Sunday, November 29, 2015

Golf GPS allow golfers to know exact distance on every shot

Source: Wikimedia Commons
Instead of eyeballing the distance or walking out the length from a yardage marker, golfers now can look down at a GPS to let them know the exact yardage left to the hole.

As GPS became more popular to help people on the road after the turn of the century, the technology quickly found its way to golf courses. But it wasn't to help golfers find the next hole. Instead, it was designed to inform golfers the exact distance they had left to the pin from wherever they stood.

With the technology improving every day, the GPSs now do even more than just give users the distance left to the hole. Some of the top options on the market, such as Garmin's Approach S6, now track golfers' swing cadence and tempo. This allows golfers to seek help on their swing mechanics from the GPS on their wrist rather than needing to pay even more for professional help.

Technology speeds up pace of play without golfers walking out yardages 

While baseball has been scrutinized for its time of game in recent years, golf has always been a notoriously slow sport. Golf won't ever be quick, but GPS has cut down the time between shots with golfers not having to figure out distances on their own. Players can simply look down at their GPS and know the exact yardage they have left to the pin.

Most golf courses expect their 18-hole course to completed in about four hours by a group of four golfers. Most of that time is spent between each shot as swinging a club takes only about one second. So the best way to speed up the sport is by cutting down the time between shots.

Andrew Scontras, a junior mechanical engineering major at the University of Maryland, has played competitive golf in high school and college. He used to devote time on each shot to mapping out the distance from the nearest yard marker, but after purchasing a SkyCaddie in high school, he no longer has to do that.


 Much of the wait in golf can be connected to the indecision players have on which club they should hit. Each club is designed for a specific distance, so golfers need to know how far they have left to reach the hole. Without a GPS, golfers are left walking around for the nearest yardage marker like Scontras used to do.

Others aren't sold that GPS has sped up pace of play for all players. Senior journalism major Matt Present, who has been caddying at Columbia Country Club for four years, has seen golfers grow too reliant on the technology.

For shots inside 100 yards, most golfers use a wedge, so the exact distance doesn't matter that much. Still, Present said he has players he caddies for ask him what his rangefinder says when they are just 40 yards from the pin.

"You'd think guys who are playing golf regularly would have a feel for their game," Present said. "But so many people don't and so many people rely on technology when they shouldn't Whether the number is 43 or 41, you are hitting the same shot no matter what. Just step up and hit it. The GPS at that point isn't doing you a whole lot of good."


So while GPS has cut out the meandering time for some golfers, others now show indecision on shots when the previously wouldn't have been concerned.

James Hewatt, an assistant to the pro at the University of Maryland golf course, sees both sides of the pace of play argument. While he acknowledges the players Present refers to, he also notices a lot of people like Scontras.

"You don't have to worry so much about stepping off yardages and things like that," Hewatt said. "That takes a lot of time out of a round so when you are playing a tournament and you're on the clock constantly, just saving that 15 seconds on every hole really does make a difference."

GPS price has dropped over time but still costs more than $100


SkyCaddie is the most common GPS used by golfers, and the cheapest version on amazon.com costs $125. Golf is already an expensive sport with clubs often costing hundreds of dollars and greens fees also pricy, so a GPS is another costly expense for the average golfer. Amateurs must decide if the pros of a GPS outweigh the price.

The older models have become more affordable since when they first were on the market, but they have been replaced by more high-tech versions that still cost hundreds of dollars. Garmin's Approach S6 is listed at $400 on its website, and it is considered so valuable because of its ability to track a user's swing in addition to also tell yardage to each hole like the older GPS'.

Hewatt and Present both own rangefinders, which look almost like a pair of binoculars, and are used to laser point the pin to locate the distance. It accomplishes the same task as a GPS, but Hewatt believes the rangefinders are slightly more accurate.

He said GPSs are good within a couple yards of being exact but rangefinders are accurate down to the tenth of a yard. The downside, though, is rangefinders can only track the distance to the pin and not any bunkers or hazards. They also don't come with a screen to map out the look of a hole.

Still, GPSs give the edge golfers crave.

"Golf is such an addicting sport where you want to beat your old score and continue to play better," Present said. "Anything out there that you think can do that, people are attracted to, especially when it is a fairly well-to-do sport and people can afford it."

Rangefinders and GPS units go for about the same price, and though they are expensive, Hewatt said he does think they are worth the investment because the importance of knowing the exact yardage of the shot you are attempting to hit.


