Know Property Management Better

Considering an expert’s outlook on Property Management is the ideal way to open a discourse about what Property Management is and the ropes of this complex business. According to the definition given by Robert and Floyd in 1998, Property Management is defined as “the management of real estate on behalf of the owner for compensation.”

In layman terms, Property Management is a process where a person or a group of people control and supervise a property that is available for lease. These kinds of properties are owned by someone else. Therefore, the owner of the property hires someone to handle the day-to-day activities that are related to the real estate. This process also involves looking for tenants for a house or apartment, a collection of the rent or payments that are to be made for the property, looking over the maintenance of the property, and the general upkeep of it.

Property here does not just mean a house or an apartment; property can be referred to residential, commercial, industrial and or unique purpose property such as event grounds, banquets, resorts, schools, clubs, hotels, retirement homes and so on.

How does this process work?

Often time’s Oklahoma city property management is taken care of by a firm or real estate company, and a property manager is designated to do the job of leasing out property, managing rent, supervising the handing over and taking over of a house or apartment, so on and so forth. Property managers also make sure to preserve the value of the property while generating an income.

The property manager is different as compared to a real estate broker. The broker provides buyer and seller agent services. On the other hand, property managers help the owners in creating rental budgets, advertise the property, comply with real estate board laws, collect rent, etc. Property managers also supervise preventive maintenance such as exterior and interior upkeep, repair-work and so forth.

Why should a property owner invest in property management?

For those who own more than one or two properties, managing them can and does become difficult over time. Hiring a property manager will help them in maintaining the properties better, and they will not incur any loss. Those who participate in affordable residential programs can also hire a property management expert to render their services so that everything is looked after.

While property management companies usually charge an amount of 7-10% of the monthly rent to manage properties, they can be convenient and beneficial for property owners. One of the most significant benefits a property owner can reap from having a property management company take care of their property is that they know the federal laws concerning real estate and property management.

Since taking care of everything from the tenant to collecting the rent, looking at the upkeep of the place, supervising repairs, etc can be taxing while the owner takes care of their own house, it is not a very big investment to get an expert to take care of these things. It saves time and saves a lot of money.

Contact US:

RE/MAX Energy Property Management

335 S Mustang Rd,g
Phone: (405) 919-0460

Beside The Points For Thursday, March 22, 2018

Things That Caught My Eye

Celtics bring the Thunder

There have been 885 NBA teams who trailed by 5 or more points in the final 20 seconds of a game this season so far. Of those, 884 of them went on to lose that game. On Tuesday, the Boston Celtics became the first team this season to pull off a win in that scenario, beating a 5 point deficit with 16.8 seconds to go. [FiveThirtyEight]

Boeheim on top

Jim Boeheim of Syracuse has edged out Tom Izzo of Michigan State to take the top sport when it comes to wins over expected in the NCAA men’s basketball tournament. Boeheim has 54 wins and 25 losses when we’d only expect his teams to get 44.3 wins, giving him a 9.7 wins over expected in the tourney. [FiveThirtyEight]

Try out our interactive, Which World Cup Team Should You Root For?

Gore to mount campaign in Florida

Frank Gore, an immortal, has signed a one year deal with the Miami Dolphins. In 2017 he rushed 961 yards for the Indianapolis Colts, 39 yards shy of a tenth career 1,000 yard season. Frank Gore will be 35 years old. [ESPN]

Mickelson is playing the best in his career

Phil Mickelson has finished in the top 15 in 6 out of 8 tournaments this year with a season average finish position just under 20. This makes this season one of the best of his career so far. [FiveThirtyEight]

New Football league

In addition to Vince McMahon’s attempt to revive the XFL, a competitor to the NFL, this past week documentary filmmaker Charlie Ebersol announced the Alliance of American Football will debut in February, 2019 and will run for 10 weeks. Reality is, there are 28,000 Division I NCAA football players and at any given time only 1,700 NFL jobs, so they’ll certainly have players. The competitive advantage of the league would be 60 percent fewer commercials and no TV timeouts. [ESPN]

