves into clamoring for attention by making obscene points with no statistical grounding. Skip Bayless and Colin Cowherd are by far the worst offenders to this regard. It actually pains me to listen to either of them talk, condescending and smarmy, making comments that are sometimes border-line racist and almost assuredly asinine. When you read about how writer’s such as Bill Simmons grew up reading Peter Gammons and how he was an inspiration for his career, it makes you wonder if some day a child is going to grow and think “you mean if I am loud, obnoxious, rude, and nonsensical, people will pay money just so they will disagree with me and be angry? Sign me up!”
It obviously gets ratings to have such a dumb routine or else they would be put out to pasture. I didn’t watch any of the commentary regarding the recent WNBA fight but I can bet they expressed outrage, called it a barbaric event, said that it was exactly what was wrong with sports and then maybe it turned into a conversation about violent movies and video games corrupting our youth and that sports should remain pure and free of strife. One of the above sports personalities probably made a comment about Mahorn “beating” Lisa Leslie and demand he be fired. I believe I speak for most fans of basketball when I say that
- The WNBA sucks
- The fight wasn’t a big deal
- That hardly qualified as a fight
- Does the injured player get sent off to the glue factory or do they try to fix her like Barbaro?
The news has become irrelevant and those who cover it are trying to make themselves a part of the story. It is just like how Perez Hilton starts feuds with celebrities so that other sites report about him. He isn’t famous, he isn’t a celebrity, and yet because he is loud and obnoxious he has some how worked his way into main stream culture as someone to be admired. If I had an actual readership that mattered, it could be argued that by writing about Skip Bayless that I am merely contributing to get him the infamy and notoriety that he so desperately craves. I don’t really have a counter-argument to that, but if I can some how let one person avoid listening to him talk about Terrell Owens then this post was worthwhile.
What are some of the sites I go to if I want to get actual sports news? Deadspin, Big Lead, AOL Fanhouse, and PFT. They are able to intermix humor to go along side with actual sports journalism. I know it is a hard concept to grasp, especially for those who continue to try and make money off the internet without actually knowing how to use it. In the future we’re going to look back and figure out why the main stream media was never able to understand the rise in popularity of new media. One of the answers is going to be that while the main stream media was trying to get revenue by treating its audience like fools, the other was producing valuable content. Content is the king maker, with it you’re golden and without it you’re without a paddle. I long for the days when ESPN delivered actual sports content and not trying to tell me “Who’s now“.
For anyone who doesn’t believe that sports journalism is really that bad, I urge you to read Fire Joe Morgan. That site is where I found the video that inspired this post. If you really want an exercise in self-flagellation then read the articles about Woody Paige. I would say more but I don’t want to ruin any of the surprises, but I will leave with a quote by Paige himself, to give you an idea of what you’re in for:
Greek mathematician Archimedes solved the puzzle of the sphere inside the cylinder, but never studied the circle within the diamond. The Rockies must figure out that perplexing riddle on their own after the all-star intermission.
i hate podcasts
July 25, 2008
I can understand the appeal of podcasts. I can understand that people like to download them and listen to them on their iPods while going to work/exercising. I can understand that it presents a new venue for authors and artists alike to express their sentiments. What I cannot understand is why no one ever provides a transcript of their commentaries so that people have the option of reading the dialog.
I can’t listen to podcasts for the same reason I can’t listen to books on tape and why I don’t listen to radio talk shows: I zone out too easily. When I listen to a podcast I just can’t sit at my computer without starting to read other websites. Inevitably the podcast will become ambient noise to my ears and I will miss key points. This is a personal problem, yes, but on an unselfish level, this practice discriminates against people that are hard of hearing (I am not trying to mask my personal grievances behind white knighting for the hearing impaired but I figured that my laziness and inability to pay attention isn’t worth of a post). It seems to me that these websites, and many others that I don’t visit, are missing out on a large number of potential readers (and revenue) because they don’t provide transcripts.
