{"product":{"product_id":"0393310728","title":"How to Lie with Statistics","price":"8.89","image_url":"https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/518MvUkWsmL._SL500_.jpg","url":"https://www.amazon.com/dp/0393310728"},"comments":[{"body":"If every republican read [how to lie with statistics ](https://www.amazon.com/How-Lie-Statistics-Darrell-Huff/dp/0393310728) -Darrell Huff (1954) Fox viewership would drop. Hell, Democrats or anyone for that matter should read this.  It makes trusting a news source a lot harder when you immediately pick out devious tricks to engineer partial truths.","subreddit_name":"politics","author":"destin325"},{"body":"It's not an oxymoron. You can have two sets of true facts about a situation, which depending on which things are emphasized, gives you an entirely separate narrative of how things are going.\r\n\r\nOne could say, for instance, \"Murders in Chicago are up 1200% this year! Highest number of deaths on record!\" And that would be one set of facts.\r\n\r\nOne could also say, \"There were 12 murders in Chicago, compared to 1 last year. The 10 year average is about 10 murders per year, so this isn't outside of the expected range of deaths. Also, it's a city of 3 million, so this is in fact a fairly low amount of murders on a per capita basis.\"\r\n\r\nThose are two sets of facts reporting on the same incident, both true but you can tell they paint entirely different *narratives* about how to feel about the situation.\r\n\r\nWhat this shows is that you cannot simply say, \"Well, just report the facts, and everything else will work itself out.\" There is a meta element to this, where you choose *which things* to emphasize, and which to de-emphasize, and by this choice of emphasis you inevitably are shaping the way things are understood, because humans understand events not by a bulleted list of facts, but as a narrative, a story.\r\n\r\nThese things you have to take into consideration when you're talking about media and the spread of information, especially political information.\r\n\r\nFor more fun like this, check out [How to Lie with Statistics.](https://www.amazon.com/How-Lie-Statistics-Darrell-Huff/dp/0393310728)","subreddit_name":"AskALiberal","author":"Arguss"},{"body":"Here, you obviously need to read this https://www.amazon.com/How-Lie-Statistics-Darrell-Huff/dp/0393310728?ref_=d6k_applink_bb_dls_failed\r\n\r\nThe fact is that masks were made political and there are politically motivated people funding and doing research.  u/Kryloxy is correct that there are studies that show masks are somewhat useful and a bunch that show they aren't. I think the best summary of this whole situation comes from the University of Oxford's Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine.\r\n\r\n\"The increasing polarised and politicised views on whether to wear masks in public during the current COVID-19 crisis hides a bitter truth on the state of contemporary research and the value we pose on clinical evidence to guide our decisions...There is considerable uncertainty as to the value of wearing masks. For instance, high rates of infection with cloth masks could be due to harms caused by cloth masks...The numerous systematic reviews that have been recently published all include the same evidence base so unsurprisingly, broadly reach the same conclusions. However, recent reviews using lower quality evidence found masks to be effective...This abandonment of the scientific modus operandi and lack of foresight has left the field wide open for the play of opinions, radical views and political influence.\"","subreddit_name":"NoNewNormal","author":"NotaClipaMagazine"},{"body":"\u0026gt; The actual shame here is Newsweek reporting on that tiny slope at the end of the graph.