Soccer players not unanimous fans of not playing soccer

A poll of 104 current Major League Soccer players across 22 of the league’s 23 clubs found rising but still middling support for promotion and relegation. In 2017, 54 percent of players favored the introduction of promotion and relegation — where the worst teams in a league are relegated to a lesser league while the best teams in that lesser league are elevated to the majors — but that figure’s since risen to 63 percent. The main concerns are that a viable second division doesn’t yet exist and that ownership groups would be destabilized. [ESPN]

Big Number

30 quick time outs

Gregg Popovich, the coach of the San Antonio Spurs, has no qualms about calling a time out in the early moments of a game. As of Monday, Popovich had called 30 time outs in the first two minutes of a game since 2009, head and shoulders above the rest of the league. [FiveThirtyEight]

Leaks from Slack


chris.herring [9:51 PM, Wednesday]

Pop just called timeout 2 mins into their game on national TV


@chris.herring I’ll tweet that from the main account!

chris.herring [9:51 PM, Wednesday]:

In fairness to Pop, Spurs missed their first 7 or 8 shots. I would’ve called timeout, too :joy:



Oh, and don’t forget
Why can’t the Rockets be the Warriors?

Why Can’t The Rockets Be The Warriors?

We’ve seen all this before. And it was not so long ago.

On Tuesday night, with his Houston Rockets up 2 against the streaking Portland Trail Blazers, a little more than three minutes on the clock, James Harden made a three. A few possessions later, he made another. The Rockets won 115-111 to go to 57-14 on the season, best in the NBA and four games up on the reigning champion Golden State Warriors. On both shots, Harden took what would have been called hero ball shots in another context. No other Rocket touched the ball; everyone in the arena knew what Harden would do, and how. Harden has made these shots his signature and his team’s by finding success where others have found only stacks of Rudy Gay box scores. And while the league has come to view the shot as not just unguardable but reliable, it has at times waffled on whether Harden’s team can be trusted. Funny, given the recent history of ascendant teams led by star guards with an unguardable shot.

Just a few seasons ago, a team was led by two star guards who hadn’t found much success in the postseason thanks to a history of injuries and bad fortune. It featured a young big man who anchored the defense and epitomized a key facet of modern offenses. It boasted a sixth man who would have been a featured starter on practically any other team, a roster loaded down with dead-eye marksmen and a fleet of versatile wings who could switch assignments and not fall down. This team won the NBA title.

(Key: Steph, Klay, Draymond, Andre, just about everyone else, and the top-ranked 2014-15 defense.)

The 2014-15 Golden State Warriors were an unexpected development. The team had won 51 games the previous season under then-coach Mark Jackson, and the roster was largely unchanged coming into that season. Once the season began, however, it was clear that something was very different. Golden State won 21 of its first 23 games and finished the season with 67 wins, ranked first in defensive rating and, importantly, second in offensive rating, up from 12th the season before. Yet a broad set of NBA observers doubted that a team playing the way the Warriors did could win a title, even after they’d already won it.

This season, the Rockets ran out to a 25-4 record before losing seven of nine games. In all but one of the losses, they were missing Harden, Chris Paul or Clint Capela. (The remaining loss was to the Warriors.) Since then, Houston has lost just three times in 33 games. FiveThirtyEight’s projections expect the Rockets to win 67 games total, up from their tally of 55 last season. They have the top-rated offense not just this season, but for as long as has been keeping track. They sneak into the top 10 on defense this season as well, an improvement on 18th the previous season. They’re flat good. But you know that by now. What’s important here is that when a team is this good, regardless of what its doubters say, the question isn’t whether it has arrived but whether it will win the title or merely its conference.