Two of the websites that I visit almost daily are Bad Astronomy and Bill Simmons. Phil Plait often answers questions from his readers as videos hosted on YouTube. While sometimes this is necessary because he models examples with objects and props, but not always. Bill Simmons is on hiatus while he writes his second book but usually has at least 1-2 podcasts up a week. On the blog for the movie I Hope They Serve Beer in Hell, they post interviews with various cast and crew members as YouTube videos. I’ve watched a few of them, and they were interesting, but I would still rather read it.
All three of these sites do not provide transcripts. It is hard to justify my right to complain about a free service because the people behind these podcasts are doing us, their readers, a favor by providing additional entertainment for no cost. My point is that they could increase their audience just by spending 10-20 minutes to write down what they just said. Providing multiple outlets for media can only expand the potential market of consumers for the content.
I know that in a chat on Bill Simmons’ site a reader once asked why he didn’t provide transcripts and his answer was the ESPN hasn’t/will not hire someone to do that. Why would you purposely choose to make a product that is ignored by a percentage of your audience? Personally, I would never have a podcast because my voice lies somewhere on the scale of voice quality between Gilbert Godfrey and the singer of Clap Your Hands and Say Yeah! That being said, if I did ever consider doing one, I would provide a transcript. Maybe someone can enlighten me but I really cannot see any value in refusing to do this. I am still going to continue to read all of these websites, and one day I may see the light and become a podcast addict, but in the meanwhile I’m content to listen to music while I do my daily perusal of the internet.
more on josh childress
July 24, 2008
True Hoop: Essentially I agree with everything Henry Abbot says. However, I think he is downplaying the potential ramifications of this deal. He is operating under the assumption that the leaders of the NBA office will realize the errors of their ways and fix the league to compete on a global scale. I can understand his optimism but I just don’t share it. This is the same league that mandated an age limit so it could protect the team owners from drafting players on just their potential. This is the same league that enacted the Allan Houston rule only for the Knicks to not use it on Allan Houston (although that is more Isiah’s fault). This is the same league that allowed a team to move from one of the largest markets in the United States, and one of our most important cities with regards to the Asian market, to Oklahoma City, which hasn’t been relevant on a global scale since, well, ever.
Competition can inspire change and improve the market for all parties involved. The problem is that when you’re the dominant force in the market you lose the will to innovate. Microsoft is a great example of this: once they conquered the browser market by killing Netscape, they slowly allowed their browser to become worse and worse. Now that Firefox is taking their market shares they have tried to adjust their attitude but they are essentially just copying ideas from Firefox. The DNA of Microsoft is corrupt. They become complacent and it poisoned their creativity. That doesn’t imply a death sentence but as Dr. Horrible said, “the fish rots from the head”. The problems with Microsoft begin at the top and that remains true as well for the NBA front office.
How the NBA chooses to respond to this will have long term ramifications across many different sports league. Could the MLS one day begin to poach European talent? Will baseball players in Latin America eventually stop coming over to play in their own leagues? Right now both of those ideas seem highly improbably to the point of impossibility ,but then again, so was the idea of a player of Childress’ caliber departing the NBA at the peak of his career.
But what the NBA does not have, anymore, is a free pass to supremacy. And if you’re a fan of good basketball, that’s a good thing.
This quote sums up his thoughts (and my more pessimistic ones) in a clear and concise way. While he expects the league to learn from its mistake and I expect them to be arrogant and ignore the potential issues that lay ahead, it is agreeable that a change is coming.
Wages of Wins: He takes a look at the piece by True Hoop as well, but adds additional commentary with regards to the collective bargaining agreement. His points on why the NBA forced themselves into the situation are excellent. The previous CBA was negotiated as if the NBA was an insular business with no competition. They handicapped themselves in certain ways to protect themselves from overspending. Because of these protections, the players became limited into getting their true free market value. Childress, for example, was a restricted free agent. That meant that any Hawks maintained the right to match any contract offer presented to him by another team. Because the Hawks were adamant about not doing a sign-and-trade, Childress’ options were limited. Only one team had the cap space to offer him anything greater than the mid-level exception but no one wants to play for Memphis so its a moot point. That meant that he could resign for below his market value with the Hawks or sign a one-year qualifying offer that would have allowed him to be an unrestricted free agent next summer. Like any trail blazer, he ignored convention and signed with a European team instead, negating all the good that the CBA had done to allow teams to keep their own players. The article does a much better job than me in explaining the potential impact that this will have on future negotiations for the CBA.
