Data Talks

. . . but it sure sounds garbled when it is spoken by journalists.

Not providing context on the increase in testing is such a basic error, and has been so widespread, that it's revealing about the media's goals. It's more interested in telling plausibly-true stories ("narratives") that sound smart to its audience than in accuracy/truth per se. https://t.co/abYbgkVFbj

— Nate Silver (@NateSilver538) May 7, 2020

Click for the thread.

Mr. Silver is being polite. This seems more like misleading spin than it does narrative.

Occam's Razor should incline us towards ignorance on the part of journalists. Lord knows, their innumeracy is on constant display.

But given that statisticians, epidemiologists, experts, and commenters have been repeatedly observing that increased testing will necessarily lead to a rise in reported cases regardless of whether the virus is spreading or retreating, this seems more than ignorance. It seems like the New York Times, Axios, and others must be deliberately practicing deception.

An implausible conclusion in normal times. With the exposure of the Russian Collusion Hoax, the General Flynn Hoax, the Carter Page Hoax, the Impeachment Charade, the Kavanaugh Allegations Hoax, the Wikileaks Access Hoax, the MLK Bust Hoax, ad infinitum, the Biden Rape Allegations Omission, it is more than plausible.

I still lean towards mathematical and statistical incompetence on the part of the media as the most likely explanation but it feels like I am leaning harder and harder against a prevailing wind of deception.