10 Comments on Why the ATL (and The Observer) should be ashamed of themselves

Ian Betteridge on Tue, 7th Apr 2009 12:53 pm


I stopped buying the Observer after it’s woefully bad reporting of the MMR vaccine controversy. Evidently the paper’s understanding of basic stats and methodology hasn’t improved since then.

Louis Coiffait on Tue, 7th Apr 2009 4:01 pm


There’s no shortage of dodgy research / statistics out there, see a friend’s monthly blog feature on the subject: http://www.mrscienceshow.com/2009/03/correlation-of-week-intelligence-and.html

But even with the most robust inquiries providing the evidence (http://news.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/hi/the_p_word/newsid_7882000/7882842.stm) it is up to decision makers and that is invariably a political act.

It would be better to equip our policy makers, public and press with a more discerning and balanced understanding of research – so they can make better decisions.

acm on Wed, 8th Apr 2009 10:28 am


British Sunday newspapers are truly awful. Whilst I buy the dailies I have given up on the Sundays after one too many professional experience of telling them that their story was rubbish and giving them good reasons why it was so, only to have them publish it anyway.

That said the Observer is probably the best of the bunch.

matthewtaylor on Wed, 8th Apr 2009 11:22 am


Thanks Adrian, old mate.

I tend to agree. But the quality of some parts of even the Observer’s offering seems to have dipped in recent weeks. Too much of the news coverage feels random and shallow – as if a good headline is all that matters. As a weekly it ought to have really good comment but generally I find the Times on any given day is better. I am a great fan on Rawnsley but I have found myself being able to predict what he is going to say even before opening the paper and Henry Porter – even if some of his critique is well founded – exemplifies a tendency towards self importance and self indulgence. Why don’t we see more of you round here? Would you like to be a Fellow?

Michael in UK on Wed, 8th Apr 2009 12:20 pm


Yes the Obbie is terribly poor, I completely agree.
Oh, apart from –
Will Hutton, Catherine Bennett, Simon Caulkin, the book, music and theatre reviews, Nigel Slater, Nick Cohen, Barbara Ellen, Wiiiam Keegan, Richard Wachman and Heather Stewart and other business writers, Stephen Bailey on design and architecture, Philip French on films, the personal finance team, Charlie Gillett and Paul Morley in music monthly, the “this much I know” interview.
I must say I don’t read the actual news pages all that much.

Are you really never going to buy it again?

matthewtaylor on Wed, 8th Apr 2009 12:21 pm


No, apparerntly not. And I see today the ATL is getting yet more headlines from an equally dodgy bit of self selecting research!

matthewtaylor on Wed, 8th Apr 2009 12:33 pm


Hi Louis.

I agree, and thanks for the links.

In 2007 we launched ‘The Tiger that Isn’t’ Michael Blastland and Andrew Dilnot. it systematically exposed the abuse of statistics by interest groups, politicians and the media. As I said at the time, it should be required reading for policy makers and journalists.

matthewtaylor on Wed, 8th Apr 2009 12:55 pm


Hi Michael

Fair enough – for a more nuanced view see my reply below to Adrian. Will I really never buy it again? I probably will but – to be honest – I found £2 a big psychological barrier. I’m sure the paper did their market research but for me this crosses the boundary between loose change you don’t notice and real expenditure which has consequences for other things. The other week in Tescos I traded my Observer against a nicer loaf (30p extra), fresher orange juice (99p extra) and tastier tomatoes (50p extra) and then ate my splendid lunch reading the on-line edition

joe on Wed, 8th Apr 2009 3:08 pm


I’m not a historian, but I’m wondering whether it hasn’t always been a habit of the middle classes to blame society’s woes on the working classes. For example, the Great Stink, the Gin epidemic etc.

Yet when you look at the great social ills, how many of them were caused by the greedy rich? Who was it that created conditions whereby it was acceptable for children to work down the mines, up chimneys and in the mills?

I don’t think today’s generation of the underclass is any worse than any other. The only real change is the language the chattering classes use to denigrate them in broad pointless brush strokes.

But then, when Ministers brush off calls for support for the county’s most vulnerable workers by saying that the funds are too tight and claim that they could always use ACAS (shades of telling people to ‘get on their bikes’), we can see that ignorance abounds in the powerful Observer-reading class.

bobbi on Fri, 10th Apr 2009 5:11 pm


matthew
you really think £2 is a lot to pay for such a package – really???
everything you get in a newspaper like the Observer for only £2
Bet you would spend that – and more – on a mocha chocca skinny bloody latte

Tell me what you're thinking...
and oh, if you want a pic to show with your comment, go get a gravatar!