Sporcle as social commentary

While doodling around on sporcle the other day (the site gets about 10 percent of my daily traffic), I took a quiz where I had to name as many of the 120 FBS (Div 1-A for the old school among you) colleges around the country. As an undergrad at UMD, I was the sports editor of the daily newspaper, co-hosted a sports talk radio show and interned at the WashPost Express sports desk. So, yeah, I was a little cocky going in - I figured I'd hit the 90th percentile or so without really trying.

I knocked off all the BCS conference schools, the major independents and most of the WAC pretty quick, then started delving into the nether reaches of my memory. All told, I hit 91 out of 120, including the second-most-missed school, Middle Tennesee State - one tends not to forget such schools.

Thinking I'd hit a fairly good ratio, I checked over my score vs. what the rest of the sporcle community gets on such quizzes - and found out I'd bombed. Big time. I scored in the 53rd percentile, which is the lowest I've scored relative to any test population since I took physics my junior year of high school (let's not go there.)

But what really shocked me, more than my score percentile, was the number of people who knew that some of these schools play D-1 football. According to sporcle, 42.4 percent of all quiz-takers knew Troy played D-1. And that was the lowest percentage. Schools like Akron (67.9), Arkansas State (65.3) and Tulsa (53.1) all scored pretty respectably.

Out of curiosity, I googled and took the president's quiz on Sporcle. Having had all the presidents memorized in order since around middle school, it went by as a speed typing exercise for me. I then checked the percentages of how many quiz takers knew various presidents. Let's just say it got interesting. More people know that Idaho (72.3) and Wyoming (76.8) play D-1 football than know Woodrow Wilson (70.0) was president. More knew that Arizona and UVA (not exactly powerhouse BCS teams) play D-1 ball than know that the Roosevelts and Thomas Jefferson were president.

Now, I'm not here trying to show how dumb people are. The Darwin Awards, The Simple Life, and Glenn Beck's Facebook Fan Page have already proven that there are plenty of misguided folks out there. What I'm more interested in is the way Sporcle can be viewed as commentary on society, culture, politics, etc. In other words, like ogres, the site has layers.

Going further on that track, check out the quiz on the world's most spoken languages by country. According to the quiz, the country with the fifth-largest Bengali speaking population is the U.A.E., which seems odd when you first look at it - Bangladesh and the U.A.E. are extremely far apart, and, based on wealth demographics in Bangladesh, it doesn't seem many of its citizens are traveling to the U.A.E. on vacation. But there is a reason for this language boom - the modern equivalent of nonconsentual indentured servitude, or, in layman's terms, slavery.

The U.A.E., and, to a greater extent, Dubai, imports large numbers of laborers from countries in Southeast Asia, then keep them there through systems that make the old company town system of the late 19th/early 20th century Rust Belt region look fair. In a simple, signpost kind of way then, Sporcle serves here as a notice - every person who took the quiz and thought, "Wow, that seems strange" and then researched the question a little bit now knows significantly more about the inner workings of a nation that many of us know about simply due to its oil reserves and excessive luxuries.

While this has certainly been much more wordy than I initially hoped it would be, I hope I've gotten my point across - that Sporcle is a Shrekian demonstration of the odd nature of web culture and social commentary tools.

Finally done

I took February and the first week of March off from posting for a variety of reasons - the LSAT (postponed by the Snowpocalypse!), law school recommendations, and generally trying to get my post-college life back in order. Now that I've got everything (sort of) cobbled together, it's back to the blogosphere I go! I'm hoping to keep a steady schedule of 2-3 posts a week for the foreseeable future. We'll see how that goes.

News Notes

Beck to Massa: No Tickling Allowed
I mean, what was Glenn Beck expecting from the Eric Massa interview? Granted, I agree with Massa's end goal: the optimal public health care system would be a single-payer system similar to the ones of Canada and Western Europe. That said, I probably wouldn't have pulled out a scrapbook of Caligula-esque Naval orgies. But I guess that's why I've never been a Congressman.

Dunleavy was "shocked?" Really?
The Clippers fired Mike Dunleavy yesterday, and apparently it caught him by surprise. If that's true, he's the only person on the planet who believes he was still qualified to work in any capacity for an NBA team other than ball boy (though he'd probably screw that up, too.) The money part of the article:

The decision came as a total shock to Dunleavy, he said, because he'd had dinner with Sterling earlier this week.

"We'd talked about what I'd seen on my scouting trips, about free agency," Dunleavy said. "I'd told him some of my ideas on how we should handle free agency and he says to me, 'That's smart, that's a good idea, I like that.'"

You mean Donald Sterling acts in a deceitful and unprofessional manner toward employees? I guess that makes Mike Dunleavy the Captain Renault of the Clippers. And continuing that analogy, Baron Davis is Bogart, and Chris Kaman is Major Strasser.