Chris Sheridan: Two very interesting points in this article. The first is the belief that there are not enough teams that can afford to spend top dollar to lure over NBA free agents. The problem is that many players are restricted to taking the mid-level exception which averages about five million a year or so. Those same players can go to Europe, get paid in a more valuable currency, avoid taxes and receive free housing. It seems that teams in Europe who want to compete don’t have to have pockets as deep as the Knicks or Lakers because global economics have already given them an advantage.
More importantly, and the reason for my complete lack of optimism for the NBA front office, is the following quote:
NBA commissioner David Stern has consistently said he is comfortable with the notion that there are some players who can make more money in Europe and would prefer to play there, saying the majority of the world’s best basketball players still seek the allure of playing in the world’s most prestigious league.
But what was once a trickle of players choosing Europe over America has started to become a flow, and in the years ahead it’ll become a question of whether the NBA will decide to loosen some of its salary-cap rules that have hindered player movement, especially among restricted free agents.
“The level of concern is low,” NBA president of basketball operations Joel Litvin told ESPN.com in a phone interview. “This is what happens when you have a global sport and a global marketplace for elite players, and we’re confident that the NBA remains the gold standard for professional basketball. Businesswise, it’s good for us, because it means more basketball fans will be watching basketball, and those fans will find the NBA because that’s where the best of the world plays.”
A low level of concern? The prestige will negate their open-market advantages of Europe? I am confident that if this is the attitude towards Childress’ deal that prevails in the minds of the leaders of the league, that this will be the beginning of the end. Not in the sense that the league will collapse, far from it, but that the talent will start to equalize. Like I said in my previous post, this will begin to mirror the system that governs European soccer. The NBA will have competition with other leagues that have just as much talent. The NBA must drop their idea of isolationism and realize that they no longer will be able to use prestige to acquire talent. The idea that players would turn down millions of dollars so that their jersey would say New York Knicks instead of Real Madrid is absurd. This is the wrong attitude and this is why I cannot help but to look towards David Stern and his cronies with dismay.
Globeandmail.com: This article does a good job of explaining why playing in Europe might soon become more appealing for players. Economics reasons, of course, remain the heart of the issue. Maurizio Gherardini believes that it is too early to judge if this is going to be a trend which is a valid assumption. I don’t know if trend is the word I would choose though, as I think that more agents are going to start using European teams as leverage. In most cases, an agent’s job is to get their client as much money as possible. If that becomes European leagues and not the NBA, then it is off to Europe.
best of wikipedia
July 24, 2008
Wikipedia is my favorite website: it lacks advertisements, it supports open source, it has a vast community of active users and it contains information on nearly every subject available. Often times when I find myself bored and without a book to read I will just search a random topic and from there follow a chain of links that offer as much education as a classroom. Last fall, I was taking a class on natural sciences (biology, geology and astronomy) and I was able to self-educate just by reading Wikipedia. I didn’t bother to buy the textbook since I had all the information for free. I earned an A in the class but more importantly, I discovered ta fascination for astronomy. Since then I have kept up with the subject through books and popular blogs. Without Wikipedia I doubt I would have become as interested in the field as I am now. While it is certainly too late for me to become an astrophysicist, Wikipedia has provided the foundation for me to become as knowledgeable as possible without actually being in the field.
With that in mind, I would like to share a few of the more interesting articles on a variety of subjects.
Terraforming: This article details the hypothetical process of creating a new planet by altering the ecosystem, atmosphere, and ecology in an effort to make it more habitable for humans. While it remains merely a hypothetical scenario, anyone with a slight interest in the Universe knows that human kind cannot survive solely on Earth due to a variety of factors. This is not something that will occur in my lifetime but the fact that people are already debating the ethics and merits of the possibility of doing such a thing is quite fascinating. If you do find this interesting I also would highly recommend that you read about Globus Cassus.
