| Join Now
Thankyou for commenting.
I don't know how much to expand and explain, but my anxieties about the last two years scientific media, and the fact that main stream media has needed to fill its copy/hours with science 24/7 has led to some unfortunate and, to me, frightening (struggling for a word) manipulations or misuses or something; and possible influence by interests
I wish in many ways I had the energy to study media and/or social media and/or the broader internet. Look how much space needs to be filled by people competing for attention
EDIT But as someone who made the effort to qualify for a statistician certification (I never actually took it up because it was a Graduate one), I am seriously concerned when I see, for whatever reason, professorial level scientists in our media (every day) intentionally (I didn't say that) or unintentionally misleading (not the right word) or playing some interests game by over simplifying things. The professors (of course) are not the worst offenders. That goes without saying. And at a very personal level as a private consultant with, dare I say, a lifetime professional experience across many fields at a high level, it is close to being professorial without being such. I hope that is not taken as insulting or disrespectful. We feel unable to comment on much at all. We inhabit different worlds which sometimes collide
We could certainly do better as a society. At a various times we have had society members who have agreed to engage with the media in a non-political way. The problem has always been getting sign off when a statement is representing the society.
You are right that interactions are easy to explain. In fact, the main gripe that an average punter has about data analytics conclusions is that the treatment effect might be different for different people (like them).
I refer to the recent email from Marie-Louise which uses a media article to backup a rebuttal of Clive Palmer's challenge on academic evidence over vaccine effectiveness.
I certainly do not wish to be associated with the views of ANY political figure on this issue but Mare-Louise's email raises a few concerns I have had over recent years with the power of academe (and media) to dominate conversation and silence debate through all manner of flawed arguments from authority
I would hope that any statistician worth their salt would understand the concept of an interaction. This could be communicated to the media. And flawed arguments debunking political (or other) arguments don't help. IMO Sadly, though the concept of interactions has been forgotten over recent years to the benefit of the vaccine corporations and others. For two years now everything has become very univariate too.
DISCLAIMER I do fall into the ranks of the unqualified Facebook experts; and I apologise for posting but sometimes I lack a meaningful activity. I have similar concerns over correct usage of AI; associated power of those in various area of data and analytics over our lives - sadly with not many really qualified to ask many questions
Statistical Society of Australia (SSA)
PO Box 213
Belconnen ACT 2616 Australia
02 6251 3647www.statsoc.org.auABN 82 853 491 081
Please direct enquiries to:
Marie-Louise Rankin, Executive Officer
© 2019 Statistical Society of Australia (SSA). All Rights Reserved. | website login
Website by Converge Design