Abstinence "vs." comprehensive sex ed

In fifth grade, not too long after moving to Maryland from New York, I got my first taste of sex education as taught by Howard County. Although I don't remember the exact lessons we all learned during the roughly two week course of videos and teacher-led instruction, I do remember it being a big deal. All the classes were separated into boys and girls, and it spawned a multitude of lunch-time conversations in the cafeteria as we compared notes to see if they had shown us the same videos.

At my middle school, health class rotated so that you took it for one quarter per year (home ec, art, tech ed, and music got full quarters, while gym got three.) Each year in health class, a large section of the course focused on what most educators would term "comprehensive sex education" - while we were certainly encouraged to remain abstinent, and indeed were taught it was the only 100 percent effective method of avoiding STDs, we also learned a tremendous amount of information about how to have safe sex. We learned about condoms and diaphragms and watched videos showing the gory horror of syphilis, crabs and HIV/AIDS.

By ninth grade, health had taken over half of the year for one elective cycle, with gym comprising the other half. At that point, our sex ed lessons were much more focused on the safe sex side of the equation, as we discussed the consequences of foregoing contraceptive usage and learned how various STDs are transferred and treated. That half-year in ninth grade ended my formal sex education, and at that point, I'd say I felt relatively confident in my knowledge of "how stuff works."

I bring this up because of a big story on the sex ed front that hit the papers today. A study released by a University of Pennsylvania professor is being touted as a major critique of the comprehensive sex ed methodology, which typically refers to sex ed that teaches students how to use condoms, avoid STDs and prevent pregnancy. Abstinence sex ed, on the other hand, usually implies classes with either a faith or moral-based component that eschew any and all references on how to conduct safe sex. This approach tends to view teaching safe sex counterproductive, as condoning safe sex will lead to an increase in teens having sex.

The study today seems to counteract the president's decision to push money into comprehensive sex ed classes, by showing that abstinence-only sex ed can help delay kids from having sex in their middle school and early high school years. Via the Washington Post story:

"Over the next two years, about 33 percent of the students who went through the abstinence program started having sex, compared with about 52 percent who were taught only safe sex. About 42 percent of the students who went through the comprehensive program started having sex, and about 47 percent of those who learned about other ways to be healthy did."

The debate over how to teach sex ed gets to the heart of one of the most fundamental questions parents, teachers and school systems try to answer every year - how much should our children know about safe sex, and when should they start receiving that information?

In my view, the answer to the first question should be "as much as possible." The central premise to using the new study as fuel for the argument seems to be flawed. The study sought only to see whether abstinence-only sex ed would delay the inevitable. It doesn't say, for instance, if the 33 percent of kids who still had sex within the two years of completing the course did so safely. Without classroom instruction, did they know the risks involved, other than sex in theory is bad? In this study, the class didn't affect condom usage, but the class as constructed didn't use the faith/moral-based approach typically employed in abstinence sex ed.

That to me gets to the heart of the issue. Without getting cynical, I think it's safe to say that in modern society, kids between the ages of 10-14 are being exposed and acclimated to ever-greater numbers of sexual stimuli. I'm not going to go in depth into that point, as I think it's generally accepted as fact. Teaching an abstinence-only curriculum may delay the onset of sexual activity, but it doesn't remove it completely (for the most part), and it hinders the ability of students to adequately prepare themselves by restricting the amount of information coming from good, influential sources - I'd like to think most kids would trust what they learn from a health teacher about avoiding the clap over what they learned in the locker room.

I know I've rambled a little here (it's my blog!), but reading the story in the Post this morning got me agitated, as it seemed to so greatly miss the point. By once again setting up abstinence and comprehensive sex ed as positions that can't possibly be reconciled, it just seemed to fuel a debate that doesn't need to occur. Teach both - emphasize abstinence from the start (especially at the earlier ages), and slowly supplement with info given out in a "But if you do, here's how) manner.

Thoughts?

My Play List, Part 2

It's been awhile (thanks LSATs/law school apps/multiple snowmaggedons), but I'm back. If you haven't read it yet, check out this post for a recap of what the soundtrack to my life would be if it were a mix tape. To briefly summarize, the songs listed below are what I'd put on a mix tape for the following activities I go about in my every day life.

Driving
My Own Worst Enemy, by Lit: When I get out on the open road (or 29 south in the middle of rush hour), this is one of those songs that's just fun to blast. Easy to sing along to as well (a big prereq for making my list, since the members of Lit don't really sing so much as scream.

The Distance, Cake: Fact - I drive faster when this song comes on the radio. Also, a classic example of me hearing the lyrics but not really thinking about them; this was the song that originally caused my girlfriend to tease me for not listening to lyrics - I assumed it was a song about racing, not some depressingly failed relationship. Oh words.