There are a few ways to slice this. Since 1983-84, this year’s Houston team ties for 20th among all teams in net rating (the difference between points scored and points allowed per 100 possessions) through 71 games. That’s a bigger deal than it may seem, for a few reasons. First, the teams ahead of this season’s Rockets are immensely accomplished. They include four Michael Jordan teams, three Tim Duncan teams, two Laker teams — one Shaq and Kobe, another Magic and Kareem — one Kevin Garnett Celtics team and, of course, the past three versions of the Golden State Warriors. In general, teams at Houston’s level at least win the conference. The teams that didn’t make the finals tended to have extenuating circumstances. The 2012-13 Thunder, for instance, were the top seed in the West but lost Russell Westbrook in the first round and fell to Memphis in the second. The 2011-12 Chicago Bulls lost reigning MVP Derrick Rose in the first game of the first round. And the 2015-16 Spurs faced an exceptionally high level of competition, losing in the second round to a Thunder team that went up 3-1 on the Warriors.These rankings tend to be sticky. Meaning that the list after 25 games looks a lot like the list after 45 games, which looks a lot like the list after 65 games. Teams shift around a few places, but they do not tend to bomb in or out of the rarified neighborhood. We know that the early season is predictive in sports because players tend to be healthy and rested, but it’s also good to remember that teams playing at an all-time level are seldom flukes.


Net rating isn’t the only factor in which Houston is dominating, and as Benjamin Morris wrote for FiveThirtyEight a few seasons back, margin of victory is actually far less predictive in the playoffs than it is in the regular season. In fact, it’s Houston’s wins that make it a playoff force. In the postseason, the difference between two teams’ win totals is much more predictive than margin of victory. If the Rockets finish with 67 wins and the Warriors finish with their projected 61, Morris’s data from his 2016 article suggests that given home court advantage, Houston would win a series 70 percent of the time — even if the two teams were dead-even on margin of victory.

The Rockets may not be quite as good as the Warriors were in that first season or as Golden State was in the 73-win 2015-16 campaign. But, then, neither are this year’s Warriors. The team’s injury troubles and continuing sloppiness have turned it into a merely dominant team, not an all-time one. Even if we grant the Warriors a few extra victories because their injury problems have been worse than Houston’s, it would make a prospective series between the two a coin flip, not heavily slanted toward Golden State.

And like the Warriors, the Rockets aren’t simply unguardable as a team: They have a player who has mastered an unguardable manner of playing. Harden doesn’t have the same switchblade release as Curry — he can’t dart around a ball screen and have a shot in the air before his man can turn his head. What Harden can do is get just about any switch he wants, thanks to the level at which he and Paul are running the pick and roll, and then, in isolation, he can walk into his now-trademark step-back threes.

The pull-up three is increasingly a staple of modern offenses, as defenses have adjusted to the off-ball maneuvering that good offenses use to free up shooters. Harden leads the league in pull-up threes per game, taking 8.0 and making 39.0 percent of them. Paul is third on the list, taking 5.2 per game and making 38.5 percent of them.The Blazers’ Damian Lillard sits between the two at 5.4 pull-up threes per game.

“>2 As a team, the Rockets are taking 16.5 pull-up threes per game and making 35.9 percent. The next-closest team, the Los Angeles Clippers, takes 10.0 per game. Even if its primary pick-and-roll engine sputters, Houston has an entire extra, independent dimension to carry its offense through dry spells, like Curry’s pull-ups or like Kevin Durant’s mastery of contested shots in last summer’s finals.

Nothing the Rockets could do this season would make them meaningful favorites to most NBA fans against a healthy Warriors team in the playoffs. Nothing the Warriors could do would do that, either. That’s probably correct: There are many things most projection systems, like FiveThirtyEight’s CARM-Elo, can’t spot, such as player injury, which undermine the edge Houston holds by the numbers. Golden State is a dominant champion with what is now a considerable track record of excellence. It’s tough to be favored heavily against that. But there is also now sufficient evidence to declare that Houston is squarely in Golden State’s weight class, just as there was for Golden State when it arrived on the scene.

Check out our latest NBA predictions.

Everyone’s Talking About Tiger, But Phil Mickelson Is Playing The Best Golf Of His Career

The entirety of the golf-watching internet has spent a couple of recent Sundays engrossed in a 40-something golfer whose career peaked a decade ago. But while Tiger Woods has consumed all of the oxygen in the room, the game’s other 40-something blast from the past, Phil Mickelson, is quietly playing some of the best golf of his professional career.

That Mickelson, at the well-seasoned age of 47, is entirely overlooked thanks to his enigmatic rival is almost too fitting; it’s been happening for two decades.

