Following brutal conflicts of the 17th Century, European rulers began governing based on demographic trends, enabled by the birth of modern statistics. As The Guardian aptly captures its importance, “Statistics would do for populations what cartography did for territory.” Over three centuries later, their role in our institutions remains crucial. They are used to describe the economy, sway public opinion, showcase polling data, and be indisputable points of reference. The United Nations Statistics Division reaffirms statistics as an “indispensable element in the information system of a democratic society.” However, in recent years, western democracies have observed a rapidly growing distrust in statistics. This shift in mindset is the result of the incessant misuse of statistics to bend the truth by authorities who claim to be trustworthy. Politicians have weaponized numbers to serve their credo. While misinformation online is a serious concern, this article examines a subtler issue — the manipulation of factually correct information to spread fear.
Statistics would do for populations what cartography did for territory.
“England’s vaccinated population had close to 1 million deaths in 23 months; the unvaccinated population had less than 61,000 deaths over the same period (July 2021 and May 2023),” Natural News, a far-right anti-vaccination website claimed on Facebook. While the statistic is technically correct, several misinformation strategies deceive people into believing that vaccines are ineffective at preventing COVID deaths. By mid-2021, tens of millions of people, or over 90% of the population of England over the age of 12, were vaccinated. On the other hand, only a few million people were unvaccinated, and the number of deaths in this group was therefore much lower. Further, the statistic includes death from all causes, not just COVID-19. Since older people were much more likely to be vaccinated, they were also more likely to have died from other causes. One easy way to see why this statistic is misleading would be to replace the group of vaccinated people with the group of people who have all four limbs. The statistic would then read “England’s four-limbed population had close to 1 million deaths in 23 months; the people with missing limbs had less than 61,000 deaths in the same period.” When phrased like this, the deception seems obvious. A more effective statistic would be “deaths per 100,000” for example, which paints a more accurate picture.
This shift in mindset is the result of the incessant misuse of statistics to bend the truth by authorities who claim to be trustworthy.
“56% of Australia’s working-age Muslims are not in the labour force,” rightwing Australian Senator Fraser Anning tweeted in May 2018. At face value, this number seems alarmingly higher than the national average of 24% at the time. However, various nuances were overlooked by the Senator. To begin with, Economist John Quiggin from the University of Queensland concluded that the higher non-participation rate for Muslims is almost entirely due to lower participation rates for women, which stems from cultural and systemic reasons like not being able to work in establishments where alcohol or non-halal meat is sold, workplace restrictions against the hijab, or requiring the workplace to have adequate praying room facilities. Excluding women from the statistic, the non-participation rate drops to 30%, much less than the claimed 56%. However, the core of the problem is not the statistics, but the implication that Muslims receive unemployment benefits and are hence a liability to the economy. Professor Quiggin asserted that unemployed Muslim women whose husbands or partners were earning would not be eligible for government benefits in most cases. The Department of Social Services clarified that “the Government does not collect information on religion in social security statistics,” further discrediting Senator Anning’s implication. His selective framing, despite citing a real figure, stripped away context to turn a complex social and cultural situation into a political weapon.
While statistics are undoubtedly impactful, they often reduce complex issues to catchphrases that oversimplify reality and serve political ambition rather than public understanding.
“Rapid Turnaround of Exports… for the first time in 18 years, India records a monthly goods trade surplus in June,” Indian Union Minister Piyush Goyal tweeted on June 15th, 2020. This statistic hails Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s new policy framework as a boon for India’s trade industry. However, the raw numbers comparing June 2019 and June 2020 reveal that Indian exports in fact reduced from $25.01 billion to $21.91 billion. The surplus was in fact caused by the significant drop in imports from $40.29 billion to $21.11 billion. Digging deeper, this was not followed by substitutes in the domestic industry as implied by the tweet, but was rather a result of the slowdown of industrial activity caused by the coronavirus pandemic. The surplus was thus less a triumph of policy than a by-product of pandemic-induced collapse in imports, showing how the lack of context of statistics disguises economic stagnation as trade strength.
Evidently, the manipulation of statistics to incite or distract from fear is present in all realms of political life, from healthcare and trade to jobs and immigration. While statistics are undoubtedly impactful, they often reduce complex issues to catchphrases that oversimplify reality and serve political ambition rather than public understanding.
The author of this article chose to publish anonymously.