|
Termyn8or -> RE: It's not the moderators (2/12/2010 9:55:38 PM)
|
OK, thread got lost for a minute.
Statistics don't lie, but....
50,000 of the people are killed in the US every year by _____
1.67 % of the people are killed in the US every year by _____
Now this not yet addresses how statistics can be made to lie, perhaps it would be more apt put that raw data don't lie. Statistics are derived from such data. But consider the example above. To say that people are killed by something, assuming that these are some categorized form of accidents or a disease or whatever, take on one of two meanings to the beholder. The paltry 1.67% is actually approzomately 50,000 people. Which way it is presented is the only difference it but can be concieved in a totally different light, even by identical persons.
By the AMA's own estimates, medical care killed 250,000 in a year. That is over 8.3% of the total population, but for some reason is addresssed less fervently to say the least. Why ? Because of the undefined cause of death of those 50,000 people were put out in front, for all to see. The AMA figures are apparently not front page news. So this is one tool of manipulation.
Manipulation 102 includes the careful selection of questions on a poll. As brought up and ricketily segued into by myself, a point brought up in the movie Palermo Connection.
Question A: Do you want to see your kids grow up to be drug addicts ?
Question A: Do you want to see your kids killed or jailed because of a drug bust ?
What this means friends is that even the supposedly raw, empirical data can be manipulated when it comes to certain things. Public opinion polls are especially vulnerable to this type of manipulation. But it doesn't stop there.
When a team of research scientists are contracted to research something, they are set to sally forth the best interest of those who pay the bills. Look at how many times this research has actually contradicted and even reversed itself over the years. First one thing is good for you and the other is bad, then the tables turn. If the data were really true, the truth would stand. Therefore none of the data are empirically true because if so, this could NEVER happen.
So what others accept as proof, I often do not. As such other alternative theories and opinions are entertained and evaluated. This does not mean I buy into every conspiracy theory even born, nor does it mean I summarily dismiss a notion, even if snopes dubunks it. Snopes has been debunked, or would that be rebunked ? A good site nonetheless, but you can't expect them to know everything.
This all ties into everything. Advertising, political ads and whatnot, ,,,actually that pretty much sums it up. Illusion is the King of the world now. In these matters I have been admonished NOT to take my certain stance, not to go with MY plan. Time and time again I am proven right. It is a matter of illusion. The more closed you want to be, the more open you must appear. To customers, adversaries in business or whatever, it is not your idea that counts it is their perception. That comes only from your presentation.
In a discussion, if I have been pretty much proven wrong and I will admit it. But in anything that even smells like an adversarial situation I will never admit I am wrong unless it is to my advantage to do so. Kapeesh ?
Any decent PR person will tell you the same if they are willing, but they spent good money on that fancy education so they see knowledge shared as power lost. I paid for my education with my life. They make money off of it.
NIce to see you in thread Alpha. Bumming around a bit ? :-) I say - ENJOY.
T
|
|
|
|
