There are lies, damn lies and statistics…
Just because a journalist types something down and it gets checked by three editors and two copyeditors, doesn’t guarantee that it is true. A glance at the correction section inthe bottom corner of A2 of any newspaper will prove this.
When reporting, journalists like to have solid, irrefutable proof of what they are writing is actually right. An eyewitness is a good start. Having an expert quoted is a way to shut down the naysayers. But for journalists, there is no more clandestine source to validate a story than statistics. Whether they came from a prestigious university, a well-regarded think tank or the nosy neighbor counting cars that run stop signs outside her house - numbers never lie.
According to a source, 92 percent of all journalists prefer the use of stats over any other source more than 88 percent of the time.
Stats give credibility to any story. Stats tell the reader, “Don’t worry, these check out. Just sit back, nod in approval and then proceed to flip to the funnies.”
In fact, the use of stats in a story masks the fact that most journalists aren’t very mathematically inclined. Stats also help validate a subject journalists know little or nothing about, such as like wind turbines, bird sausage or the economy.
If there was ever a time to see glee in a journalist’s eye is when he or she is typing out the following phrase - ”According to statistics released . . . ” After that, the journalist can hit F7 for spell check, throw his or her byline on the story and call it a day.
More from @JournalistsLike
- Stuff Journalists Like – #48 Desk Dining
- Stuff Journalists Like – #71 Off The Record
- Stuff Journalists Like – #5 Deadlines
@JournalistsLike Recommends
- A Great Art Project, Part 1 (High Road Artist)
- Hidden Fears, A Love Story (High Road Artist)
Topics:
irrefutable, Journalists and statistics
If you like stats, you’ll love Gullible.info. This site is chock full of really interesting statistics. It’s the site of a coworker’s best friend’s cousin or something.
If it’s in print, it has to be true! What?
Aww. My html tags got all messed up. Here’s the site you’ll love:
http://gullible.info/
It’s full of fun stats, such as:
• Ninety percent of all Conestoga wagons broke down irreparably in less than 795 miles.
This is an incredibly useful site, which was created by my coworker’s best friend’s cousin. If it’s in print it must be true!
This blog does a great job of poking holes in bad stats stories:
http://thestatsblog.wordpress.com/
Stats are my nemesis. I’m in sports, so there’s plenty of them – especially in baseball and football. It’s not that I don’t like using them. It’s that a) for high school football, I have to take and calculate them myself rather than having them handed to me (I’m not complaining, but there is a lot of room to make errors that way) and b) I have a bad tendency to switch around numbers in my head (a type of dyslexia?), so when i make errors in stories it’s usually in the stats.
Finding a statistic about anything even remotely related to my beat was always my favorite day.
At least, 79% of the time, it was.
Every reporter who gets to work with stats should read “Precision Journalism.” Short book. Great information. Helps journalists ask good questions, which we all love doing.
Had an embarrassing moment the other day, out for drinks with the group editor when I had to ask him to calculate how much money I owed. I am, um, the subeditor and at a business mag at that! Generally though, I´m pretty good at finding errors in writers´ stats, if I say so myself…
An answer from an expert! Thanks for conrtiibutng.