Hard Copy: How Breaking News has been Broken in the Content Farming Era

Earlier this week rumors swirled on social media that Rory McIlroy was finalizing a deal to join LIV Golf for an astronomical $850 million. The notion was both outlandish and counterintuitive to everything McIlroy has said up to this point, making the claim bizarrely captivating. It also exemplified a growing problem in sports writing and spreading misinformation.

The original publication — a financial “paper”, of all things — is a website littered with clickable ads and popups that generate revenue for the website based on article engagement and impressions. There’s little doubt that this specific article was a huge money-maker, too. The article has been shared thousands of times by various accounts on X and beyond, eventually prompting McIlroy himself to publicly comment on the baseless claims presented within.

We’ve seen this song and dance before. The “journalists” who authored the article at least had the decency to include the following passage, which tells you all you need to know about the truth behind their claims:

It has not been possible to verify the claims. Spokespeople for the Northern Irish player and LIV Golf did not respond to requests for comment.

This feels like the new standard operating procedure for a growing number of publications. Make a baseless claim when the iron is still hot (the day after the Masters, for example), toss in a “could not be reached for comment” disclaimer somewhere in the middle of the content and share, share share. But to which I can certainly attest, clicking “post” on an article only gets you so far. You also need a little help on social media.

Enter the Content Farmers.

Simply put, “content farmers” are social media accounts that scour the internet looking for stories that can be sensationalized with a clickbait headline and post them on their own timelines. Note that these accounts don’t write the articles themselves (that would be too much work), nor do they make it a habit of doing any actual reporting. Their goal is to amass a following as large as possible by using this practice over, and over, and over again.

The most notable accounts in the Golf Twitter realm include @FlushingItGolf, @NUCLRGOLF, and about a dozen more of their ilk. These two verified X accounts have over 200,000 combined followers, posting dozens of times a day to their audience. NUCLRGOLF even offers a subscription option for a small fee. There is little doubt these accounts are profitable in their own right thanks to X’s revenue share program.

I know what you’re thinking: this is just sour grapes from another website founder who has a fraction of the following of those aforementioned accounts. You’d be correct. Allow me to explain.

Golf Unfiltered has been around for well over a decade. We’ve tried to do as much as we can with the resources available to us and the tools used most at any point along that timeline. Golf Twitter wasn’t always a thing, nor was Squarespace, podcasting platforms or revenue share programs. We've dabbled in clickbait headlines ourselves, but never for more than an article or two. But above all else, we’ve done our best to bring thoroughly researched reporting (to the best of our ability) and in-depth opinions on golf’s current state.

We are not special in that regard, nor are we alone. Much more successful outlets like No Laying Up, The Fried Egg, The Golfers Journal, Lying Four and many others are not as much competitors as inspiration. Their collective work paved the way for countless other upstart media outlets, showing that passionate golf fans can come together and create something others might enjoy.

Content farming accounts are not the same thing.

Those accounts are the worst side of golf media. They are profiting off the hard work of others if not outright circumventing the need to do the same on their own. They shout into the ether, waiting to see what catches the eye of less-informed casual scrollers who never read past a headline before sharing the latest nugget. Sometimes, as was the case with Rory McIlroy, it catches enough steam to prompt public action, validating their efforts.

Online publications are really damn hard to manage. As my colleagues at GU will tell you, I make the same “joke” every year that this year will be the last for GU. It’s frustrating, expensive, and a lot of hard work. Most things that are worth it can say the same.

If you’ve made it this far into this article, thank you. If you’ve ever clicked on a single piece of content we’ve produced, thank you. If you’ve ever responded to a tweet or post on our platforms — even to tell us how wrong or dumb we are — thank you.

What happened this week with Rory and LIV was not about us or any of the other outstanding outlets mentioned above. It was about you and the level of disrespect thrown your way by content farming accounts. They don’t care about educating or enhancing your enjoyment of the game we all love. They just want your engagement and dollars. You are their marks.

If you’re comfortable with that fact, more power to you. I can’t stop you from following and engaging with those accounts. All I ask is to show support to the outlets who care less about your wallets and more about our shared experience in this game.