“He’s always one-upped me in my career, and I wouldn’t be surprised if he came out this week and won,” Mickelson said of Woods earlier this month. “Just to one-up me again.”

Lefty stands at No. 18 in the World Golf Rankings, where the average age of the players ahead of him is 30.7. He is No. 3 in the FedExCup standings, where the average age of the players ahead of him is 28. He has logged five top-10 finishes in eight starts this season; only 31-year-old Brian Harman, who has played in 10 events, has more.

At the WGC-Mexico Championship in early March, Mickelson beat Justin Thomas — the No. 2 golfer in the world, who is young enough to be Mickelson’s son — in a playoff. It was Mickelson’s 43rd professional win and his first since taking the British Open at Muirfield in 2013.

It was also a continuation of peak performance this season from the avid gamesman. Entering this week’s WGC-Dell Technologies Match Play, Mickelson has finished no worse than tied for sixth at four consecutive tournaments. With an average finish of 3.5 over his past four appearances, Mickelson is currently riding the best four-event stretch of his entire career.Excluding unofficial events, match play and team events.

“>1 He’s placed in the top 15 in six of the eight tournaments this year, putting his average tournament finish this season on par with the best seasons of his career.

The underlying numbers support Mickelson’s 2018 renaissance. Using the strokes gained statistic — which evaluates every golfer by comparing his performance on each incremental shot in a round to the average — Mickelson is having the best season of his career on record, albeit in the early going. He is averaging +2.33 strokes gained per round, which is higher than his best full-season mark since at least 2004, the first year for which this data is available.

What’s gotten into Phil?

How Phil Mickelson has fared in terms of strokes gained, 2004 season through March 20, 2018

Average Strokes Gained
Season Measured Rounds Off the Tee Approach Around the Green Putting TOTAL
2004 54 +0.60 +0.60 +0.22 -0.09 +1.32
2005 50 +0.34 +0.57 +0.36 +0.26 +1.53
2006 47 +0.57 +0.98 +0.14 +0.27 +1.96
2007 52 +0.33 +0.61 +0.50 +0.16 +1.60
2008 59 +0.40 +0.84 +0.36 +0.21 +1.82
2009 48 +0.31 +0.27 +0.38 -0.15 +0.82
2010 57 +0.19 +0.74 +0.23 -0.15 +1.00
2011 58 +0.14 +0.90 +0.33 -0.19 +1.18
2012 60 -0.10 +0.57 +0.40 +0.56 +1.42
2013 57 +0.02 +0.49 +0.26 +0.66 +1.44
2014 50 +0.20 +0.17 +0.27 +0.23 +0.87
2015 55 +0.07 +0.02 +0.23 +0.26 +0.58
2016 59 -0.15 +0.73 +0.22 +0.57 +1.36
2017 69 -0.06 +0.55 +0.22 +0.34 +1.05
2018 22 -0.10 +1.14 +0.21 +1.08 +2.33

2018 season is ongoing. Total average strokes gained may not add up exactly because of rounding.

Source: PGA Tour

As many a grandfather has implored over the years, golf is a sport people can play virtually their entire lives. But performance obviously diminishes over time — especially at the highest level the sport has to offer. There’s a senior tour for a reason, after all.

So how, then, is Mickelson turning back the clock this season as the old-timer in a sea of youths?

“There’s a number of areas in my game that, if I look back 10, 15 years ago, I feel like I’m significantly better,” Mickelson said earlier this month on the Dan Patrick Show. “Certainly, I’ve gotten a ton better at putting.”

This is very true. Only Jason Day (1.39) is averaging more strokes gained with the putter than Mickelson (1.08), who leads the tour in the percentage of holes with only one putt (48.8 percent), the average number of putts per round (27), the percentage of holes with a birdie or better (41.3 percent)On holes in which the player hit the green in regulation.

“>2 and overall putting average (1.5 putts per hole).

While his work off the tee has been nothing special (-0.10 strokes gained), Mickelson has had little difficulty getting his ball in position to attack the flagstick, ranking third in strokes gained on shots approaching the green (1.14).

