TV and print journalists, newscasters and reporters too often may use statistics without the necessary critical inquiry into their true meaning. In return, they expect their viewers and readers to also accept and believe in what they say. This, even though the statistics journalists use could collapse under closer investigation.
Statistics used by journalists and others, if you cannot prove what you want, then show something else entirely, and just ACT like it proves your position anyway. The public does not typically scrutinize the tons of information they receive and believe on a daily basis. To prove your point using statistics, simply get rid of all the data and results NOT favorable to your position and publish only that which is favorable.
Percentages are great for confusing the public. In correlational (cause and effect) scientific research, the data and statistics gathered from it, essentially are nothing more than dressed up, fancy, formal speculation using $100 words. Cause and effect correlational research results may typically be asked to go way beyond the data demonstrated to suggest cause and effect relationships. This “mental leap” consequently makes finding causal relationships highly suspect and questionable.
Published then mass merchandised correlational research results may easily turn into “misinformation”, all of which is just one step away from superstition. Going beyond the data demonstrated to build a theory is nothing more than statistical manipulation which is deceiving. No matter if this is done on purpose or not it can still mislead the public exposed to it. A researcher’s admitted blundering innocence in manipulating data is not at all believable and should not be believed.
Statistical research is a science and an art. Subjective statistical manipulations and distortions may be accepted as “objectivity”. Statistics fascinate the public. Just think, anyone can get wholesale returns of speculation out of very little factual information. Statistics appeal to a fact-finding, fact-minded American culture. Statistics can be used to sensationalize, exaggerate, confuse as well as oversimplify. However, without honesty and understanding the process becomes nonsense, allowing “cheats” and swindlers to mislead the masses.
Public pressure and journalists with “itchy” trigger fingers may too often and too easily launch unproven theories from questionable statistical research. When it comes to discerning information, the public, and especially the news media, may not realize that NOT KNOWING may be healthier than knowing just enough information to be dangerous.