SYG 2010
Hurley

.

When evaluating political, social or historical claims, it is ALWAYS wise to screen every assertion through the following filters of credibility.

The most successful techniques for lying make use of the following forms of deception:

1. Lie about a non-specific group or category (but not a specific person or organization).
2. Lie about the dead.
3. Lie about a public figure.
4. Imply guilt by association.
5. Impute wicked motives, purposes, or consequences.
6. Use "weasel" words which imply more than they literally say.
7. Quote out of context.
8. Create the appearance of elaborate "documentation."
9. Repeat the lie at every opportunity.

.

The following questions look at the issue of the reliability of the data or claim being asserted:

1. Who is the author? Is the author an authority on this subject? What are his/her credentials? What are the author's known biases? Is the author emotionally stable?

2. Who is sponsoring this view? Who published it, distributed it, or promoted it? Is there a particular vested interest involved? What do the sponsor(s) stand to gain or lose?

3. Examine the factual content of the claim. Are the essential points factually correct? Can they be verified? Are the claims relevant to the case being made?

.

The following points consider the question of STYLE. Is an assertion primarily descriptive or propagandistic? Examine the following techniques:

1. Are familiar propaganda techniques used? Look for instances of name calling, glittering generalities, implied testimonials, we're just plain folks, card-stacking or join the Band wagon.

2. Is the style accusatory or conspiratorial? Or is the style informative, platitudinous or tautological?

3. Is the statement cluttered with meaningless words and mystical expressions?

4. Is the claim consistent with known facts? If it sounds too good to be true, it probably isn't.

.

Statistics are often used to inform. They are also, unfortunately, used to deceive. The following tricks are frequently used to create a devious statistical impression:

1. The "Underfed Sample." Make sure the sample is an appropriate random sample of the population under study.

2. The "Unbalanced Sample." The kinds of people in the sample need to be selected consistently with their proportion of the population.

3. The "Loaded Base." Comparisons must use the same basis of contrast if their differences are meaningful.

4. The "Top-Heavy Average." This is a technique that manipulates the average (mean, or in some cases median) by selectively including or excluding specific elements of comparison.

5. The "Microscopic Comparison." This technique greatly exaggerates relatively minor differences.

6. The "Elastic Graph." Graphs are designed to illustrate certain points of comparison. By enhancing or diminishing the scale of the graphy, the visual impression of the view can be manipulated.

7. The "Leaning Poll." Opinion polls can esaily be manipulated by either using an unrepresentative sample, or asking loaded or leading questions, and/or severely limiting the responses to the questions.

8. Using statistical associations to imply causation. Remember, Science can easily establish a correlation. It cannot prove a specific CAUSE. Such claims are usually Spurious Correlations.

.

It is better to be safe than sorry. You need to learn to be skeptical about all assertions and claims. Ask for evidence, and consider it carefully. Use these guidelines to help you. Think. Examine. Evaluate.

Return to Social Problems Page