And yet, Mickelson’s odds to win the Masters sit at 20-to-1, below those of Woods, Jordan Spieth, Jason Day and Jon Rahm, who have combined to produce eight top-10 finishes and two wins this season. Mickelson has nearly matched those marks by himself. Given his record of work and meteoric ascension this season, golf’s most notorious active gambler would perhaps do well to bet on himself.

Mickelson has publicly said one of his goals is to qualify for a 12th Ryder Cup and to help the U.S. team win on foreign soil. His recent win gives him a great chance of accomplishing it. Another goal is to eclipse 50 career wins on tour.

“I don’t know (when I’ll get to 50),” Mickelson told reporters after his latest win. “Seven more wins and I’ll be there. I don’t have the month or the time, but I will get there.”

Politics Podcast: What If Trump Fires Mueller?



Over the weekend, President Trump tore into special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into Russian meddling in the 2016 election. So the FiveThirtyEight Politics podcast crew games out what would happen if Trump actually moved to fired Mueller. The team discusses possible congressional responses, public opinion and the effect on the midterms. According to Nate Silver, it would be a “catalyzing event”:

“There are two things that had a big negative effect on Trump’s approval rating, one of which was when they began to debate the health care bill and the other of which was firing [FBI Director James] Comey. That had a 3- or 4-point downward swing, which in this era is a lot. … People who are on the fence about ‘am I sympathetic to Trump or not?’ will come off the fence if Mueller is fired, and it will be a catalyzing event.”

The team also previews Tuesday’s Democratic primary in Illinois’s 3rd Congressional District, in which centrist incumbent Daniel Lipinski is being challenged from the left by political newcomer Marie Newman.

You can listen to the episode by clicking the “play” button above or by downloading it in iTunes, the ESPN App or your favorite podcast platform. If you are new to podcasts, learn how to listen.

The FiveThirtyEight Politics podcast publishes Monday evenings, with occasional special episodes throughout the week. Help new listeners discover the show by leaving us a rating and review on iTunes. Have a comment, question or suggestion for “good polling vs. bad polling”? Get in touch by email, on Twitter or in the comments.

How UMBC Did The Unthinkable — And The Inevitable

After a relatively sedate start to the NCAA men’s basketball tournament, the most shocking result in tourney history was saved for one of the last games in the round of 64. Late Friday, Maryland-Baltimore County did the unthinkable, pulling off the victory that college fans have been waiting decades to see: The Retrievers became the first No. 16 seed in the history of the men’s tournament to knock off a No. 1 when they beat Virginia 74-54.The women’s tournament beat the men to the punch by 20 years, of course, when No. 16 Harvard beat No. 1 Stanford in 1998.


(Look, we did say a No. 16 seed could beat a No. 1 this year — never mind which No. 16, and which No. 1…)

No, instead of the obvious pick, it was the obscure one. UMBC went into the game ranked 188th in Ken Pomeroy’s power ratings; Virginia ranked first. Our predictive model gave the Cavaliers a 98 percent probability of winning. Nothing about the two teams’ track records suggested that number was too high. (If anything, facing a Retrievers team that lost by 40-plus points to the likes of Albany, UVA seemed like it might be the safest No. 1 seed in the first round.)

Instead, the Cavs were on the wrong side of history.

Besides the novelty of a No. 16 beating a No. 1 seed — let alone the tournament’s No. 1 overall team — the magnitude of the upset would have been shocking in any context. According to ESPN’s Stats & Information Group, it was tied for the worst loss by an Associated Press No. 1 team to an unranked team at any point in the season, let alone the tournament.Undefeated No. 1 St. Joseph’s lost to Xavier by 20 in the 2003-04 season.

‘>2 And from a bettor’s standpoint, UMBC joined Santa Clara in 1993 and Norfolk State in 2012 — a pair of No. 15 seeds that won — as the only teams to win a game outright in the men’s tourney despite being an underdog of 20 or more points.

Virginia can place some of the blame on losing forward De’Andre Hunter right before the tournament. Sidelined with a wrist injury, Hunter was UVA’s best player on a rate basis,Excluding those with low playing time.

“>3 according to’s Win Shares per 40 minutes. The Cavs no doubt missed his efficient play at both ends of the court against the Retrievers.

