Football Routs Campbell, 45-10

first_img Box Score (HTML) “Our guys played great in every phase of the game from beginning to end. It was a whole team win,” said Drake head football coach Rick Fox. Campbell’s quarterback Daniel Smith, who is the nation’s leading rusher entering the game, mustered just 81 yards rushing, while throwing 10-of-22 for 147 yards and an interception. The Bulldogs (6-4, 5-2 PFL) used two big first-half plays to take a 14-0 lead. Cole Neary made a tough catch between two Camel defenders for a 37-yard reception to put the Bulldogs deep in Campbell territory. Two-plays later, Reichardt capped off the 73-yard scoring drive with a two-yard touchdown run, his fourth touchdown run of the season. Two possessions later, Doran beat the defender on a jump ball and then broke a tackle for a 68-yard touchdown catch to put Drake up 14-0. Story Links Preview Buy Tickets Live Stats PRAISE 940AM Jacksonville 11/18/2017 – 1 p.m. Kraemer capped off the 21-point Bulldog third-quarter with a 12-yard touchdown pass to Zach DeLeon, giving Drake a 35-3 lead. Box Score (PDF) The Bulldog defense limited Campbell (6-5, 5-3 PFL), who heading into the game averaged nearly 450 yards per game, to 327 yards of total offense. Sean Lynch and Kieran Severa tallied a team-high 11 tackles. Nathan Clayberg helped set the tone up front as he collected 10 tackles, including 1.5 for a loss and a sack. Next Game: Full Schedule Roster center_img Listen Live Watch Live Junior Drew Lauer led the Bulldog ground game with 79 yards and a touchdown, while Brock Reichardt and Tyler Updegraff tallied 56 and 51 yards rushing, respectively. “I was proud of the whole offense, because we were able to run the ball and throw the ball to keep them off balance. Grant did a great job making some big plays in the passing game. He led our offense and when he works our offense he is as good of a quarterback you will find,” said Fox. “I am so proud of Drew (Lauer), when he got injured last year they said it was a year and a half of recovery time. He came back in less than a year and to come back and have a big day today was huge.” BUIES CREEK, N.C. – A complete team performance propelled the Drake University football team to rout Campbell, 45-10, Saturday afternoon at Barker-Lane Stadium in Buies Creek, N.C. The Camels managed to get on the board near the end of the second-quarter with a 30-yard field goal as Drake took a 14-3 lead into halftime. “Our defense played really well especially against a really tough quarterback. He is tough to contain and we did a great job,” said Fox. The Bulldogs continued to make big plays in the second-half as Drew Lauer wheeled off a 54-yard touchdown run and then Kraemer completed a 57-yard touchdown pass to Doran, extending Drake’s lead to 28-3 midway through the third-quarter. Senior Grant Kraemer put together a near perfect game as he completed 17-for-20 attempts for 369 yards passing and three touchdowns. Kraemer’s top target was junior Steven Doran, who recorded a career-best and game-high 170 yards receiving on four catches and two touchdowns. The Bulldogs were in full control heading in to the fourth-quarter, leading 35-10 and went on to tack on 10 fourth-quarter points for a final score of 45-10. The Bulldogs will close out the season on Saturday, Nov. 18 as they host Jacksonville. Kickoff is set for 1 p.m. Print Friendly Versionlast_img read more