Tune Out, by The Format: I got hooked on The Format by a film school buddy of mine, who set me up with about 8 gigs of music the weekend I moved into my freshman year dorm. Of all the stuff he put on my laptop, Interventions + Lullabies easily snagged the most plays. Being who I am, I remained blissfully unaware of the band's breakup till about 3 months after the fact. I should probably read more music blogs.

Gym Music
I Can, by Nas: Love the Beethoven intro, references to the Mali empire and the strong beat. Put it all together, and it's always a good bet for the ipod on the elliptical. Speaking of which, track me on Twitter (Journterp) if you want to follow my Drew Magary-inspired public humiliation diet. Goal: Get down to 175 lbs by July 4th. To quote Nas, I know I can.

Bad, Bad Leroy Brown, by Jim Croce: It's cool for men under 40 to use ellipticals, right? I ask this for two reasons: 1.) Treadmills tend to leave me with sore knees/lower back the next day; 2.) It's too cold to run around outside without straining muscles. Until it hits the 60s consistently, meaning I can play basketball and soccer for cardio work, I'm stuck on the elliptical, and from the looks I sometimes get, it seems like I've violated some sacred taboo. Anywho, for what it's worth, Leroy Brown's got a great beat for working out, especially when it feels like you might get into a bar fight over gym equipment usage.

My Play List, Part 1

Sitting here on a UMD WAM lab computer studying for next weekend's LSAT, I decided to take a quick break to read a couple of sports columns. I pulled up the iTunes on the computer knowing that I didn't have any music loaded but hoping someone sitting nearby had some decent non-password protected songs I could listen to through iTunes' Shared function.

Digression: I love that Windows 7 commercial where the guy describes being able to listen to the same music on two different computers in his house as if it's a breakthrough technology of some kind. I bought my Mac Powerbook back in August, 2005, and have been able to do that ever since. One of the great parts of living in a several-hundred student dorm freshman year? TONS of good music available via the shared iTunes function for people who couldn't figure out how to pirate stuff.

Back to present day. I pull up iTunes, and one of the users listed in the shared function whom I know only as "Elana's Music" has essentially a "Jeff's Greatest Hits Collection." Tons of CCR, Jim Croce and Meat Loaf in the older section, supplemented by Sublime, Blink182,Weezer and Spoon (I don't have the greatest taste - I like what I like, and make no apologies.)

I can't remember where the idea comes from, but I remember watching a comedian on Comedy Central a while back do a bit about having a soundtrack for your life. As in, while you walk around and go about your daily tasks, music constantly plays, illustrating the given action, like dark, ominous tones filling the air as you push your bed away from the wall to vacuum the floor, only to discover an absolutely devastatingly huge pile of balled up gym socks you shucked off while asleep. Elana's Music insired me to create such an audio supplement for my life. What follows is my attempt to compose a sort of mix tape (I know play list is the proper terminology, but mix tape just sounds better) for my life. I've organized it by activity, with a brief explanation for each inclusion.

Beach Tracks
Santeria, by Sublime: My girlfriend (often) makes fun of me for my incredibly poor ability to divine the meaning of lyrics of songs. Part of this is because if the music beneath the lyrics is really good, I kinda tune out the lyrics. Hence this selection, about a guy wanting to track down and kill the sancho who stole his girl. Whatever. All I know is that the guitar solo midway through is stellar for summer walks on the beach.

Save Tonight, by Eagle Eye Cherry: Maybe it's because the first time I heard this, I was in the midst of spending a week at a church sleepaway camp in the hills of western Maryland. I had hit puberty a little early in terms of size, and thanks to soccer, I didn't have a massively awkward transition into my new body. What I'm trying to say is, my appeal to the opposite sex may have peaked between summer after 8th grade through Christmas break of 9th grade. Anywho, one of my counselors was REALLY into Eagle Eye Cherry, so the song became my cabin's anthem, and it sort of epitomizes summer for me.

Getting Ready Tracks
I Got a Feeling, by Black Eyed Peas: First, I feel like I've got to clarify "Getting Ready" tracks. Think GTL time. While annoying, repetitive and not exactly complex lyrically (even I understand it!), it's a solid option for getting amped up pre-getting sloppy.

Right Round, by Flo Rida: Same as above, but gets added points for its use in The Hangover. Speaking of which, The Hangover 2? Really? Even given the love Hollywood has for franchises, the decision to make this has to be the most one of the worst greenlights in the last ten years, right behind Meet Dave.

In Da Club Tracks
Yeah, by Usher, Ludacris and Dave Chappelle: This one came out my junior year and absolutely exploded, and stayed relevant through most of my senior year due to the massive success of Usher's Confessions. Also, Li'l Jon's rhythm making the booty go smack.

