Jun. 2nd, 2009

rhythmaning: (Armed Forces)
I get annoyed at people who either deliberately or through a lack of understanding misquote or otherwise abuse numbers or statistics. I have been known to shout at the radio when either journalists or politicians misstate or obfuscate, using numbers in an attempt to prove their argument.

[livejournal.com profile] frankie_ecap looked at the leaflet that popped through my door courtesy of the LibDems, and pointed to this graphic:

libdems001



In case it isn't clear, it compares the number of votes of the three main parties in the last general election - Labour (15,138), LibDems (14,664), Conservative (9,559), with 2,314 other votes.

It is trying to re-inforce the view that the LibDems are only 474 votes behind Labour, and a vote for the Tories is wasted.

The numbers are right, but the graphic distorts the picture dramatically. It shows the Tory votes to be somewhat less than half of the LibDems, and barely ahead of other votes. In fact, the Tory vote was 65% of the LibDems, and over four times the size of the votes for others.

I put the numbers into Excel. Here's what the chart should actually look like:

Untitled-1



A rather different picture. The the website of my local LibDem candidate shows a more accurate picture to the one on the leaflet, too:



You probably know by now that I am a LibDem voter. I have been assured that the candidate is a top bloke. But this misrepresentation of the numbers - a blatant distortion - may well have lost him my support.

Profile

rhythmaning: (Default)
rhythmaning

June 2017

S M T W T F S
    123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930 

Most Popular Tags

Page Summary

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jun. 29th, 2025 12:13 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios