I believe that the use of statistics in modern society is always going to bring about resentment in some viewers. William Davies writes that “statistics were designed to give an understanding of a population in its entirety . . .” This is what statistics do today as well. Within a statistic, there is always an inherent attempt to pursue the audience into seeing an “undeniable truth.” It is my opinion that this is unavoidable. Period. Davies acknowledges that these numbers are used to represent populations, but not every aspect or person within the given population can be accounted for. Take the United States for example. There are more than 300 million people living in the US; therefore, statisticians have to make decisions regarding representation of the population. If a researcher wants to know how the population feels on an issue, they can create polls, surveys, or other means to acquire data; still, the population is unfairly represented. Davies reiterates this point by stating that “there is always an implicit choice in what is included and what is excluded, and this choice can become a political issue in its own right.” Being straightforward with the collection method and the representation (demographic, age, race, sex, gender) is the only way to ease tension with those who feel resentment from statistics. Although it may help government officials to “understand the population,” I do not think people agree with being reduced to a number.
This article did a great job at introducing the evolution of statistics and the way that they have been used throughout the centuries. Today, it is not economically or physically feasible to monitor each and every citizen within a given society. Yes, people within the same region may have similar views on some issues, but to lump everyone together is just plain ignorant. There are local variations and extraneous factors that influence the actions, behaviors and opinions of the people within a community. I understand why people use statistics though. They are ways to relay a “general truth” about a population, without taking individual lives into consideration. To say that unemployment has decreased from 20% to 16% does not capture the whole story. Those who are unemployed will likely resent the statistic or the politician delivering the statistic. The only way to deal with this issue is to empathize with those still struggling and acknowledging that “it is not enough.” Highlighting the positive aspect of a statistic does not reinforce a point, but rather alienates the other end of the spectrum. Statistics of this nature should never be used to say “we as a society are improving” or “life for Americans is getting better.” Statements like these would make me angry and distrusting. Stating that we, as a nation, are trending in the right direction while empathizing with old coal miners, steel workers, and other unemployed persons would be better. Resentment will always exist with statistics: that is the inevitable truth.
Your title is peak clickbait. I really like your point about how highlighting positive aspects of statistics can just alienate the people who aren’t represented by a particular trend. It communicates to the public that the best possible outcome has been realized when most folks receive statistics as they relate to them. To your point, in 1983, Pittsburgh’s unemployment rate was over 17% while it was around 10% nationally. I’m sure jobless steel workers didn’t feel like their plight was adequately captured in the BLS data then and didn’t want to be a number either. A steelworker wasn’t part of that 17%, they were someone who didn’t know how to support their family without the mill.
I totally with the opinion in this post that resentment will always exist with
statistics and that’s an inevitable truth. That’s correct. As I said in my post, it’s always
a problem to try to represent a thing by just an “average”. There are a lot of people
lower than average would feel angry about that for sure. It’s hard for us to change this
fact. But as what said in this article, we can at least try to ease this tension by
gathering data according to gender, regions, race, ages, etc.
I want to emphasize the example of United States in the post. I personally think
it’s a really typical example here, because this is a country that consists of people
originally from different countries, with different cultures, and of course will have
very different opinions regarding the same issue. Therefore, it’s very true that
government officials and politicians have to be very careful by saying that the overall
GDP of the country has been increasing by how much percentage or the overall
employment rate has been decreasing by whatever percentage.
I totally with the opinion in this post that resentment will always exist with statistics and that’s an inevitable truth. That’s correct. As I said in my post, it’s always a problem to try to represent a thing by just an “average”. There are a lot of people lower than average would feel angry about that for sure. It’s hard for us to change this fact. But as what said in this article, we can at least try to ease this tension by gathering data according to gender, regions, race, ages, etc.
I want to emphasize the example of United States in the post. I personally think it’s a really typical example here, because this is a country that consists of people originally from different countries, with different cultures, and of course will have very different opinions regarding the same issue. Therefore, it’s very true that government officials and politicians have to be very careful by saying that the overall GDP of the country has been increasing by how much percentage or the overall employment rate has been decreasing by whatever percentage.