In addition to critically questioning the source, journalists must also learn to interpret statistics correctly. A basic knowledge of statistics is usually enough.
Fake statistics
At the beginning of April, a graphic relating to the Russian recapture of the Kursk region appeared on the messenger service Telegram. The supposed graphic from Statista shows how many dead mercenaries from different countries were found in the region around Kursk. Among the victims were also 197 German mercenaries. The AFP fact check team classifies this graphic as false. The graphic does not come from the supposedly trustworthy source Statista.
The most obvious indication of the falsification is the lack of a link to the original source. The national flags, which are supposed to represent the countries on the graphic, are partially incorrect or are in the wrong context. The visual representation of the headline for the post also differs greatly from the original Statista headlines.
Missing context
The following example is a little more interesting. The statement by the AfD’s climate policy spokesman, Karsten Hilse, says: “Only about 3% of all CO₂ emissions are man-made, they come from the economy, heating and transport. Around 97% of CO₂ emissions are of natural origin.” Such statements must always be critically scrutinized. As the scientific consensus is clear that humans are largely to blame for climate change. In order to be able to classify such figures correctly, the context is needed, in this case it is the time. When asked about the source of his statement, Hilse refers to a fact check site that has largely refuted his view. However, he did not want to go into the source, he wrote. A calculation with further context is available at EU-Factcheck.
Understanding (learning) statistics
These two examples show that it is sometimes easy to recognize that figures and statistics can be falsified. In most cases, however, mathematical manipulation can also be behind this. Journalists therefore do not necessarily have to understand statistics down to the smallest detail. However, it is important for them to master the basics of statistics.
Professor Dr. Rebecca Hartje from Jade University Wilhelmshaven teaches journalism students these basics. This should enable them to interpret the figures correctly later in their careers so that they can present statistics transparently to their audience. The basics of statistics are therefore important in order to understand the methodology of the survey. Prof. Dr. Hartje says that the statistical means chosen are important for interpretation. For example, when calculating averages, a distinction is made between the median and the arithmetic mean, with the median often being the more accurate method. An example illustrates the difference: if you look at the incomes of five people – €2,000, €2,200, €2,300, €2,400 and €10,000 – the arithmetic mean is €3,820, while the median is €2,300. The arithmetic mean is strongly influenced by the outlier (€10,000), while the median gives a more realistic picture of the “typical” income.
Another phenomenon, explains Hartje, is the color coding of temperature scales in weather reports. People often complain that the colors are chosen so drastically to stir up panic. In fact, meteorologists use the color scales depending on the current season. The scale is differently in summer than in winter, as temperatures are generally higher in summer, so the colors also change. If a winter day is warmer than average in historical comparison, the scale is adjusted accordingly. It may well be that “more extreme” colors are
used in the weather report due to climate change.
Critical scrutiny
According to Professor Dr. Hartje, surveys by private companies and institutions should therefore always be critically scrutinized. In contrast, statistical surveys conducted by a federal government are more credible because the federal government should remain neutral and not pursue any private sector interests. Figures from Federal Statistical Offices or the German BaFin can therefore be classified as trustworthy. It makes sense to consult other experts on specific topics. In the case of climate policy, climate researchers or scientific reports from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) are suitable.
It is therefore clear that statements by experts should always be considered in context and should be free of factors such as a connection to interest groups. Nevertheless, experts remain an important part of journalistic research.
RESEARCH | ARTICLE © Luca Klostermann and Timon Weiß | Jade University of Applied Sciences Wilhelmshaven, Germany
Leave your comments, thoughts and suggestions in the box below. Take note: your response is moderated.