Learned Helplessness and Covering Men’s Pro Golf

A funny thing happened over the weekend in the world of men’s professional golf and Mother Nature was the catalyst.

The PGA TOUR’s AT&T Pebble Beach Pro-Am was shortened to 54 holes after a severe weather system moved through the Monterey Peninsula, thus crowning Wyndham Clark the champion after Sunday’s final round was canceled. This meant that many golf fans chose to watch LIV Golf’s 2024 debut at Mayakoba in Mexico, where Joaquin Niemann defeated Sergio Garcia in a playoff.

For many fans, this may have been the first time they’ve ever watched a LIV Golf event. The controversial tour enters its third season with the support of more television coverage in more markets, coupled with the addition of Jon Rahm’s “Legion 13” team into the mix. Those of us who are chronically online and pay much too close attention to this sort of thing also noticed how Golf Twitter shifted its snark and attention to watching LIV. It was as amusing to notice as it was disappointing, especially since many of the individual accounts from Golf Media’s most popular commentators were suddenly… objectively watching the tournament?

Before I go on, allow me this preface. It is not lost on me that many of these media types are paid to comment on all things pro golf. It’s their job in every sense of the word, and LIV Golf appears to be alive, well and thriving. Therefore, it is no surprise that these media personalities must now comment on a segment of pro golf that they were openly ridiculing mere months prior.

But this doesn’t mean I have to like it.

When LIV burst onto the scene, it was in the midst of the most confusing and anxiety-inducing period of a generation. The pandemic was roaring, social upheaval was brewing, and at least here in the US, political divisiveness had never been worse. Fans of golf required a distraction, and it created ample opportunity for a disruptor like LIV to emerge. At a time when every aspect of life’s status quo was being questioned, LIV offered the proverbial “Why not us?” to golf’s fandom.

What followed was an onslaught of debate among golf’s media, including most of us taking holier than thou stances against the upstart league. Most of us hated that LIV’s funding came from Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund (PIF) due to the kingdom’s abhorrent civil rights record. Others hated that the PGA TOUR was no longer the only show in town; a sports league that we grew up watching and idolizing. And, yes, golf media also grew fearful of what might happen to the golf tour they were paid to cover for their careers.

It felt like the only thing to do was to protect one’s self interests, and that included going on social media and criticsizing LIV Golf into oblivion. Or at least try to. Obviously, this didn’t work.

Here is where I’m going to lose some of you reading this.

On its surface, LIV Golf has remained unchanged. The addition of a few names — and continued rumors of other names yet to be revealed — doesn’t change anything about the tour’s origins, financial backers, or ulterior motives. They’ve just persevered and hung around longer than we expected, despite multiple attempts to dissolve their legitimacy and legality. LIV Golf knew this would happen if they just survived. They were right.

The result: we are now seeing dozens of media outlets and their employees turning an about-face on their coverage of LIV.

To be fair: we’ve not reached the point where ESPN, CBS, or any of the major independent outlets are inviting LIV players into TV studios or onto podcasts. But if this weekend’s social media commentary is any indication, it’ll happen soon enough.

Where did all of the energy go? Was the outrage that many expressed in the wake of LIV’s debut all for show? Fake outrage is nothing new among journalists, but this feels like a rapid 180 among some outlets and their journalists. Did everyone hop on a conference call and suddenly decide, “Welp, we still need to get paid to cover golf, so we better change our tune?” Of course this happened, at least in the proverbial sense.

A few days ago I noticed this gem from our friend Will Bardwell, which pretty much sums everything up nicely.

The key to sportswashing is that, if you stick with it long enough, people quit caring that it’s sportswashing.

— Will Bardwell (@willbardwell) January 31, 2024

This was the plan from LIV all along. They knew that golf media would simply stop caring as much at some point. Truthfully, I probably knew this, too. It’s a hard thing to admit, and it’s a tale as old as time.

Let’s make something abundantly clear: LIV Golf is an opportunistic organization that serves a dual purpose. For their players, it’s an “escape” from the constrictive nature of the PGA TOUR to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars. For Saudi Arabia, it’s one-hundred-percent, without a doubt sportswashing. Both things can be true at the same time, and they are not pretending like it’s anything different. In fact, LIV brass straight up told us so.