But this loss cannot be pinned completely on Hunter’s absence. Against UMBC, Virginia played just about the worst game it possibly could. What had been one of the top offensive teams in the country during the regular season shot just 41 percent from the floor — including 18 percent from 3-point range (to go with a 50 percent showing from the foul line). More shockingly, the nation’s best defense looked completely lost, particularly in the game’s second half.

The Retrievers played their best possible game as well. They shot a stunning 54 percent from the field against the Cavaliers, nailing 12 of 24 attempts from beyond the arc. Going into the game, Virginia hadn’t allowed an opponent to shoot better than 50 percent from the field all season, against a schedule that consisted of many difficult opponents. Though no major-conference school could solve the UVA defense, UMBC — led by an audacious 28-point performance from electrifying guard Jairus Lyles — was the team that finally broke through. Virginia was holding opponents to 53.4 points per game, the lowest in the country. Lyles and the Retrievers got 53 in the second half alone.

In terms of blame, there’s plenty of finger-pointing left for Virginia coach Tony Bennett’s deliberately low-possession brand of basketball. The Cavs were easily the nation’s slowest team all season, and they basically never had to accelerate the pace to make a comeback push all year. As TV analyst Kenny Smith pointed out in the postgame coverage, UVA was unable to adjust once UMBC forced the Cavs to play from behind.

This topic deserves more research, but there is some evidence that slow favorites generally disappoint in March. It makes sense: Unlike underdogs, who should want more variance — and therefore fewer possessions in a game — favorites should theoretically be trying to reduce the randomness and give variance a smaller role in a game’s outcome. So it could be that Virginia-style favorites are inadvertently doing their opponents a big favor by slowing the pace down to a crawl, essentially giving away some of their talent advantage by allowing more randomness to seep into the game. (Whether this works in practice, though, is up for debate.)

Whatever the reason behind it, UMBC’s win was an upset for the ages. On the one hand, it was surprising that no 16 seed had ever beaten a No. 1 before Friday — according to our Elo model, we’d calculate the chances as 1-in-27 (or 3.7 percent) that a No. 16 wouldn’t have broken through in 134 tries. But this was also the victory that just seemed like it might never happen. Now that it has, there are no gimme games in the bracket anymore. Just when you thought it wasn’t possible, March Madness somehow got an extra dimension of madness. And it all comes courtesy of the UMBC Retrievers and their long-awaited underdog victory.

What It’s Like To Watch #MeToo When It Is You, Too

On average, more than 300,000 Americans experience rape or sexual assault each year. When the #MeToo movement makes headlines, those survivors are reading. How is that affecting people who have experienced sexual violence, to see stories similar to their own blasted across media outlets every day? Experts aren’t sure, but they’re confident that it’s having some kind of impact.

Case in point: In the last three months of 2017, calls to the Rape Abuse and Incest National Network — a national crisis hotline for people who have experienced sexual trauma — increased by 23 percent compared with the same period in the previous year. That increase is part of an apparent nationwide jump in sexual abuse victims seeking help from crisis centers. Experts believe there’s a connection between the increase and the rise of #MeToo, which was founded more than a decade ago but took off as a hashtag in October after reports of workplace abuses committed by the rich and powerful drew media attention to the stories of survivors of sexual assault and harassment.

So are more people calling the hotline now because they feel like #MeToo means they can tell their story and be believed? Or are more people calling the hotline because #MeToo reminded them of their own, personal, pain and now they’re suffering all over again? In short, we can’t say. But the clues left in the stories survivors tell and in the research that exists on the way people respond to trauma suggest that it’s probably a little of both.

In conversations with survivors of sexual assault, I learned that the impacts of #MeToo are complex, with the potential to heal or retraumatize — and sometimes both at the same time. On the one hand, being able to talk about their experiences has been healing for the survivors I spoke to — especially when they could do it in a context that allowed them to reach out to other survivors and help each other.

“There are so many people who have never told anyone” about their abuse, said Kesha Brown Booker, a rape survivor who speaks to universities, churches and other groups through the speakers’ bureau network of RAINN. But then they hear what she has to say. “I speak, and tell my story, and they feel like this person understands and gets it.”

