When someone is good at something (or maybe just famous in some field) they’re more likely to get attention.
When they get attention, they’re opened up to more attention because people will talk about them. It’s easier to talk about well-known things.
This opens them up to scrutiny.
If you’re really good at a sport, you might make it to a professional league.
And if you’re the best out of the really good, you’re likely to be highlighted by camera crews more often.
Since you’re spending more time on camera, the people at home are more likely to notice things about the way you play, or the demeanor you have when you’re playing the game.
They might say you flop too much, or you complain too much.
The reality may be that you’re just highlighted more.
Other players might do it as frequently as you do. They just don’t make it on camera as often.
The data we see doesn’t tell the whole story.
How are we questioning the data as it’s presented? Because there’s so much information in the world, it’s often helpful to have something to focus us (camera) on the relevant data (the player).
However, we do miss out on hidden data points (the other players on the field who aren’t getting their individual play broadcast) because of the way an individual or group is choosing to present it (cameraperson).
The information that wins is typically easy to see, share, and spread.