\r\n\r\nMy business statistics teacher in college was garbage, but the best thing he ever did was mandate that we buy the book, [How To Lie With Statistics](https://www.amazon.com/How-Lie-Statistics-Darrell-Huff/dp/0393310728) as one of the textbooks. \r\n\r\nIt's a short book, written in 1954, and yet it is remarkably applicable to today. It goes through the most common ways advertisers, politicians, salespeople, etc use misleading graphs or charts or cherry-picked statistics to lie. And once you've read it, you notice it *EVERYWHERE*.","subreddit_name":"AskALiberal","author":"Arguss"},{"body":"[How to Lie with Statistics](https://www.amazon.com/dp/0393310728/ref=cm_sw_em_r_mt_dp_RMbuFbH90WGWP) \r\n\r\nIt's a short book that does a good job of showing how people manipulate the presentation of data to achieve their goals. If nothing else, it will raise your awareness of the issue and perhaps make you more skeptical of what you see and read.","subreddit_name":"AskReddit","author":"omnificunderachiever"},{"body":"[how to lie with statistics](https://www.amazon.com/How-Lie-Statistics-Darrell-Huff/dp/0393310728/ref=asc_df_0393310728/?tag=hyprod-20\u0026amp;linkCode=df0\u0026amp;hvadid=312014159412\u0026amp;hvpos=\u0026amp;hvnetw=g\u0026amp;hvrand=7597700268521178587\u0026amp;hvpone=\u0026amp;hvptwo=\u0026amp;hvqmt=\u0026amp;hvdev=c\u0026amp;hvdvcmdl=\u0026amp;hvlocint=\u0026amp;hvlocphy=9019559\u0026amp;hvtargid=pla-432731750539\u0026amp;psc=1)","subreddit_name":"minnesotavikings","author":"mrbooms"},{"body":"\u0026gt; So you have no idea of survival\r\n\r\nYour not making any sense at all\r\n\r\n\u0026gt;Yes really, CO2 isn’t good for your lungs\r\n\r\nYour not making any sense at all\r\n\r\n\u0026gt;Except there is, in so many studies you’ll find the big spike where we are now, and in the rest of history you’ll only see such acceleration in extinction events.\r\n\r\nDeaths as a result of climate is at an historic low\r\n\r\n\u0026gt;You know you don’t randomly become a billionaire because you talk about climate change right?\r\n\r\nWorked for Al Gore, with is 15 times the average co2 footprint\r\n\r\n\u0026gt;It is you can see it in so many statistics\r\n\r\nHere's one of Bill Gates favorite books\r\n\r\nhttps://www.amazon.com/How-Lie-Statistics-Darrell-Huff/dp/0393310728\r\n\r\nI think it might be time to ask yourself if this issue has become somewhat religious to you?","subreddit_name":"conspiracy","author":"stalematedizzy"},{"body":"Getting into the finer details are where it can get tricky. There are entire courses and even degrees about working with statistics, making sure a survey is actually representative, or the ways numbers and surveys can be \"abused\" to show certain things.      \r\n\r\nIt can come down to things like how questions are phrased, or the answer options that can change survey responses.     \r\n\r\nA pretty easy book to read is called \"[How to lie with statistics](https://smile.amazon.com/How-Lie-Statistics-Darrell-Huff/dp/0393310728?sa-no-redirect=1)\" and goes over a bunch of fallacies and mistakes that can be done with them.      \r\n\r\nA summary of the first example that is relevant here is a claim that \"The Average income of a Yale Graduate after 25 years is $300,000\"   \r\nA more thorough breakdown would be \"of the people who we could contact, and of those who replied, listed their income as an average of $300,000\"       \r\nSince it would be easier to get in contact with high earners on things like linkedin or CEO pages, and the people earning a lot are more likely to respond when asked than the graduates who did nothing with their degree and would bring the average down.      \r\nSo in effect, the previously cited statistic, doesn't actually represent the earning actual earnings very well. In an actual survey/study this is why there are sections explaining the methodology used, and part of what peer review is. So that someone else can look at the study and go \"Wait, they only sampled like 100 people from a class of 2,000, and they only got their contact info off company CEO pages... of course the income numbers will be higher so this study is useless.\" \r\n\r\nA good part of the field is working around these issues to be able to actually do studies and surveys that can provide meaningful data.","subreddit_name":"explainlikeimfive","author":"18_USC_47"},{"body":"\u0026gt;Since then I have absolutely no confidence in any poll. It's a crapshoot\r\n\r\nThey're all bullshit.