To my media colleagues — both independent and otherwise — you have a choice here. You can continue to take your stand against something you truly do not believe in from a moral perspective. That doesn’t have to change, and any employer that asks you to do otherwise is not worth your time. Yes, this is a very easy thing for me to say, and I am well aware of the complexities of staying employed and toeing the company line.

You have another choice: just come clean. We all criticized players jumping to LIV and their ridiculous rationalizations for doing so when we all knew they were just doing it for the money. You have the chance to stand up, say something to the tune of, “I have to cover this league now, so you are going to see me start doing that as objectively as I can” and then move on. We will understand.

But to simply shift your perspective overnight comes off as disingenuous at best and hypocritical at worst. We all do things in our day jobs that we don’t like to do because our bosses ask us to, so why not just call it out and clear the air? I may be naive in this, but taking a moment to offer anything to your readers in this regard could go a long way.

Speaking only for myself and not my teammates at GU: I cannot support LIV, I will not support LIV, and people will disagree with me about that. And that’s OK.

All I ask is that you make your stance known publicly and then continue to do the best job you can to cover the game while staying true to yourself.

Golf Twitter in the Elon Musk Era

Elon Musk is now the owner of Twitter and everyone is waiting to see what that means for the social media platform. The network’s legion of golf-minded users — lovingly deemed Golf Twitter — is no exception.

The first few days of Musk’s reign have been shaky at best as an influx of hate speech and extremists trolls have exploded seemingly overnight. Most are highly politicized, albeit probably (hopefully?) fake, yet Golf Twitter has remained unscathed by anything Musk has allowed to this point.

However, as news breaks and lawsuits abound from the likes of Patrick Reed vs The Media, along with rumors that major advertisers are undecided on their continued support of Twitter and Musk’s desire to charge users for verification badges, the landscape of the network may change drastically. This includes what people feel comfortable stating publicly and the sources they trust for information.

How things stand today

Golf Unfiltered has held an account on Twitter since 2009. For the entirety of that time, all of the tweets have come from me, Adam, the owner of the website and host of the podcast. I’ve dabbled back-and-forth with keeping tweets brand-centric to injecting my own personal takes on pretty much anything with varying degrees of engagement. The GU account’s 11,000 followers are mainly comprised of Golf Twitter loyalists, contest prize seekers, and a wide range of differing opinions.

At 11k followers, the GU account is somewhere in the middle of the pack in terms of follower count and engagement. We’re far from the largest and far from the smallest. I’d like to think we provide value to the Golf Twitter landscape, but that’s probably not for me to define.

Similarly, the value of Twitter and its hundreds of millions of users should not be defined by the company but rather the users themselves. For the most part, this experiment in open communication among golf fans, media entities, and the sport’s celebrities has been successful. The accounts that offer the most engaging content rise to the top, including those from longstanding golf media outlets like Golf Digest, Golfweek, and others.

Where things start to get complicated is when professional golfers and well-known journalists begin to engage with anonymous users.

It is no secret that Twitter can be an awful place where anonymous accounts spew unbridled and unregulated insults (or worse) at golfers or journalists, particularly to those with a verified blue check mark next to their name (more on that later). Twitter’s attempts at reducing trolls has been lackluster at best, ranging from the removal of tweets to permanent bans on the worst offenders. This process has been far from perfect and unfairly enforced across the board.

Musk has hinted at changing this process as well, erring on the side of “letting the speech exist” whenever in doubt. Clearly a dangerous overgeneralization in theory, particularly when considering the scope of what could exist on Twitter.

To be clear, Golf Twitter is a miniscule niche group of users who have next to zero influence on the network’s overall landscape. This has begun to shift ever-so-slightly toward relevance with the launch of LIV Golf and that tour’s off-course backing. The lines are blurred between professional golf, politics and world affairs, and Twitter users have responded in kind.

The point: while Golf Twitter is insignificant in the larger scope of the social network, it is not immune to the same problems and regulation inconsistencies that plague Twitter overall… and what Musk just inherited.