Ignition (Remix), by R. Kelly: Just a great club song. Good dance beat, encourages bad decisions and drinking. But more than that, it might mark Kelly's hig-point as this generation's Michael Jackson, albeit a poor man's version. The combination of the voice (just listen to "I Believe I can Fly"), chart-topping hits, and massively bad decisions (getting filmed with Sparkle's 14-year-old niece, pissing off Jay-Z, that whole "Trapped in the Closet" business.) On the other hand, bounce bounce bounce bounce bounce....

Part 2: Coming when I have some time.

State of the Union Preview; Other Stuff

Obama Set to Reveal Island was Figment of Locke's Imagination
After much consternation and angry message-boarding by Lost fans, the White House decided not to preempt the final season's first episode. As a complete non-fan (saw and hated the first five episodes), I've never been more proud of our country. After a year in which we dynamically shifted tracks politically, continued dealing with a Great Depressionish financial crisis, tried to figure out how to keep people healthy, disagreed on fundamental civil rights and followed a balloon in the Midwest like a modern Hindenburg, we effectively told the most powerful world leader, "Look buddy, enough is enough. We don't care. Just put Matthew Fox on the screen and let J.J. Abrams decide why Jacob had to die." And we wonder why the world laughs at us.

The Rise of Fascism in America
Am I the only one watching the rise of Tea Party politics with a healthy dose of fear? Apparently not. In this great piece in The New Yorker, Ben McGrath analyzes the rise of the right-wing crazies during the past year. What I find uniquely scary about this movement is that the goal at times seems to be to find ways to circumvent basic democratic processes. The logic process noted at times in the article (Let's have everyone vote in an internet poll as to whether the government should pay off the mortgages of homeowners who've defaulted!) seems to favor an Oliver Wendell Holmes-esque slavish dedication to majoritarian rule, even in the face of information (the broad positive impact single-payer health care would have on many of the tea party acolytes) that contradicts that same devotion. Then again, it lets journalists show off how many times they've read Hofstadter. So that's good.

What happened to Rex Ryan?

I watched almost the entire Jets game last night (missed the first six minutes of Q3), and had seen all of the Cincy-Jets and Chargers-Jets games the past couple weeks. Most of the focus for the loss last night (Full disclosure: I'm a huge Giants fan. No horse in this race) seemed to be on:

A.) Peyton playing out of his mind;
B.) Austin Collie and Pierre Garcon looking like Holt/Bruce circa 2000ish;
C.) the Jets' defense getting exposed.

The last point is the one that I couldn't get over after the game. Darrelle Revis, Kerry Rhodes and Co. didn't seem to play with less effort or focus, and the tackling seemed pretty similar in both halves - the Jets didn't seem like they were falling apart all of a sudden.

What did seem to happen was a change in strategy. After getting burned long a couple of times by Manning, Rex Ryan made a decision to drop his corners off the line and drop his safeties deeper, essentially giving Manning the pass underneath in an attempt to stop Garcon and Collie downfield. While watching the game this seemed like a weird idea, and in retrospect a horrible one.

The Colts don't really have a running game. When the offense is performing at its peak, they want Brown/Addai to carry the ball 15-20 times combined, and let Manning air it out the rest of the way. They make up for the lack of running production with Manning's absurd efficiency throwing underneath - anyone who saw the Ravens game knows exactly what I'm talking about. Dallas Clark creates lots of matchup issues, and the Colts have three WRs in Wayne, Collie and Garcon who are all strong route runners, a key component of Manning's success in throwing passes in the 5 to 15 yard range.

Dropping the safeties and corners off a little also changed the complexion of the Jets' blitzing packages, which had been extremely successful this postseason. Even when they don't get a sack, Ryan's schemes utilizing unique talents like Rhodes in the pass rush causes the opposing o-line all kinds of problems. And the corners, Revis in particular, play absolutely fearless tight coverage off the line, even if it occasionally results in a deep completion.

The biggest problem with this strategy change, though, came on the other side of the ball. By allowing Peyton to mask the lack of an effective running game with his short passing, Ryan and the Jets' ceded their biggest advantage against the Colts - the ability to control the pace of the game by pounding the ball behind an offensive line that sent three player (Ferguson, Faneca and Mangold) to the Pro Bowl this year. While the Jets capitalized on a few big plays (the Sanchez pass to Braylon Edwards, Smith's Wildcat bomb) to take a halftime lead, they hadn't been a "big play" team all year. The Jets won this year by minimizing offensive mistakes while holding the ball as long as possible, reducing the amount of time opponents with better offenses had to comeback against that suffocating defense.

While this is probably longer and less link-driven than I'd like, I thought I'd put it out there to see if anyone else picked up on this vibe. Especially since if I read another piece on Favre as some Oedipal tragic-hero, I'll chuck my mouse across this office.