You are on page 1of 4

Hernandez, Eliza Joyce

Pablo, Micah A.

Sali, Rania J.

Turtal, Rezzie Jane A.

Misuse and Abuse of Statistics

Title of the Summary of the Identified Abuse/Misuse Group’s Action to Identified

Article/News Article/News Abuse/Misuse
1. FACT CHECK: Cayetano’s line graph shows Going by his intent to show the averages,
Cayetano's line a more drastic drop in Cayetano could plot the figures on the
graph of murder, murder and homicide cases 3rd row in the table he provided in his
homicide in 2016. But the senator says slide.
he wanted to show that the
Bueza, M. (2016). average number of deaths While it may be okay to use his original
FACT CHECK: has gone down under data, it is still best to observe the "similar
Cayetano's line graph Duterte (Bueza, 2016). time periods" rule. In the line graph
of murder, homicide. below, the data for 2016 so far – from
Rappler. Retrieved on January 1 to August 3 – is consolidated
April 14, 2019 from into one marker, instead of dividing 2016
https://www.rappler. into two markers.
Cayetano's line graph implies a more
drastic drop in 2016 than what his own
44037-fact-check- As a result, we arrived at a new average
figures actually show.
senator-cayetano-line- for 2016 – 28 (or 6,132 cases divided by
graph-murder- 216 days).
Data analysts say that a line graph –
showing change in data over time – should
cover similar time periods. Cayetano's
graph didn't. The data he plotted for years
2010 to 2015 were all for full years.

His data for 2016, however, are still

incomplete, covering only 216 days, and
not 365 days as in the previous years.

It is also incorrect to have statistics for

two markers for the year 2016 – the first
marker covering January to June of 2016,
and the second covering July 1 to August 3
also of the same year – and then compare
them to one marker covering a full year.
A dashed line may be used to show that
the data for 2016 is not yet complete, or
is a projection pending the complete data
for the year. Additional notes on the
graph, like an asterisk, could also be

The graph also shows a gradual, not

drastic, decrease in the average number
of cases.

2. FACT CHECK: The way the graph was If the DOT meant to emphasize the
DOT's 'misleading' presented made it appear tourism achievements in the first year of
tourism graphs in like the 109% jump in the new administration, it should have
2017 report revenue happened during compared improvements in tourist
the first year of the Duterte arrivals (or percentage changes) during
Bueza, M. (2017). administration. Including President Duterte's first year with that of
FACT CHECK: DOT's data for intervening years in his predecessor, Benigno Aquino III.
'misleading' tourism the graph would have shown
Using 2 graphs, the DOT said that tourist
graphs in 2017 report. that the numbers have been At the most, what Duterte administration
arrivals "increased by 71.83%" and
Rappler. Retrieved on progressively increasing can essentially take credit for at this
tourism revenue "doubled" or increased
April 14, 2019 from since 2011 (Bueza, 2017). point is the period from June 30, 2016
by 109% during the first 11 months of
https://www.rappler. (the day he took his oath of office) until
Duterte's term, compared to figures
com/newsbreak/fact- July 2017.
recorded in the first 11 months of the
previous administration.
misleading-tourism- The DOT should have displayed the
accomplishment- figures for July 2015 to May 2016, the
Percentage change, or the rate of change
graphs-report from an old value to a new one, is usually first 11 months of Aquino's last year, and
computed from the immediately see how it compares with that for July
preceding period of time. 2016 to May 2017, the first 11 months of
Duterte's first year.
Adding a line chart indicating percentage
change directly from period 2010-11 to
2016-17 disregards progress achieved
from Aquino's first year to the end of his
term (June 2016).

A bar graph made by It shows the percent share of It combines in one

the Bases infrastructure spending to graph actual infrastructure spending
Conversion GDP across different (from President Marcos to President
Development administrations Aquino) with planned infrastructure
Authority (BCDA) (Punongbayan, 2017) spending (under President Duterte) –
during the without so much as an explanatory note.
inauguration of The graph also distorts scale by lumping
“Build, Build, Build” the average infrastructure spending in
in November 2016 each of the 5 previous administrations,
and data for a single year under the
Punongbayan, J.C. Duterte administration.
(2017). A bar graph It cherry-picks the data by hiding the
made by the Bases variations in infrastructure spending over
the past 4 decades. The original graph
(which I traced to a 2013 paper by the
Development Authority Philippine Institute for Development
(BCDA) during the Studies) presented the entire gamut of
inauguration of “Build, yearly data across administrations, not
Build, Build” in just the averages across them.
November 2016.
Rappler. Retrieved on
April 14,2019 from