Tag: media

What Happens When the Media Narrative™ on Gun Control Loses Traction?

KevinLeave a comment

They go back to scaaaaary numbers!  And they beat their drums made from the skins of dead children.

Terrible tally: 500 children dead from gunshots every year, 7,500 hurt, analysis finds

That’s the headline. Here’s the first line of the piece (emphasis mine):

About 500 American children and teenagers die in hospitals every year after sustaining gunshot wounds — a rate that climbed by nearly 60 percent in a decade, according to the first-ever accounting of such fatalities, released Sunday.

Children and teens – which includes 18 and 19 year-old “children” who are legally adults.

But wait! It gets better!

In addition, an estimated 7,500 kids are hospitalized annually after being wounded by gunfire, a figure that spiked by more than 80 percent from 1997 to 2009, according two Boston doctors presenting their findings at a conference of the American Academy of Pediatrics, held in Orlando, Fla.

Eight of every 10 firearm wounds were inflicted by handguns, according to hospital records reviewed by the doctors. They say the national conversation about guns should shift toward the danger posed by smaller weapons, not the recent fights over limiting the availability of military-style, semi-automatic rifles.

So the urgent need to reinstate the assault weapon ban is not so urgent after all?

Just as an aside, I did a Google search on the name of one of the authors, Dr. Arin L. Madenci. Google returned 9,380 hits. The first eight pages are almost exclusively this announcement. Of the dozen or so stories I scanned, not one had a link to the actual report, just the database that spawned it.

So let’s look at some numbers.

The NBC piece states:

Madenci, and his colleague, Dr. Christopher Weldon, a surgeon at Boston Children’s Hospital, tallied the new statistics by culling a national database of 36 million pediatric hospitalizations from 1997 to 2009, the most recent year for which figures are available.
During that period, hospitalizations of kids and teens aged 20 and younger from gunshot wounds jumped from 4,270 to 7,730. Firearm deaths of children logged by hospitals rose from 317 in 1997 to 503 in 2009, records showed.

Wait – “aged 20 and younger? I thought we were talking “children and teens”?

The Centers for Disease Control has a tool, WISQARS, which stands for Web-based Injury Statistics Query and Reporting System. It has subsections on fatal injury, non-fatal injury, and violent injury statistics, though the last covers only sixteen states and is “not nationally representative.” That’s OK though. The fatal and non-fatal statistics can be searched by “violence-related” or “unintentional.” The CDC numbers go through 2010.

In 1997, according to the CDC, for “children” aged 0-19 there were 4,223 gunshot fatalities, not 317. Apparently the overwhelming majority of these gunshot fatalities never made it to a hospital. The non-fatal data only goes back to 2000, so I can’t do a comparison, but you’d think they’d want to use the higher number. But here’s the interesting part where this “news” piece becomes an opinion piece without bothering to inform you of the fact:  of the total of 1,005 words in the NBC piece, the first 298 of them are about the study and its results. The remaining 707 are about how you should feel about it. They relate to the tragic death of 3-year-old Will McAnaul who died from an accidentally self-inflicted gunshot wound. As I have said before, this is the kind of thing that really irritates me. As I said then:
 Now, what are you to infer from this? You are to infer that the majority of these injuries and deaths are accidental, are you not?

Let’s look at the CDC’s numbers in more depth.

For 1997, children 0-12 years of age, gunshot fatalities: 318
Unintentional: 84
Violence-related (includes suicide): 226
Known suicide: 20

Eighty-four accidental deaths. Over two hundred homicides.

For 1997, children 13-19, gunshot fatalities: 3,905 (12.63/100,000 population)
Unintentional: 222
Violence related: 3,616
Suicide: 1,242

That means 2,374 were homicides.

Let’s jump to 2009.

Children 0-12, gunshot fatalities: 209
Unintentional: 44
Violence-related: 156
Suicide: 14

Age 13-19 total gunshot fatalities: 2,502 (8.25/100,000 population)
Unintentional: 90
Violence-related: 2,383
Suicide: 735

Excuse me?