Why did Musk want to buy Twitter anyway?

For the sake of context, Elon Musk’s interest in acquiring Twitter has been an interesting ride.

In a recent report by the New York Times, the timeline of Musk’s experience with Twitter also began in 2009 when he joined the platform. His first tweets were mundane, focusing on what he was doing that day and where he just ate lunch. You know, kind of like everyone else.

Over the next 13 years or so, Musk’s usage of the network evolved… again, just like everyone else. He began to see value in the network, particularly as a monetization opportunity and advertising platform for his other companies like Tesla and eventually SpaceX. Musk also began to notice how Twitter attempted to regulate trolls and hate speech on its platform, particularly in the realm of politics.

Musk’s political affiliation has spanned the proverbial gamut over the years, but in 2016 for obvious reasons we won’t go into here, he began to favor one side more than the other. He also becomes a fan of a website called the Babylon Bee, a conservative satirical news site similar to a more liberal publication, The Onion.

As we will all remember, the years between 2016 to now have been incredibly politicized and a bit of a mess (understatement), and included a permanent Twitter ban of former president Trump in 2021. This attempt at regulation by Twitter, including many other account suspensions and bans, caught Musk’s attention.

In fact, Twitter would eventually ban the Babylon Bee’s account in 2022 following a trans-phobic tweet that violated the network’s content rules. This allegedly pushed Musk over the edge, prompting him to suggest perhaps he should buy the network. A $44 billion offer, cold feet and a failed lawsuit to back out of the deal followed, ultimately culminating in Musk being the sole owner of Twitter.

The Blue Check Mark

Regardless of Musk’s reasoning for purchasing Twitter and the uncertainty of what he’ll do with it, one thing that’s already been teased is what he plans to do with Twitter verification.

The “blue check mark” symbol next to verified accounts meant something for a long time. To oversimplify it, major public figures, brands, and other well-known Twitter accounts could apply for verification to let everyone else know they were the “official” account of that entity. This is also true in the golf space.

Musk has already stated that the once free verification will now cost $8/month. It is unclear if this means current verified accounts will be grandfathered in and if paying the fee automatically verifies an account. To be transparent, the GU account is not verified.

The reason this little digital badge is important, if it’s not already clear, relates to Twitter’s other major problem: misinformation.

Now is a time in our society where accurate information is the most important resource. This is especially true in the world of journalism, even sports journalism. This extends beyond the results of a golf tournament.

Sports often mirrors everyday life. They are a reflection of what we hold important in terms of values, entertainment, business, and our culture. The idea that competing sides can reach an outcome fairly, accurately, and without prejudice is as core to our social structure as any other value. This is why when someone cheats in sports, it’s a big freaking deal.

Accuracy and truth matters, and it is the responsibility of trusted sources to provide both to those who trust them as that source.

At first blush, what Musk is suggesting is that sources can now pay a monthly fee for that trust. It has nothing to do with accurate reporting and perhaps even proving you are who you say you are. If that’s not the case and I am missing the point, that’s entirely due to the vagueness Musk chose when communicating this idea of charging for verification. That’s something you want to be crystal clear on.

What is abundantly clear is that the landscape of Twitter we once knew will change. My personal opinion on how it should change is irrelevant, especially since the company has gone private. I do not believe that Musk is the appropriate person to lead arguably the most influential social media site in the world, but I’ve been wrong before.

Let’s just call things as they are: the world’s richest man now owns the platform he wishes to make a beacon for “free speech.” The dissonance between those two facts could not be louder and more contradictory. Even typing that sentence feels like the opening to a dystopian novel.

As far as Golf Unfiltered is concerned, we will remain on Twitter for as long as it makes sense. Twitter remains our biggest individual audience source, but that could change. We are seeing growth in other outlets, including TikTok and YouTube.

What I do know for certain is this: if Twitter shifts too far into a place where truth, accuracy, and civility is an afterthought, Golf Unfiltered will close the account without a second thought.

Woke Golf Culture and a Marketing Evolution

Recent trends and themes on golf social media, specifically Twitter and Instagram, have ignited a shift in how brands market their products to you. While still small in volume, the growing ‘Woke Golf’ culture takes a hard stance on minimalism, conservatism, and at times how the game should be played.