Lake Wobegon effect: Similar to the Dunning-Kruger effect, it details the idea that people, when asked to measure their abilities, overestimate them in comparison to others. These people certainly would not do very well with Law 1 of Robert Greene’s 48 Laws of Power.
If-by-whiskey: I’ve read most of the articles pertaining to fallacies and this one happens to be my favorite. Although that could be because whiskey is my favorite drink. Regardless, the speech made by Noah S. “Soggy” Sweat, Jr is one of my favorite examples of public speaking. I still would encourage you to read the article if only to read further about additional fallacies, but I am going to post the excerpt of the speech listed in the article:
“My friends, I had not intended to discuss this controversial subject at this particular time. However, I want you to know that I do not shun controversy. On the contrary, I will take a stand on any issue at any time, regardless of how fraught with controversy it might be. You have asked me how I feel about whiskey. All right, here is how I feel about whiskey:
“If when you say whiskey you mean the devil’s brew, the poison scourge, the bloody monster, that defiles innocence, dethrones reason, destroys the home, creates misery and poverty, yea, literally takes the bread from the mouths of little children; if you mean the evil drink that topples the Christian man and woman from the pinnacle of righteous, gracious living into the bottomless pit of degradation, and despair, and shame and helplessness, and hopelessness, then certainly I am against it.
“But, if when you say whiskey you mean the oil of conversation, the philosophic wine, the ale that is consumed when good fellows get together, that puts a song in their hearts and laughter on their lips, and the warm glow of contentment in their eyes; if you mean Christmas cheer; if you mean the stimulating drink that puts the spring in the old gentleman’s step on a frosty, crispy morning; if you mean the drink which enables a man to magnify his joy, and his happiness, and to forget, if only for a little while, life’s great tragedies, and heartaches, and sorrows; if you mean that drink, the sale of which pours into our treasuries untold millions of dollars, which are used to provide tender care for our little crippled children, our blind, our deaf, our dumb, our pitiful aged and infirm; to build highways and hospitals and schools, then certainly I am for it.
“This is my stand. I will not retreat from it. I will not compromise.”
Brfxxccxxmnpcccclllmmnprxvclmnckssqlbb11116: A Swedish couple tried to protest a law about naming their child. This was their response. This is why I hate protesters. A quick glance should be given to the accompanying category that lists further unusual names. Lists like these make me glad that my parents did not try to give me a creative name. Maybe I won’t put them in a nursing home after all.
Twin paradox: There is nothing better than a good paradox. The fact that this involves time-travel makes it a favorite of mine. I would explain more but the article does a much better job than I could ever try to conjure.
Green Man: I’m not sure why this deserves its own article but it concerns a man who was disfigured in a childhood accident who in his later years enjoyed walking alone at night even though he was blind.
Victor Lustig: He is considered to be one of the most famous con artists of all time. He managed to scam Al Capone, sell someone the Eiffel Tower and get a sheriff arrested for using counterfeit hundred dollar bills.
I’ll try to do a post of similar nature of a weekly basis, hopefully with more fleshed out details concerning why I find them interesting. If you have any suggestions for me feel free to post them in the comments or tag them to me on del.icio.us. There is nothing better than a good Wikipedia article.
“We knew that this would happen, and it has happened very rapidly,” he said. “It’s not going to go away—it’s only going to get worse.”
-Albert N. Greco, via The Chronicle of Higher Education
The advent of Bit Torrent has made it easier for the general public to download large quantities of music, movies, and now college textbooks. The above quote references the latter. It makes sense that piracy is becoming a large problem in the textbook industry; why would students want to pay hundreds of dollars a quarter/semester for a book that most likely they never need to look at again? Personally, the only value I received from my Economic textbooks were the required problems. In the future, I am just going to go to the library once a week or so and copy down those problems. Everything else I can learn just as well via Wikipedia. I do buy all the texts for my English classes but that is because I enjoy re-reading the books, I love highlighting and writing in the margins, and I hate e-books. My English books have an established value whereas my Economic books have an artificial one.