The potential positives of seeing #MeToo stories in the media seem to line up with what experts have learned about trauma and the process of healing from post-traumatic stress disorder.

In the first few weeks after an assault, as many as 94 percent of survivors may experience symptoms of PTSD, including nightmares and flashbacks. But most of those people will slowly heal on their own. They won’t “get over it” — but they do become able to live without pain and don’t develop long-term PTSD, said Edna Foa, who is a professor of psychology at the University of Pennsylvania and one of the leading experts on sexual assault and trauma. Even while a minority do end up with longer-term problems, Foa said, they, too, can find relief through treatment. The #MeToo movement appears to be tapping into patterns researchers have seen that predict whose symptoms will dissipate naturally over time and what it takes to help those who seek treatment.

“We think that social support is a key protective factor against the development of PTSD,” said James Hamilton, professor of psychology at the University of Alabama. It helps explain why most survivors heal naturally over time. So, hearing other survivors of sexual violence talk about their experiences on social media and watching high-profile abusers lose jobs or go to jail could be helpful. It could give survivors a sense that they are part of a community, not foundering alone in dark water. And, Foa said, knowing that it’s possible to think about, or even talk about, what happened without experiencing immobilizing emotional distress is often a first step on the road to recovery for those who struggle with PTSD long term.

But beyond personal experiences, experts know very little about how watching strangers talk about sexual assault in social or traditional media affects people — especially people who have, themselves, experienced similar traumas. Neither Foa nor any other experts I spoke with could think of any studies that looked specifically at this issue.

There is some research that is tangentially connected. For instance, a 2006 study found that crime victims who read about their own cases in the newspaper or saw coverage on TV experienced high rates of negative emotions afterward — 66 percent reported sadness, 48 percent reported fear.

Indeed, the same survivors who told me that #MeToo had been empowering for them also told me that it had been, at times, a painful and retraumatizing reminder of their experience. That was true for Booker. That was also true for Jay Wu, a survivor and communications manager for the National Center for Transgender Equality. Wu identifies as a non-binary gender and uses the pronoun “they.” “I think partly it’s just the nature of talking about things like this,” they said.

Other studies suggest that media exposure to a trauma that isn’t your own can also be stressful. A survey of more than 2,000 New Yorkers after 9/11, for example, found that people who viewed the most television had a 66 percent greater chance of experiencing PTSD-like symptoms, even though three-quarters of the respondents did not see the disaster first-hand.

It’s unlikely that media exposure alone can cause PTSD, said Blair Wisco, professor of psychology at the University of North Carolina at Greensboro. At the same time, she said, studies have shown that therapists, first responders and others whose jobs expose them to scenes of trauma do have an increased risk of a sort of vicarious PTSD.

It’s also the case that, positive or negative, #MeToo media coverage is likely to affect people and groups differently. The survivors I spoke with emphasized that some of how #MeToo affects people is tied up in whether those people can see the movement as working for them — or being about them at all.

Transgender people, for example, have a higher probability of experiencing sexual assault or violence than the general U.S. population. A large 2015 survey found that nearly half of all trans people had been sexually assaulted.In contrast, previous surveys that split respondents into “male” and “female” categories and were not intended to capture trans experiences found that 1 in 6 American women and 1 in 33 men had experienced rape or a rape attempt.

‘>1 But, Wu said, trans people have often been left out of #MeToo media narratives that center on cisgender women, people whose female gender identity matches the sex they were recognized as having at birth. Some trans survivors have told Wu that #MeToo presents an opportunity to get trans stories out there. But for others, Wu said, it’s just another cultural moment that ignores their existence and their pain.

And that issue — whether all survivors feel like the community #MeToo is building is really for them — could have wide-reaching consequences for mental health. Booker spoke about this concern. So did Constance, another RAINN speaker and rape survivor who asked that her last name not be used. The media narrative has focused on wealthy, professional, culturally prominent, cisgender, white women, these survivors told me.