Scontras has actually made the investment on a GPS unit not once, but twice. He lost the clip to is his first SkyCaddie so he would put it on top of his bag when he wasn't using it.

One time when he was playing with his dad he forgot it was still on his bag. So when he swung the bag over his shoulder, the GPS fell off his bag, bounced off a bridge and trickled into a pond.

But he had grown accustomed to relying on the technology, so after he lost it, he went to the store and purchased a newer SkyCaddie model.

GPS is like having a caddy in your pocket with knowledge every hole

While pro golfers have the luxury of a caddy to help them decide what to do on every shot, amateur golfers typically aren't as fortunate. But GPS show golfers the layout of every hole and allow players to adjust on the device to see how many yards they need to lay up before the water or how many yards to play it to the front of the green.

In fact, GPS systems have become so helpful for golfers, Present has noticed the technology eliminate some caddying jobs. While it hasn't affected his caddying job, he said many caddies across the country have lost their jobs because the technology can do the work for the player.


The technology is especially useful for golfers who are playing on a course they have never seen before. For instance, if a golfer steps up to a hole with a dogleg left, they are going to want to know how far it is to that bend so they don't overshoot the fairway.

These situations, Hewatt said, is where a GPS becomes more beneficial than a rangefinder. A GPS system allows the user to move a marker on the hole to any point on the whole and it will then tell the golfer how far it is to that spot. A rangefinder, meanwhile, relies on the laser being pointed at the pin, which isn't helpful in this example.

"You'll have the map of the hole and it'll show you what is to the front of the green or the back of the green or to the front of this bunker or that bunker," Hewatt said. "So that's pretty beneficial."

Arguably one of the best things about the sport of golf is the uniqueness of every course. While every football field is 120 yards long and 53 1/3 yards wide, each course is designed differently.

That can make it extra challenging on golfers playing a course for the first time. That's why pros have their caddies walk the course before they play so they know the layout of every hole.

This just isn't realistic for an amateur, though. But with GPS systems often having tens of thousands of courses inside the unit, golfers don't have to worry about not knowing what dangers might be sitting 200 yards from the tee box.

"When you haven't played the course before, it's really useful to know how far it is to clear something or how far it is to stay short of it without going in," Scontras said.


Tuesday, November 10, 2015

Democrats and Republicans alike tend to believe mass media’s news stories disagree with their point of view

Source: flickr.com
A study published in 2004 found that partisans feel news stories from mass media publications often have bias leaning toward the opposite political party. For instance, a Democrat may see a news story as slanting toward conservatism, which has been deemed hostile media perception.

This finding differs from assimilation bias, which is the idea that people are most likely to interpret information to support his or her own beliefs.

In order to determine why this doesn't apply to mass media, the study had individuals read either an essay or a news story regarding genetically modified food. What the study discovered was that the readers perceived a bias against them in the news story while the essay created assimilation bias.

Data from Pew Research Center
This lack of trust with mass media has been a growing trend since 1985, according to Pew Research Center data. In a survey conducted in 2011, it found 77 percent of people believe that media "tend to favor one side," which is a significant increase from the 53 percent in 1985.

So why has there been a increasing trend in a lack of trust of the media? The Washington Post attempted to answer that in 2012 leading up to the presidential election when candidates were calling the media bias.

While it may seem odd to rely on a mass media company, such as The Washington Post, to examine this, the newspaper employs a writer to actually cover the media. And in this case, the paper had its media reporter, Paul Farhi, examine media bias.

Source: Pew Research Center
Farhi found a potential list of reasons starting with the fact that the media has changed drastically since the mid-1980s. Not only are there just far more media outlets with the Internet, but there are also more "overtly partisan outlets," such as the Huffington Post or Drudge.

It's the classic case of one bad apple ruining the bunch. People see specifically biased media outlets and think it applies to all mass media outlets.

Plus, Pew Research found that the first outlets that come to mind when they asked people to think of a "news organization" were CNN and Fox News (63 percent). So it could be that those two major news outlets are giving the rest of mass media a bad name if people don't agree with their coverage.

Pew Research Center data shows readers trust their favorite news organizations but not the rest

While trust is bad for mass media, it isn't quite as bad among individuals' most-read news organizations. The Pew Research survey found that just 25 percent of people surveyed believed that news organizations in general get the facts straight. That number jumps up drastically to 62 percent when people answer the same question about sources they turn to most.