The fact of the matter is college textbooks have value that depreciates faster than a new car off the lot. You spend upwards to two hundred dollars on a book that is valuable for a short period of time (for argument’s sake I will ignore the teachers who assign books and then never use them in class negating any value of my money spent) and then you are faced with three options: hold on to the book, sell it back to the campus book store at a reduced rate, or try to sell it online to a private party. It is also worth noting that once a publisher issues a new edition, your old copy is completely worthless. I have been burned by that so many times that my bookshelf is littered with hardcover paperweights that collect as much dust as a Swifter.
College students are now bypassing the middle man and getting their books for free. This should come as no surprise. If the publishing industry wants students to buy their books, they need to create a value for them. How do they create artificial value? Bundles. The U.S. PIRG lists the following ways of how this is done:
Half (50 percent) of the textbooks in the survey were sold “bundled,” or shrinkwrapped with additional instructional materials such as CD-ROMs and workbooks.
When a bundled book is available for purchase unbundled (without the addon materials), the bundled book is, on average, 10 percent more expensive than its unbundled counterpart. Some bundled textbooks are substantially more expensive. For example, a Thomson Learning chemistry textbook was 47 percent more expensive bundled ($223.75) than when sold as a separate textbook ($152.00).
More than half of the bundled textbooks surveyed (55 percent) were not available for students to purchase a la carte, in which the textbook is available without the add-on materials.
Two-thirds (65 percent) of the faculty surveyed in our 2004 report said that they used bundled items “rarely” or “never”
These bundles are for online software/websites that provide quizzes and tests (looking at you Aplia). Of course, the code is only valid for a certain period of time meaning that if another class requires the same software you must repurchase. Another example of this fake value is to change around the numbers on homework problems. This is fundamentally the exact same thing as the movie studios that release a movie on DVD, then release an uncensored version, a director’s cut, an ultra-edition, et cetra. Because they cannot offer real world value they create fake value. They are cooking their books to make their industry more profitable than it should be and that will come crashing down.
Textbook piracy is not going to end. While they publishers are taking a less aggressive approach than the RIAA (ie they are simply sending letters asking for removal of copyrighted material rather than suing anyone who downloads) it has had little affect. The publishing industry is going to have to reinvent itself if it wants to succeed. Until they can produce tangible benefits to buying the course books that are greater than forcing useless software and unnecessary materials students will continue to download at a greater rate. The RIAA has spent millions trying to prevent downloading music and has not succeeded in any capacity.
Like most things I believe the answer to the problem relies in the internet and open-source. My suggestion would be to continue sites like Aplia, but instead of forcing them as a bundle, make the textbook available online with a print on-demand option for those who wish to have a hard copy. For the actual course sites, charge a low fee (yearly, monthly, quarterly) to give students unlimited access to all the text books offered. If I was given the choice between having to search torrent sites to find my textbooks but still having to buy the online software so that I can do my course work versus being able to pay a nominal fee for all the materials, I can honestly say I would choose the latter. I always take the easier option even if it would cost me more money.
The industry needs to ask itself which has more potential revenue that will keep its clientèle: the current system in which customers continue to flock to black markets or one that would reduce overhead and provide a steady, continuous stream of income? Granted I phrased this in a way that makes my idea seem much better, and there are holes in my plan (such as students sharing accounts) but in the end a change will be made. The internet changed everything and soon everyone will be forced to adapt. Music was the first feel the impact of creating false value (who really listens to CDs anymore?) and it seems that college textbooks are soon to follow.
Books to read related to this subject: Marketing is Everything by Regis McKenna, The Pirates Dilemma by Matt Mason. Hat tip to Shawn Shahani for the former.
Update: I just read this article and it seems that I am not the only one who realized that reducing overhead and giving away the content can still be profitable.
But some are skeptical. James Koch, former president of both the University of Montana and Old Dominion University, in Norfolk, Va., warns that despite the savings in production costs compared with traditional textbooks, Flat World will likely have smaller margins and thus the start-up could struggle to attract more authors. “I just don’t see how they will be able to offer equal compensation,” says Koch, who has studied the textbook industry extensively. “Their utopian approach is based on the hope that real economics don’t apply.”