What is Woke Culture?

Let’s set a baseline. ‘Woke Culture’, at its core, has nothing to do with golf or any sport. It’s a political term that refers to “an awareness of issues concerning social and racial justice.” While both themes tangentially touch on sports — it’s impossible to completely separate large-scale social issues from large-scale athletics — the concept of “staying woke” started in a very different place than how it’s used on social media today.

Over time, the concept of staying woke has been applied to other areas vastly unrelated to politics. This includes the super opinionated Golf Twitter landscape; a legion of like-minded, young, educated, liberal, white followers not afraid of jogger pants and the ‘tweet’ button.

Suddenly, a new golf theme emerged from the overuse of the ‘woke’ term: traditional minimalism.

What is Woke Golf Culture?

In a way, Woke Golf Culture is the zeitgeist for a population comprised of the individuals described above. Its origins include a smaller group of Golf Course Architecture (GCA) enthusiasts opining on the finer qualities of course design, igniting an ongoing conversation (and multiple podcasts) on the topic.

The Fried Egg is a fantastic website whose primary focus is GCA, with fellow Chicagoan Andy Johnson at the helm. In an excellent piece he authored this October, Johnson examines whether woke golf culture has become elitist; teetering on exclusivity rather than the opposite.

I’m not completely sure what “woke golf culture” is, but I’m guessing it has something to do with golfers who enjoy learning about and discussing golf course design. I don’t think that’s necessarily “elitist” at all.

Yes, many of the best-designed American courses are private and exclusive, and therefore could be considered elitist. But one great thing that I think today’s golf architecture enthusiasts have done is help promote public, affordable, and architecturally interesting courses.

I agree with this sentiment, specifically as it relates to golf courses. For example, I would have never thought of playing Canal Shores had it not been for websites like The Fried Egg and publications like the Golfer’s Journal. Examples of how crowd-sourced ‘wokeness’ can yield positivity are everywhere.

Smaller subsets of this culture now permeates through other areas of the industry, especially in golf equipment and accessories. Woke Golf Culture, and all of its opinions, have begun to change what we “should” or “should not” play in the eyes of those who contribute the loudest.

How are Brands Responding?

Ladies and gentlemen, we are in the era of high-end Sunday bags and artisan clubs.

For whatever reason, the concept of carrying your clubs while playing (carts are bad!) has taken precedence among those who are most Woke. In fact, it is recommended to do so with fewer than 14 clubs while wearing shoes that can be worn on and off the course. Many of those clubs “should” be persimmon and/or hickory shafted, which are best used when striking a discount golf ball.

Accessory brands touting the benefits of using handcrafted, tartan headcovers, milled ball markers and wooden alignment aides have popped up seemingly overnight. The craftsmanship in these pieces are incredible, along with their accompanying price tags.

This desire to get back to one’s golfing roots started as a means to celebrate the nostalgia of the game. I can appreciate that; we all have memories of growing up using our first set of hand-me-down clubs. But does this mean we have to completely abandon technology in an effort to appear most appreciative of the game?

Furthermore, why is playing anything other than the bare minimum in tech suddenly a bad thing?

Looking Ahead

There is plenty of room in golf for the multitude of ways to enjoy it. Brands like Linksoul, TRUE Linkswear, Seamus Golf, Artisan Golf, and dozens of others understand that niches make this game a beautifully complicated industry. Consumers will respond, and most of these brands will be successful.

What muddies the waters, unfortunately, are the extremists in the Woke Golf culture that prefer to tell others how to behave and how to enjoy the game. Perhaps pockets of exclusivity and elitism are unavoidable in golf; however, this doesn’t have to become the ultimate end point of widespread movements like what we’re seeing now.

Brands have a responsibility to help us understand how emerging trends can emphasize the best parts of golf and not why their customers are better than the rest of us. There is a difference between marketing to make a sale and contributing to negative exclusivity for the sake of a dollar.

Golf Twitter Outrage | Episode 194

Golf Twitter has become its own entity on social media as of late, and Trey from OutsideTheCut.com joins the show to break it down.

