Illini out of running for Pitt grad transfer

Illini out of running for Pitt grad transfer

Illinois was one of eight schools to get an in-home visit with Pittsburgh graduate transfer Cameron Johnson this past weekend. Also invited? Ole Miss, Oregon, Rutgers, South Carolina, Florida, Michigan and TCU.

Of that group, only Oregon and TCU, led by former Pittsburgh coach Jamie Dixon, made Johnson's top six. ESPN's Jeff Goodman reported the Horned Frogs and Ducks along with Kentucky, Ohio State, UCLA and Arizona were Johnson's finalists.

Johnson averaged 11.9 points and 4.5 rebounds for the Panthers last season. He also shot 41.5 percent from three-point range. The 6-foot-8, 210-pound guard will have two years of eligibility remaining and can play immediately after earning his bachelor's from Pitt later this month.

In other Illini recruiting news, Class of 2017 guard Mark Smith is moving forward with his planned official visit to Ohio State this weekend. SportsNet New York's Adam Zagoria said the 6-foot-5 guard might also visit Duke and Kentucky.

Smith, the 2017 News-Gazette All-State Player of the Year and Illinois Mr. Basketball winner, completed an unofficial visit Thursday in Champaign.

Comments embraces discussion of both community and world issues. We welcome you to contribute your ideas, opinions and comments, but we ask that you avoid personal attacks, vulgarity and hate speech. We reserve the right to remove any comment at our discretion, and we will block repeat offenders' accounts. To post comments, you must first be a registered user, and your username will appear with any comment you post. Happy posting.

Login or register to post comments

Moonpie wrote on April 21, 2017 at 9:04 am

So all that so-called buzz, which was just social media twits and desperate, desperate hope for a transfer is simply fake news. Trump, the Emperor of creating fake news, would be so proud. Soon, Ancient Tate will tell us that the Pitt transfer wasn't actually any good. Nobody is unless they sign with the Illini. Pathetic.

jk3363 wrote on April 21, 2017 at 10:04 am

Sit down, it's time for today’s lesson.

I'd like to explain the origins of "fake news" and why using the term in such context as the above is completely wrong and simpleminded. This is very much a pet peeve of mine and I'd like to combat it wherever I can.

Do you remember ad libs? Pick a verb, noun, color etc. plug them in a story and giggle as your story is "I fell off my *bike* when I ran over a *taco" and so on. You get the idea.

In the modern age, the internet-blogging-sphere is fueled by ad revenue which is fueled by clicks, or page visits. Whether it's a academic research paper, or a brownie recipe, the click is worth the same amount. Some publications take advantage of this by having sensationalized headlines for their stories, i.e. "clickbait" (Example, "Four money tips you should have done yesterday")

It has recently been discovered, especially in the last election, it doesn't have to be true at all for the gullible to click on it.

Using relatively simple programming, they drew up these mad libs, and had scripts run up these automated stories and create phony news websites to host them on. It's a low effort money making machine.

So when the Coal City Post is reporting that Robert DeNiro is buying a house nearby, the residents of Coal City might get excited or Robert DeNiro fans might perk up at the news. But a deeper dive reveals that DeNiro has no interest in the area, but that the Coal City Post is run by a bored teenager in Macedonia, who just made five dollars by letting his computer run.

The issue reached national prominence when Facebook released it's trending news section, and it was completely broken and exploitable. A simple script to falsify web traffic could elevate whatever someone wanted to the top of thousands of people's Facebook feeds. Prompt people to click on the auto-article based on curiosity alone.

But thanks in part to the Commander and Chief, and the state of discourse today, Fake News has taken on a whole new meaning. The most common targets of these attacks are opinion pieces, investigative journalism, really anything that might disagree with someone’s world view. instead of taking in and processing the information - they stamp a "fake" label on it and disregard it entirely. 

It's a symptom of a growing problem where people do not expose themselves to outside views and actually grow as individuals, or worse take an antagonistic viewpoint on topic others might be passionate about purely out of spite, or just a twisted sense of enjoyment.

 I think it might be too late in the above case to change a line of thinking, but if I can get one person to distinguish this "fake news" term differently, It's worth it.

MasterOfTheObvious wrote on April 25, 2017 at 5:04 am

Not winning.