Maybe I’m reading this wrong, but how can real economics apply to an idea that has never been practiced before? The economics of the text book industry have been supported by the fact that students have almost no choice but to buy their textbooks. If they are given the option of getting them at a reduced cost or even for free it is asinine to believe that they would want to continue to pay extravagant fees. Flat World is shunning advertising, keeping their platform open source, offering tools that a traditional text book cannot (real time updates, streaming videos) and making their profits via supplementary materials. This is a perfect example of creating real value and in the emerging new market economy. This is the new media that Ryan Holiday talks about.
basketball and soccer
July 22, 2008
In the last few weeks, we have witnessed Brandon Jenning, a high school player who was commited to the University of Arizona, join Virtus Roma. Ricky Davis (most famous for shooting on his own basket to get a triple/double) has signed was offered a contract with Olympiakos and Josh Childress of the Atlanta Hawks might soon be joining him.* Bostjan Nachbar (a decent 6th man from the Nets) has recently signed with Dynamo Moscow for three years at 14.3 million (about 30 million after exchange rates). Stephon Marbury and his #3 head tattoo have expressed interest in finishing their career in Italy. Tiago Splitter decided that he rather make more money in Europe than play for the San Antonio Spurs. The Memphis Grizzlies lost Juan Carlos Navarro this off-season when he signed with FC Barcelona. This isn’t quite a shocking development as it has happened before. In the 80s there was a brief period where players such as Bob McAdoo and Walter Berry crossed the Atlantic to play basketball, but overall, the big names have never really jumped ship.
What do all of these have in common? Players are willing to leave behind the supposed prestige that comes with the NBA to make more money and to travel the world. Frankly, I don’t blame them. For lack of a better term, the NBA has essentially been a monopoly. They have been able to force changes in how basketball is played because they are such a powerful entity. The leverage that players have against their teams has been gradually been reduced with each successive Collective Bargaining Agreement since the 99′ lock-out season. Leaving for Europe is just a small step in regaining their advantage.
In order to understand why leaving for Europe is appealing and how this will change the NBA, we must look at the structure of the soccer leagues of Europe. For a while, all the top players came to England to play. The game was invited there and it followed that the top players should take up residence. Yet over time, players gradually left to play in La Liga, Serie A, or Eredivisie. With all of these different leagues, each with some of the best players in the world, a transfer market system developed. While all of the leagues are their own separate entities they operate under certain common guidelines. They operate without a salary cap, meaning that the structure is similar to baseball. They can loan players to teams for money and they can sell their contracts. Players can sign with other teams once their contract expires. In short, with so many potential markets, players are always able to maximize their profits based off of their ability. It is a free market.
The largest exception to this system is the MLS. In the MLS, the players contracts are owned by the league and the players rights belong to certain teams. If one is wondering why this league has been floundering since its inception, that would be the first place to look. The second would be the lack of talent. The MLS is a joke. In short, the MLS is administratium . Instead of allowing the market to dictate itself they are instead choosing to set regulations in place that do not encourage growth and competition. They managed to take an already restrictive model (much the way that the NFL, NBA and other American sports league operates) and impose even tighter regulation. An apt comparison can be made between the acquisition of David Beckham to the Galaxy and Microsoft’s attempts to buy Yahoo. Both the MLS and Microsoft decided that instead of fixing their broken structure, to buy an expiring talent. Both Beckham and Yahoo peaked years ago and are coasting by on reputation alone. They are applying a band-aid to a mighty large flesh wound. If the NBA wants to brace for the future, they need to study the European soccer market closely and learn from it.
What can the NBA learn from the European clubs? While a salary cap can help inspire parity, you cannot restrict an open market. Very few people have the talent and athleticism to make it to the professional leagues. They should not be guided by a misplaced sense of loyalty to a team that drafted their rights. The NBA may have the prestige and a national audience, but that can be fleeting. Basketball fans want to watch the best players and as of now that can be found exclusively in the NBA. With current limitations in place that soon could change to Europe. Between the falling price of the dollar, the lack of a salary cap in Europe and the fact that the clubs are willing to pay all the taxes that the players incur, it is hard to believe that mid-level players will not be jumping ship at a rapid pace to get theirs.