Mark Jurkowitz, who was a former press critic and ombudsman told Fahri why he believes there is much more trust in the most-read news sources of the surveyed group.

“If you watch the Channel 2 newscast night after night, you trust the people on the air,” Jurkowitz said. “The mere fact that you’re a habituated user makes you think better of them.”

Source: Gallup

And to further this, Fahri makes the argument that low levels of trust is actually common across a variety of institutions. For example, Gallup released a poll over the summer documenting the level of confidence for a number of U.S. institutions.

Newspapers were down 8 percent from the historical average, garnering confidence from 24 percent of Americans. But despite that low number, it was still 16 percent more confidence than Congress received.

Other key groups didn't fare well either. The criminal justice system received confidence from 23 percent. The U.S. Supreme Court garnered confidence from 32 percent. And the president got confidence from 33 percent of Americans.

In fact, only the police, the military and small businesses had more than 50 percent confidence from those polled.

Perceived bias comes from readers only remembering the bad that the media does

Stories that go viral and are shared all over the Internet don't tend to be the well-sourced, well-reported ones. Instead, it's the stories where the media made an error and then people share it make that news organization look bad.

Source: flickr.com
Or other times, media simply gives itself a bad rap by making the news. Take former NBC Nightly News anchor Brian Williams for example. Williams was investigated and ultimately found that he had been embellishing his stories, surely losing the trust from nearly all viewers. But this loss of trust extended beyond Williams and to NBC, which was broadcasting his embellishments.

This surely isn't the only reason why individuals have lost trust in news organizations, but it is stories like Williams' that contribute to it. As a reporter myself, I take pride in reporting both sides of a story and telling it as fairly as I possibly can.

And I have worked for a professional news organization — The Baltimore Sun — so I've seen other professional journalists work hard to do the same thing. So it upsets me when I see a majority of Americans perceiving there to be bias in stories and thus not trusting news outlets.

I think the growing number of mass media organizations such as Buzzfeed have given journalism and news outlets a bad name. It's part of the reason why there is a hostile media perception in our society.


Sunday, October 18, 2015

Software breaks down social media interactions into visual, but is hard to comprehend

Social network analysis software takes a specific social media platform, such as Twitter, and compiles everything posted on a specific topic into one graphic to display

Marc Smith, who helped build the program “NodeXL”, said that society loses the “crowdness” online when something important happens. He made the comparison to having everyone who posted stand in a single-file line because that's how Facebook and Twitter feeds work.

At first glance, the visual representation social network analysis software of Twitter on “NodeXL” looks like a kid who stole his parents' crayons and scribbled on the wall. It's tough to decipher what all of the lines and minuscule boxes mean.

When you examine the graph closer, for instance one Marc Smith made for Major League Baseball Twitter in a 2-hour, 26-minute span on Aug. 25, you can glean more information. In each sectioned off box, it highlights the key words that were written by users.

So in the top, most-said words are the words: mlb, baseball, new wire, card, lineup, 25, schilling and tickets. So from this, one can figure that there was some sort of significant news or talk around former pitcher Curt Schilling.

But perhaps what's most important about this graphic and the software in general is the interactions that it shows. The software is based around the mentions and replies between each box, so the skinny green lines drawn between each box show how often there were interactions between each square.

In the graphic on baseball, there are a significant amount of lines draw between the second and third box, meaning there was some sort of increased connection between the words in each. For some reason, the users in each box were more likely to be interacting with one another.

This technology seems like a great idea. With how prevalent social media has become and the way users flock to in times of breaking news, it's important to break down the single-line format to show the crowd that you can easily miss.

Unfortunately, the visual representation this program creates are more confusing than they are helpful to the average viewer. Without notable research into how to read it, it just looks like a mess. The idea behind it is great, it just seems to need more work in how it is displayed.

Monday, September 7, 2015

Freshman RB Ty Johnson scored his first career TD during Maryland football's 50-21 win Saturday against Richmond

I would share this tweet with the link (http://www.diamondbackonline.com/sports/freshman-rb-ty-johnson-scores-first-career-touchdown-in-maryland/article_94269afc-54c7-11e5-88c5-d3e4cc541368.html) because most of my social network cares about Maryland football and this is a cool story about a player who wasn't highly recruited having a great debut for the team.