I just had a look at this:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/property/propertypicturegalleries/9478023/The-worlds-10-worst-cities-to-live-in.html?frame=2311093
This kind of thing is fascinating to me. Who gets to decide? What measures did they use to determine the various qualities? Did they even ask people who live there? Here's a telling comment from the article:
how the hell did 9. Tehran, Iran (45.8) appear here.. this city is beautiful, and their standard of life is much better than most countries... they are strict in some cases but overall, its a great place to live. Good people, good food and great architecture, not to mention beautiful views of mountains. Seems the USA must have had some influence on this one... they're trying to turn everyone against Iran, the nation who is doing better than they are... god forbid!!
Good points, really. And how did they come up with the 45.8... Really? They figured it down to the tenth of a point? Like that gives some sort of credibility to the equation... Interesting.
The exploration of this phenomenon is the purpose of this article:
http://urbanful.org/2014/11/07/8-painfully-general-specific-arbitrary-city-lists/?utm_source=Urbanful+Master+List&utm_campaign=b854f56312-November_10_Daily_Subscribers&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_fdf64fbc84-b854f56312-197325893
The author points out that there are some lists with an actual basis in fact-based evidence, while others appear to be random and arbitrary.
I know it may seem a little banal, but there's a larger issue at play here.
Someone thought that these articles would be interesting - interesting enough to get a little cash for the folks who wrote/promoted it. We live in a day and age where people can get easy access to information - we swim in a veritable deluge of information. Having someone parse out the data and give authoritative answers to these things is at once helpful and misleading. Because of the way the information is packaged, the concepts are extremely pared down, and methodology is rarely considered. Shucks, I'd be willing to bet that most people wouldn't understand the methodology even if they could be bothered to look it up.
My daughter and I had a conversation about statistics last night. She pointed out that a certain graph indicated that 48% of folks liked a certain thing, while three other groups garnered various percentages of approval. She noted that, therefore, in general, even though the 48% column was the most-voted-for, that in fact more people disliked that option than liked it. And, she said, that can be misleading.
(She so brilliant! Seriously. Makes me so proud!)
We spoke about how while she was correct, it is also misleading to think along those lines. Because there were more than one choice available, the alternatives were spread across a wider base. So, it depends on how you frame the issue, and how you present the results. One could accurately say that the 48% represented the largest share of votes, and that more people voted against it than were for it. It reminds me of those presidential elections where no candidate gains a majority of the votes but is still able to win (thank you, electoral college).
Anyway, the point is, I like to be a good consumer of information. I like to understand the data for what it is - a resource and someone's point of view. They have an agenda - usually to make money, somehow - and that should always be remembered and considered. Sometimes (usually) that agenda is obvious, and the honest ones will acknowledge it.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/property/propertypicturegalleries/9478023/The-worlds-10-worst-cities-to-live-in.html?frame=2311093
This kind of thing is fascinating to me. Who gets to decide? What measures did they use to determine the various qualities? Did they even ask people who live there? Here's a telling comment from the article:
how the hell did 9. Tehran, Iran (45.8) appear here.. this city is beautiful, and their standard of life is much better than most countries... they are strict in some cases but overall, its a great place to live. Good people, good food and great architecture, not to mention beautiful views of mountains. Seems the USA must have had some influence on this one... they're trying to turn everyone against Iran, the nation who is doing better than they are... god forbid!!
Good points, really. And how did they come up with the 45.8... Really? They figured it down to the tenth of a point? Like that gives some sort of credibility to the equation... Interesting.
The exploration of this phenomenon is the purpose of this article:
http://urbanful.org/2014/11/07/8-painfully-general-specific-arbitrary-city-lists/?utm_source=Urbanful+Master+List&utm_campaign=b854f56312-November_10_Daily_Subscribers&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_fdf64fbc84-b854f56312-197325893
The author points out that there are some lists with an actual basis in fact-based evidence, while others appear to be random and arbitrary.
I know it may seem a little banal, but there's a larger issue at play here.
Someone thought that these articles would be interesting - interesting enough to get a little cash for the folks who wrote/promoted it. We live in a day and age where people can get easy access to information - we swim in a veritable deluge of information. Having someone parse out the data and give authoritative answers to these things is at once helpful and misleading. Because of the way the information is packaged, the concepts are extremely pared down, and methodology is rarely considered. Shucks, I'd be willing to bet that most people wouldn't understand the methodology even if they could be bothered to look it up.
My daughter and I had a conversation about statistics last night. She pointed out that a certain graph indicated that 48% of folks liked a certain thing, while three other groups garnered various percentages of approval. She noted that, therefore, in general, even though the 48% column was the most-voted-for, that in fact more people disliked that option than liked it. And, she said, that can be misleading.
(She so brilliant! Seriously. Makes me so proud!)
We spoke about how while she was correct, it is also misleading to think along those lines. Because there were more than one choice available, the alternatives were spread across a wider base. So, it depends on how you frame the issue, and how you present the results. One could accurately say that the 48% represented the largest share of votes, and that more people voted against it than were for it. It reminds me of those presidential elections where no candidate gains a majority of the votes but is still able to win (thank you, electoral college).
Anyway, the point is, I like to be a good consumer of information. I like to understand the data for what it is - a resource and someone's point of view. They have an agenda - usually to make money, somehow - and that should always be remembered and considered. Sometimes (usually) that agenda is obvious, and the honest ones will acknowledge it.
Comments