Time for a little fun with math. I often see 99 percent survival rate as a snappy comeback for people talking about vaccines and mask mandates. And I think we can all agree that it's important to consider risks and benefits when deciding things. What does 99 percent mean?
2/ If it's a death rate, that means for every 100 people infected, 99 lives and 1 dies. To be fair, 99 is a much bigger number than 100. Here is one *
3/ Let's think about it another way. I live in a town with a college of about 29,000 students. If they all get infected, 290 die. The town has a population of about 70,000. If we all get infected, 700 die. My kid's school has about 1,500 students. If they all get it, 15 die.
4/ I hear you. Not everyone will get it. Younger people like school kids and college students seem to have lower risk of death. It's smart to think that way. Statistics are summaries, and that means they hide details. Sometimes those details matter a lot.
5/ But you can be smarter still. What about those 99? Does being infected mean nothing? What about time off work or school? What about large hospital bills? What about the strain on medical workers to keep some of those 99 alive?
6/ What about those who can't get medical care because the hospital staff are shifted to COVID care? What about if those students do well, but infect people who won't?
7/ Risk vs. benefit does matter. But it matters that you are honest about the risks. People are not asterices and you need to count all the costs. #DetectingDeception
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
This is an important point. Some people use dual meaning on purpose to confuse people. That's bad #DetectingDeception. Others hear the confusing thing and are, well, confused.
2/ Example: Someone said in front of my kid yesterday that masks don't work. They do, and the kid and I had to have a talk about what might be going on here.
3/ If you think wearing a mask won't keep you 100 protected from COVID, you aren't wrong. But it does help reduce the chance of spread. Along with other things like vaccines, avoiding crowds, keeping it outdoors, TOGETHER, it helps a lot.
Took a mini #socialmedia break and on my return, my first impulse was to snarkily tweet "The plural of anecdote is not data." But that's probably not clear. Here's what I mean.
2/ I think humans are hardwired to learn from the experiences of others, and stories that engage the emotions are particularly effective. We have entire industries built around creating these stories to manipulate beliefs and actions, after all.
3/ Those stories can even be completely made up and still have powerful impacts. Think about...the tortoise and the hare. Fictional event to make a point Or George Washington and the cherry tree. Myth ABOUT A REAL PERSON used to make a point.
Good morning. The Senate trial begins today, and you'll have a lot of opportunities for #DetectingDeception. You've been warming up for months, but here are a few last-minute tips.
2/ You won't find the deceptions as much in things people say in the trial as you will in things people say about the trial in news and on social media. There are consequences for being deceptive in legal proceedings, but there may not be for doing it elsewhere.
3/ The incentives are actually pretty high to try to shape the shape the story outside of the trial. As I understand it, impeachment is a political process, which means the outcome may be a mix of what's right and what's helpful politically for some.
Off to teach today - a few hours in a de-densified classroom with masked students. Based on news reports, planning on double mask on me, but spent some time looking for official guidance from a health department and 🦗. This seems troublesome. #PartyLikeAProfessor
2/ I mean, look at this. One Google search for double masks for #COVID19 yields all this conflicting advice.
#WednesdayWisdom There has been a lot of calling media outlets #FakeNews over the last several years, and I thought this chart was interesting (Expand to see recent trends). #DetectingDeception
2/ It's been pretty evident that calling things #FakeNews was a way to avoid stories that the name-caller just didn't like. That's deceptive of course. Two ways you might notice this.
3/ First, is the #FakeNews accusation only used when it is bad things about the accuser? Second, does the accuser proudly cite the very same source when the story is complimentary?
This is an interesting summation from interviews with journalists covering taxi online cultures. Several interesting ideas including "to assess newsworthiness, one must also assess what weapons the story would hand to its audiences." datasociety.net/wp-content/upl…
2/ "Further, the choice
to engage with a false story – even in the effort to refute it – aligns with the interests of the manipulators, who see any form of amplification as a victory."
3/ Person-attacks... stories are popular and get clicks. "...stories should keep the story specific to the communities affected, focus on the impact of an attack, minimize sensationalist language and headlines, and reduce antihero framings of the perpetrator"