Follow Trey at @OutsideTheCut on Twitter.

Monday Morning Marshal: PGA Tour Week in Review 2/9/2015

As a new segment here on GolfUnfilitered.com, we'll take a few minutes every Monday morning to offer our take on the previous week on the PGA TOUR. Be sure to add your own take on the topics discussed in the comment section below. You can also reach out to me on Twitter, where I will do my best to respond.

---

Jason Day Wins the Farmers Insurance Open

It may have taken a four-man playoff to get it done, but Jason Day's victory at the 2015 Farmers Insurance Open says a lot about where the PGA TOUR is headed. The 27-year-old Aussie now has three PGA TOUR wins on his resume, and it seems like he should have at least a half-dozen more by now. His efforts have earned Day a spot in the Top 5 of the Official World Golf Rankings, becoming the highest-ranked Australian on the list (Adam Scott is ranked way down the list at No. 5). Throw in the fact that he has three runner-up finishes at two different majors (Masters 2011, U.S. Open 2011 and 2013) and it's clear to see that Day has been simmering to a boiling point for years.

Which is what makes watching Day so maddening. At some point we need to stop talking about Jason Day's potential and more about him taking the game by the horns. Unfortunately, wins at the Farmers Insurance Open isn't going to cut it. While he took a step in the right direction by winning the WGC Match Play event in 2014, Day will remain in the "Could Be" column until he wins his first major.

That being stated, the Golf Channel's Jason Sobel tweeted the best reaction to Day's win:

PGA Tour victories for guys named Jason: 1860-2004: Zero. 2005-2015: Nine. We're taking over. That's right... we.

— Jason Sobel (@JasonSobelGC) February 9, 2015

---

Tiger Woods and Phil Mickelson are Falling Apart

Their respective departures from this week's tournament may have been different on paper, but it is abundantly clear that neither Tiger Woods nor Phil Mickelson have any damn clue what they're doing on the golf course anymore. Poor play can be attributed to any number of external factors -- such as bad weather, missing teeth or inappropriate stock tips -- but it appears what ails Big Cat and FIGJAM is an unhealthy mix of physiological and psychological shittiness. In Tiger's case, poor physical health coupled with yet another swing change (his fourth!) has all but rendered the greatest player of our generation to nothing more than a weekend hacker. Actually, check that; Tiger needs to make it to the weekend first before he's worthy of that designation. Phil's situation seems a bit different. He's not exactly the youngest guy on TOUR anymore -- and hasn't been for awhile -- and he's got his own medical concerns as well. But something that Phil never seems to do is blame his poor play on anything other than what's going on between his ears. Unlike Tiger, Phil's golf swing as a whole seems sound; it's his putting that has all but deserted him, and it's left him baffled.

“My putting is beyond pathetic,” he told Golf Digest after missing the cut at Torrey Pines. “And if I can’t get back to the levels of 2013, I’m not sure what I’m going to do.” Me neither, Phil, because I predicted you'd be named a player-coach for next year's Ryder Cup. GET IT TOGETHER MAN.

---

Best of Twitter

For those unaware, a "hot take" is a knee-jerk reaction shared or angle taken on a sports topic without first giving it any semblance of a coherent thought. Or, in other words, "anything I write in my Twitter feed." There were a few doosies this week from around the interwebs, including the one I tossed out following Brook Koepka's five-putt on 18 during Friday's second round:

That sound you heard was the Brooks Koepka bandwagon exploding — Adam Fonseca (@AdamJFonseca) February 7, 2015

@AdamJFonseca wow. Just... Wow. pic.twitter.com/JbKxZWmidn

— No Laying Up (@NoLayingUp) February 7, 2015

Tough room.   Other favorite tweets from the week include:

ICYMI: @NoLayingUp reacts to JB Holmes' decision to lay up on 18 with a chance to win pic.twitter.com/A1mSTgktlw — Two Inches Short (@TwoInchesShort) February 9, 2015

Your latest example of how flawed the OWGR are: there's no way that there's only 61 golfers in the world better than Tiger right now.

— Adam Sarson (@Adam_Sarson) February 9, 2015