“Davies’ explanation of statistics as, “…tools designed to simplify the job of government, for better or worse” was something that I had never thought about before. This simplification is implicit in data aggregation, but I never spent time thinking about the concept before. I think that just by including this idea as a disclaimer when using data is powerful in and of itself. I think a lot of the skepticism of statistics comes from who collects the data. For example, if someone is generally distrustful of the government, then they will question the data government collects. If it’s possible, providing data that is collected by organizations or institutions or sectors that the data can help to explain could lend objectivity. For example, I both of my campaign pieces I use statistics compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics (OpenSecrets.org, which I highly recommend for any interested parties). For most of the data on the site, the candidates and organizations are required by law to submit what they are receiving or donating. To me, that lends credibility. In this instance, there is no expertise because it’s essentially just regurgitation of information. By portraying data providers as messengers reduces their “elitist” qualities.