[lit-ideas] 255 football fields
- From: Teemu Pyyluoma <teme17@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 05:12:32 -0800 (PST)
Brad DeLong's blog has numerous amusing accounts of
journalists tripping themselves over when reporting
economic news. For example, he quotes New York Times
report: "The Senate on Thursday narrowly approved a
sweeping five-year plan to trim a variety of federal
benefit programs... It will, Mr. Gregg said, reduce
the deficit and save roughly $35 billion over the next
five years..." And comments: "The Federal government
currently spends money at the rate of $2.6 trillion a
year. Total incomes in the entire American economy are
about $12 trillion a year. Saving $35 billion over
five years means that you are saving $7 billion a
year--0.3% of federal spending; 0.06% of GDP. Out of a
federal budget that spends $9,000 per person per year,
Judd Gregg is saving $27 a year. Thus reading a lead
like that makes Brad DeLong, at least, foam at the
mouth: phrases like "sweeping," "ambitious,"
"commitment," and "fiscal responsibility" simply have
no place here..."
(http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2006/01/brad_delongs_te.html)
DeLong and others are setting a program to educate
journalists in basic economics, which I applaud, but I
think the problem may be deeper.
Or specificly, what is with journalists and numbers? I
got the title of the post by searching "football
fields" in Google News, and for instance this came up:
"The bridges in the three-county District 11 area
contain 14.7 million square feet of deck area. How big
is that? It's the equivalent of 255 football fields.
When laid end to end, it's the equivalent of one
football field 17.5 miles long." Now I am sure the
writer is trying to do a service to his readers, but I
can not visualize 255 football fields, nevermind one
17.5 miles long.
I realize that such metaphors are useful for
rhetorical purposes, for example a French groups wants
(French) drivers to turn off lights in daytime which
by their calculations would save a tanker full of oil
in fuel. But for serious reporting I don't think "size
of texas" instead of seven hundred thousand square
miles is helpful, nor is comparing billions to stacks
of dollar bills. If you want to say a lot, just say
so.
My question being, is that the writers themselves are
number blind or do they just suppose their readers
are? Is this some part of journalism teaching?
Cheers,
Teemu
Helsinki, Finland
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