\r\n\r\nI read [this](https://www.amazon.com/How-Lie-Statistics-Darrell-Huff/dp/0393310728) book in my first college writing class. It was written in 1954 and every bit of it is as relevant now as it was then. Stats can *easily* be manipulated and turned into bullshit. \r\n\r\nI barely believe anything I see or read or anymore until I can verify it through at least one to two other sources; too much content is made simply for the sake of stirring the pot, making a buck, or both.","subreddit_name":"politics","author":"Roaringshore"},{"body":"You might interested in the book, [*How to Lie with Statistics*](https://www.amazon.com/How-Lie-Statistics-Darrell-Huff/dp/0393310728/ref=asc_df_0393310728/?tag=hyprod-20\u0026amp;linkCode=df0\u0026amp;hvadid=312014159412\u0026amp;hvpos=\u0026amp;hvnetw=g\u0026amp;hvrand=1089448686363721740\u0026amp;hvpone=\u0026amp;hvptwo=\u0026amp;hvqmt=\u0026amp;hvdev=m\u0026amp;hvdvcmdl=\u0026amp;hvlocint=\u0026amp;hvlocphy=9019660\u0026amp;hvtargid=pla-432731750539\u0026amp;psc=1)","subreddit_name":"centrist","author":"TRON0314"},{"body":"Your honor, I present - [How to Lie with Statistics](https://www.amazon.com/How-Lie-Statistics-Darrell-Huff/dp/0393310728/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=how+to+lie+with+statistics\u0026amp;qid=1660089019\u0026amp;sprefix=how+to+lie+with+stat%2Caps%2C75\u0026amp;sr=8-1) \\- a tale as old as time.","subreddit_name":"PowerBI","author":"itsnotaboutthecell"},{"body":"[How to Lie with Statistics](https://www.amazon.com/How-Lie-Statistics-Darrell-Huff/dp/0393310728)\r\n\r\nI’m just going to leave that there. No, statistics do not, and very well should not, effect opinions. And your last statement is not a statistic, it’s an opinion. Zabuza isn’t particularly strong, but he’s a well liked character.","subreddit_name":"Naruto","author":"StayGoldJohnnyCade"},{"body":"Same thing happens with unemployment in the US. People are reported as unemployed if they report for unemployment insurance but with the pandemic so many people dropped off the rolls back in Sept because the federal government wouldn't extend pandemic insurance.  \r\n[Stats can be manipulated to lie](https://www.amazon.com/How-Lie-Statistics-Darrell-Huff/dp/0393310728).","subreddit_name":"MapPorn","author":"Fluffy_Town"},{"body":"Hmm maybe you've misunderstood, as none of those links bridge the gap between your original comment and my question. You (everyone) should checkout the book [How To Lie With Statistics](https://www.amazon.com/How-Lie-Statistics-Darrell-Huff/dp/0393310728).\r\n\r\nThere being more students killed than police officers DOES NOT IMPLY conclusively that it is more dangerous to be a student than a cop (though it does raise the question). It is a fallacious argument without normalizing the data.\r\n\r\nAgain I totally agree with the spirit of your comment, that student death counts being larger than cops is an absurd tragedy. But it doesn't imply which demographic is in more danger without normalizing the data, which I don't see the sources you linked do.","subreddit_name":"videos","author":"Qinistral"},{"body":"There's a \\[good book\\](https://www.amazon.com/How-Lie-Statistics-Darrell-Huff/dp/0393310728) on this topic.\r\n\r\nFrom my experience, there are 2 different cases for distrust:\r\n\r\n1. Objective reasons. You can deal with those by showing how the data is received and processed. Usually that's enough, if a person knows a thing or two about data.\r\n2. Subjective reasons. I'm afraid there is no easy fix for someone being just too tired of a cavalcade of consultants whose bright ideas he had to implement without proper knowledge/skills/training (or whatever other reasons he might have). Try making a good contact with someone else around him and proving the idea to him. It's easier to overcome subjective reasons if people you trust approve the data.","subreddit_name":"datascience","author":"Bemxuu"}]}