The NBA is going to resist these changes. They like the current model and believe that they are infallible to another league rising up and taking their mantle. It is thinking like this that will ultimately lead to a mass exodus in talent. All it will take is one superstar player in his prime: a LeBron James, a Kobe Byrant, anyone who transcends the sports/popular culture boundary, to leave for Europe. Once that happens, the NBA can never return to how it was.
I don’t know if the open-source versus close-source argument is the most appropriate to make in comparison, but it certainly seems relevant. The NBA right now is trying to restrict the talent to remain in their league while the European ones favor a system that makes both the player and the club the most amount of money possible. It is going to be interesting to see how David Stern responds to these changes. If he tries to use muscle to win, he may come up victorious in the short term, but in the long-run we will begin to see a crumbling infrastructure.
*Update: I was mistaken with regards to Ricky Davis. He was offered a contract but has not yet signed it. Josh Childress has officially signed his offer from Olympiakos Also, for a more detailed explanation of the same subject I highly recommend reading this Basketball Prospectus article.
advertisements
July 22, 2008
The economy of the internet has always been based on advertisements. This isn’t surprising, because advertisements are the money-maker for a lot of different mediums: radio, television, magazines, and many more. Like most people who are pretty competent with a computer, I haven’t seen an ad in months. I don’t even know if this site contains any advertisements. Most people that I know haven’t either because they too use an ad blocking program. Back when I used to watch television on a regular basis, I ended up recording almost all my programs on DVR just so I could skip the commercials. I don’t have anything against advertisements, I just don’t feel like wasting my time gazing at products I will not buy. Outside of movie trailers (which I now view online), there really has never been an advertisement that has convinced me to buy a product.
Shawn Shahani tagged this item on del.icio.us: Add-Art, “a free FireFox add-on which replaces advertising on websites with curated art images.” Most likely this won’t have a major impact on any markets simply because the people that would use this would have a higher chance of already using a well-known ad blocker. What is important is that as time goes on, more and more people will become more tech-savvy and will use these mediums to replace advertisements with art or simply dead space. The question becomes how will the companies respond to increase their revenue? The answer, sadly, is most of them will resist changing their methods for as long as possible until a new company comes along with a new business model that they can copy.
Resisting change is a much easier business model than adapting to new environments. You don’t have to be Umair Haque to realize that companies continually engage in old and outdated business methods instead of trying to revolutionize their field. I can’t say that I blame them. If I was a CEO of a company and was faced with the decision of an old but steady business model versus a higher-potential-but-more-risky model, I think I would make the coward’s choice. When you’re gambling with millions of dollars and your livelihood, it makes it that much harder to shun traditional sources of income.
I am still trying to come to terms with the idea of this new market economy where open-source beats closed-source, where the gift-economy is king, where the long-tail can be as profitable as the head, and where advertisements are no longer the best generator of revenue. Of course I could be completely wrong with my last point, I haven’t even started my upper-division economic courses, what do I know? I am, however, prepared to teach myself through a lot of reading.
“Watching whole he eagerly surveyed the Sahara from the summit of the Great Pyramid, or timed the contortions of a group of howling dervishes, or stared at a beautiful houri in a Cairo window, Theodore Senior could relax, knowing that his son was educating himself.”
a work in progress
July 20, 2008
“When you have trouble getting out of bed in the morning, remember that your defining characteristic–what defines a human being–is to work with others. Even animals know how to sleep. And it’s the characteristic activity that’s the more natural one–more innate and more satisfying.”
I woke up at 8:00, turned off my alarm and went back to sleep. This is going to take some work.
meditations (part 1 of a long series)
July 20, 2008
I found myself at a loss when it came to reading Meditations. I was reading passages as many as three times: the first reading was merely a glance in which I absorbed no information other than in the literal eye-to-mind sense; the second reading was so that I could re-read it and if apt, apply it to some portion of my life; the third reading—if necessary—forced my to reexamine past choices and actions. It is hard to read something and to know that whoever wrote it was that much of a better person than you. Up until Book Eight, I can say that this book might have been the closest thing I have had to a fight club moment, and then I read the following:
“Remorse is an annoyance at yourself for having passed up something that’s to your benefit. But if it’s to your benefit it must be good—something a truly good person would be concerned about.
But no truly good person would feel remorse at passing up pleasure.
So it cannot be to your benefit, or good.”
And with that, it started to click.
I was, once again, reading the book the wrong way. I should not be using it as a guide to evaluate how I have screwed up in the past. Instead, I should use Aurelius’ advice to eliminate future mistakes. The beauty of the book lies not in being able to literally apply the lessons presented, but rather, to use them abstractly. There are questions within the text that I was forced to ask myself that left me uncomfortable with the results, and with that in mind, I can now work on improving so that I will not be distraught at where the truth lies.
“What am I doing with my soul?
Interrogate yourself, to find out what inhabits your so-called mind and what kind of soul you have now. A child’s soul, an adolescent’s, a woman’s? A tyrant’s soul? The soul of a predator—or its prey?”
Self-improvement can only come upon complete examination about the flaws of the past and what one can do to better themselves. I started writing my thoughts on books and posting them online less than a week ago, and I still don’t quite know what my true intentions were when I decided that this was a good idea. However, at least while I continue reading my current set of books, it seems as if this will serve as an outlet for me to be honest with myself in a way I have avoided in the past. There will be a lot more to come about Meditations as there are three main ideas that I continually highlighted that I want to write about: becoming a rational thinker, losing the fear of death, and most importantly, living my life for myself and not for others. These are topics that require a lot of depth, thinking, and most importantly more knowledge. I have a lot more reading to do before I can articulate my thoughts in a clear manner, but I can take some comfort in the fact that I am on the right track.
Instead of ending this with a promise to start the world with a fresh perspective (a promise that is as easily kept as a New Year’s resolution) I will leave with these quote from Aurelius:
“Think of yourself as dead. You have lived your life. Now take whats left and live it properly.”
“There is nothing bad in undergoing change—or good in emerging from it.”
the moral animal: why i need to read before i read
July 18, 2008
It is better to be a human being dissatisfied than a pig satisfied; better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a fool satisfied. And if the fool, or the pig, is of a different opinion, it is because they only know their own side of the question. The other party to the comparison knows both sides.
Utilitarianism by John Stuart Mill
I originally imagined myself, upon finished Robert Wright’s The Moral Animal, using the knowledge I would gain to dissect my own actions, gaining insight into what the underlining motives are for what I do, and then gain an upper-hand on my peers. In hindsight, that was dumb. The lessons that can be applied from the book are not as I have described, but instead, it offers an introductory glance into the field of evolutionary psychology. I didn’t read up on the field prior to reading the book, which was a mistake, so I was surprised by the contents of the message. Inside I found out more about how Darwin uncovered his theory of evolution then I had ever known, and I witnessed first-hand how to apply it as it relates to all aspects of human nature.
The ideas of free will, determinism, and utilitarianism dominate the latter half of the book. These concepts are key to grasping and understanding evolutionary psychology. Sacrificing oneself for the good of the group, holding the door open for the person behind you, and many other actions are not as noble as they seem upon first glance; instead they amount to a “self-serving manipulation of image.” What we think we are doing for certain reasons (morals, ethics, et cetera) is actually being done unintentionally by our mind, and that it can be attributed to evolutionary tactics. For much the same reason that the TIT FOR TAT strategy succeeded so well in the computer simulation, those who generally are not a nuisance for society are often able to procreate, spreading their genes, and in doing so continuing the lineage of “do onto others.” While I would like to believe that my actions are greater than just a desire to procreate, it seems hard to justify myself as being more important than others in that I can choose to do something. Free will has been argued by many people smarter than myself, so I am not going to attempt to parrot their ideas or disagree until I can gain a stronger intellectual base in this area.
I have much more reading to do in this field if I am to gain a better understanding. It seems as if this book serves more as a basic introduction into the field and that if I wish to learn more I will have to do much greater research. However, as funds are a little short, I will for now be reading Marcus Aurelius’ Meditations. This is another book recommended by Ryan Holiday’s reading list, and according to him it may be the greatest book ever written. I can only hope to gain as much from this as he did.