Social media bots tried to influence the US election Germany may be

first_imgAdapted from pe-art/ISTOCKPHOTO by G. Grullón/Science Most researchers concentrate on Twitter, which does not prohibit automated accounts. The platform also makes 1% of tweets freely available through a programming interface—and, for a fee, it opens up 10%. After analyzing tweets from 14 million users worldwide, Emilio Ferrara, a computer scientist at the University of Southern California’s Information Sciences Institute in Los Angeles, estimated that up to 15% of Twitter profiles—a whopping 50 million—are bots. And most are creatures of politics. “Among the few topics that bots focus on,” Ferrara says, “politics is certainly one of the most prominent, if not the most prominent.”Bots can inflate a topic’s importance or tarnish reputations by flooding social networks with fake news and by manipulating the currency of Twitter: likes and shares, follows and retweets. Just how that translates into votes is unclear, says Simon Hegelich, a political scientist at the Bavarian School of Public Policy at the Technical University of Munich in Germany. Bots are unlikely to change voters’ preferences, he believes, but they might influence decisions on whether to vote at all. “It’s hard to test this in a scientifically rigorous fashion,” he says.Germany seemed a good place to try. The German parliament’s network was hacked in 2015—Russia is said to be the prime suspect—leading to worries that stolen emails might be published strategically to affect the election. (In France’s presidential election this spring, bots drew attention to stolen, as well as faked, documents.) Last October, Merkel urged political parties to refrain from using social bots; all major parties except Alternative für Deutschland agreed.Now, research groups are trawling tens of millions of tweets related to the German elections for signs that bots are exerting influence. Lisa-Maria Neudert of the Computational Propaganda Project at the University of Oxford in the United Kingdom is comparing current bot activity to patterns seen during Germany’s presidential elections last February. In that election, in which a political body called the Federal Assembly votes rather than the public, bots accounted for a small fraction of political tweets, Neudert says. She expects more bot activity in the upcoming election, where public opinion is at stake. On 3 September, as German Chancellor Angela Merkel and her main opponent Martin Schulz faced off in an election debate that many viewers panned as more of a duet than a duel, a far livelier effort was underway on social media. People on Twitter started using the hashtag #verräterduell, which translates as “duel of traitors” and mirrors the claim by the right-wing Alternative für Deutschland party that both Merkel’s mainstream Christian Democrats and Schulz’s Social Democrats have “betrayed” the country.Yet much of the venom may not have been fueled by angry voters, researchers say. Instead it looks like the work of bots, or fake social media profiles that appear to be connected to human users, but are really driven by algorithms.With Germans going to the polls on 24 September to elect their new parliament, experts are watching closely for signs of automated propaganda on social networks. So far, bots seem less active than they did in the recent presidential elections in France and the United States, where some commentators believe Russia was seeking to boost right-wing candidates. But researchers sensitized by past elections are making the German contest a laboratory for studies of how to recognize bots and trace their effects. Country * Afghanistan Aland Islands Albania Algeria Andorra Angola Anguilla Antarctica Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Armenia Aruba Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Bermuda Bhutan Bolivia, Plurinational State of Bonaire, Sint Eustatius and Saba Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Bouvet Island Brazil British Indian Ocean Territory Brunei Darussalam Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Cayman Islands Central African Republic Chad Chile China Christmas Island Cocos (Keeling) Islands Colombia Comoros Congo Congo, the Democratic Republic of the Cook Islands Costa Rica Cote d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Curaçao Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark Djibouti Dominica Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Falkland Islands (Malvinas) Faroe Islands Fiji Finland France French Guiana French Polynesia French Southern Territories Gabon Gambia Georgia Germany Ghana Gibraltar Greece Greenland Grenada Guadeloupe Guatemala Guernsey Guinea Guinea-Bissau Guyana Haiti Heard Island and McDonald Islands Holy See (Vatican City State) Honduras Hungary Iceland India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Republic of Iraq Ireland Isle of Man Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jersey Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Kiribati Korea, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Republic of Kuwait Kyrgyzstan Lao People’s Democratic Republic Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libyan Arab Jamahiriya Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Macao Macedonia, the former Yugoslav Republic of Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Maldives Mali Malta Martinique Mauritania Mauritius Mayotte Mexico Moldova, Republic of Monaco Mongolia Montenegro Montserrat Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nauru Nepal Netherlands New Caledonia New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Niue Norfolk Island Norway Oman Pakistan Palestine Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Pitcairn Poland Portugal Qatar Reunion Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saint Barthélemy Saint Helena, Ascension and Tristan da Cunha Saint Kitts and Nevis Saint Lucia Saint Martin (French part) Saint Pierre and Miquelon Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Samoa San Marino Sao Tome and Principe Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Seychelles Sierra Leone Singapore Sint Maarten (Dutch part) Slovakia Slovenia Solomon Islands Somalia South Africa South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands South Sudan Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Suriname Svalbard and Jan Mayen Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Taiwan Tajikistan Tanzania, United Republic of Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Tokelau Tonga Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Turks and Caicos Islands Tuvalu Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Vanuatu Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of Vietnam Virgin Islands, British Wallis and Futuna Western Sahara Yemen Zambia Zimbabwe Social media ‘bots’ tried to influence the U.S. election. Germany may be next Click to view the privacy policy. Required fields are indicated by an asterisk (*)center_img Email By Kai KupferschmidtSep. 13, 2017 , 3:45 PM Sign up for our daily newsletter Get more great content like this delivered right to you! Country Bot-spotting is one of the biggest challenges in the burgeoning field. Neudert’s metric is crude, she acknowledges: She labels any account that posts more than 50 tweets a day using certain political hashtags as a bot. “That’s wrong in both directions,” Hegelich says. Some human users post more, and some bots post far less. But Neudert says that method has been surprisingly good at spotting bots.Earlier versions of social bots were easy to identify because many posted continuously day and night, but in the arms race between botmakers and bot-detectors they have become harder to identify. (There are signs that botmakers have adapted to Neudert’s rule, staying just below 50 tweets.) “You can never be 100% sure whether a profile is a bot,” Hegelich says. To detect the fingerprints of bots during the Merkel-Schulz debate, scientists in a project called PropStop relied on other measures of behavior. They found that accounts using the #verräterduell hashtag tended to be newer profiles and retweeted existing messages more often than other accounts.Many researchers are turning to machine-learning techniques to distinguish real and fake users. For instance, Ferrara arrived at his estimate of bots using an algorithm that he trained on millions of tweets from verified human users and bots. It tracks hundreds of features, including an account’s age and use of emoticons. (Bot-generated content tends to be emotionally charged.) Hegelich, who is probing for correlations between voter turnout in the upcoming election and bot activity, examines factors such as the distribution of exclamation marks to pinpoint bots. Humans are inconsistent, he says. “Most bots either use a lot of exclamation marks or never.” But even the most sophisticated models probably miss many bots, Ferrara says. “We do a very good job at detecting simple bots, but for the more complex and advanced ones based on [artificial intelligence] we only have few examples, and we probably miss most of them these days.”Perhaps the most urgent question is who is behind the bots. Ferrara tracked bots that were deployed in last year’s U.S. presidential election. After Donald Trump’s victory, “these accounts sort of went dark,” Ferrara says. Some roared back to life in April, on the eve of the French election, pushing Marine Le Pen, the far-right candidate in France’s election, he says. A number even switched to French language.Ferrara is now investigating whether the same bots are active in Germany. If that’s the case, a handful of bad actors may be leading a veritable army of social media bots, seeking to tip elections in country after country.last_img read more