“The actors and models coming out, they’re being heard and taken seriously, but other individuals are not,” Booker said. “If you aren’t in a particular industry or don’t have the money, you’re dismissed.” If the psychological benefits of #MeToo are centered around creating a feeling of not being alone and building an atmosphere where survivors are believed, then it’s important to know that not all of them are receiving that message.

Beside The Points For Thursday, March 15, 2018

Things That Caught My Eye

Best of the best of the best

This season’s University of Connecticut women’s basketball team was the very best of an already outstanding legacy of UConn teams. Of the five UConn teams since 2014 — all of whom were ranked #1 in adjusted offensive efficiency, adjusted defensive efficiency and adjusted net efficiency — this one stands out with the highest in every rating of all five teams. [FiveThirtyEight]

Best of the worst of the best

The Ivy League sent the University of Pennsylvania to the NCAA men’s tournament, and the team was seeded 16th up against Kansas. Now no 16-seed has ever defeated a 1-seed, and that record remains unbroken as Kansas defeated Penn 76-60. However, Penn will go down as the highest-Elo rated, best-ever No. 16. [FiveThirtyEight]

Try out our interactive, Which World Cup Team Should You Root For?

Ten upsets in the cards

The Localized Upset Classification model gave a 50 percent chance or higher of an upset in 10 NCAAM tournament games, eyeing Murray State, NC State, Buffalo, Loyola Chicago, San Diego St., South Dakota St., Butler, Florida St., Syracuse, and Stephen F. Austin as potential first round upset contenders. [FiveThirtyEight]

Preseason matters in a sport!

Preseason AP and coaches polls were outstanding at predicting NCAA men’s basketball games from 2002-17, with higher rated teams in those preseason polls beating lower ranked rivals 71.8 percent of the time. Contrast that with Ratings Percentage Index, which the committee uses to seed the field of 68, which correctly called the outcome only 69.1 percent of the time. [FiveThirtyEight]

Arizona and Missouri know many kinds of pain

There are 16 different seeds you can lose a round of 64 game from, and several schools appear to be gunning for at least one first-round loss from all 16 of them. Thirteen different schools have lost from six different numbered seeds, and two — Providence and Princeton — with a loss from seven different seeds. It’s Arizona and Missouri, though, that are the connoisseurs of failure. Both of them have lost from a 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 9, and 10-seed; Arizona also lost from a 5-seed and Missouri an 11-seed. [FiveThirtyEight]

The West is going to be a crazy finale

There are seven teams in the Western conference separated by only two games, and only Houston and Golden State have guaranteed their ticket. That means that there are eight teams who could enjoy any seed between 3rd and “not appearing in this tournament,” which is quite a swing. [ESPN]

Big Number

10.24 yards per attempt

From 2015-17, the best quarterback in the NFL when there were two tight ends on the field was Kirk Cousins, previously of Washington but who recently became an extremely well paid member of the Minnesota Vikings. Minnesota may want to invest seriously at the tight end position given that Cousins got 2,621 yards on 177 completions over the 256 pass attempts thrown with two TEs playing. [FiveThirtyEight]

Leaks from Slack:



oh hm interesting


That caused our favorite to change! Nova now No. 1


Browns legend Joe Thomas announces his retirement

that’s kind of heartbreaking


Just as they might get good again, too
(and just as @walt and I were going to make our bet on Cleveland as 2020 Super Bowl champs)


i’ll still put my name on that post


Oh, and don’t forget
Capitalism is great

The GOP Should Be Freaking Out, Pennsylvania Edition



Democrat Conor Lamb appears to be the winner of Tuesday’s special U.S. House election in a district that voted for President Trump by 20 percentage points. The FiveThirtyEight Politics podcast team discusses what the results in Pennsylvania’s 18th District mean for Republicans in the 2018 midterms. Spoiler: Not great, Bob!

You can listen to the episode by clicking the “play” button above or by downloading it in iTunes, the ESPN App or your favorite podcast platform. If you are new to podcasts, learn how to listen.

The FiveThirtyEight Politics podcast publishes Monday evenings, with occasional special episodes throughout the week. Help new listeners discover the show by leaving us a rating and review on iTunes. Have a comment, question or suggestion for “good polling vs. bad polling”? Get in touch by email, on Twitter or in the comments.