The story plainly states that:

…hospitalizations of kids and teens aged 20 and younger from gunshot wounds jumped from 4,270 to 7,730. Firearm deaths of children logged by hospitals rose from 317 in 1997 to 503 in 2009, records showed.

But the Centers for Disease Control data also plainly states that the total “firearm deaths” of children aged from birth to nineteen years of age went from 4,223 to 2,811 – a decrease of 1,412 in raw numbers and a death rate decrease of almost 63%.  Accidental death by gunshot dropped by 60%.

And all of this in the face of expanding “shall-issue” concealed-carry legislation, and at least four million new guns being purchased each year – at least half of them handguns.

The CDC numbers are far higher than those used by Doctors Arin L. Madenci and Christopher Weldon, and they are nothing to be proud of, but they trend DOWN, and dramatically. You can’t frighten people with declining statistics. Instead, they had to find numbers they could cherry-pick to support The Narrative™ that guns are a disease vector, and that more guns = more “gun deaths.”

And every news service in the country, and many more worldwide picked up the “story” (and I use that word with dripping sarcasm) and ran with it.

LAYERS of editorial fact-checking!!

Agenda?  What agenda?

Remember, they’re The Other Side.  It’s what they do.  It’s all they do.  And they absolutely will not stop.

So we can’t either.

UPDATE: NBC reporter Bill Briggs, who wrote the linked article, is on Facebook. I asked him about his story. Specifically, I asked:  “Mr. Briggs, I read your piece. Don’t you guys have fact checkers?”  His response:

The study conducted by these surgical residents came from the first-ever data mining of firearms injuries/deaths from this statistical set (KID). It warrants coverage. We noted in the article that this pediatric database typically includes anyone 20 and under (although for one year of data, the cut off was younger). We typically try to put faces and personal stories with any numbers reported in all our stories, no matter the topic.

I asked him:

Doesn’t it bother you – even a little – that they reported a significant increase in fatalities (317 in 1997 to 503 in 2009) while the Centers for Disease Control reported a significant DECREASE in fatalities (and a MUCH higher total count)? Does that not tell you that the KID statistical set is pretty much USELESS for the purpose they put it to (if you don’t assume that their purpose was to push gun control)? Doesn’t THAT “warrant coverage”? Doesn’t it make you ask “Why”?

We’ll see if he replies.

UPDATE II:  He did.  Here’s the remainder of the exchange:

Yes, we cover all those trend lines.

Also, if you read the abstract written by these two surgeons, you’ll note that they are not pushing a social agenda. They speak to the statistics from a clinical perspective. They only venture slightly down that road when citing the higher percentage of handgun injuries in contrast to ongoing debates about so-called assault rifles.

Bill, where was the link to the abstract in your piece? I saw links only to the KID website and to Patcine McAnaul’s blog. (And though you chose Will McAnaul as the face for your story, I think even you would admit that stating his case “may” have been one included in the data is stretching it. He was “declared dead” at the hospital, not admitted.)

I saw no mention of “trend lines” other than “hospitalizations of kids and teens aged 20 and younger from gunshot wounds jumped from 4,270 to 7,730. Firearm deaths of children logged by hospitals rose from 317 in 1997 to 503 in 2009, records showed.”

With respect to the doctors, you don’t find this comment suggestive? “Policies designed to reduce the number of household firearms, especially handguns, may more effectively reduce the number of gunshot injuries in children,” Madenci said.

This INSISTS that “the number of gunshot injuries in children” is INCREASING – an assertion BELIED by the CDC data that says it’s DECREASING – dramatically – WITHOUT such “policies” despite the increasing number of firearms in private hands – especially handguns.

In short, your piece provides false information in support of a false narrative, but it “warrants coverage” while the truth – as uncomfortable as it is – does not.

And you wonder why people no longer trust the media?

Thank you for your thoughts. The American Academy of Pediatrics can offer additional information on this research.

Thank you for your responses.

As my daughter said to me tonight on the telephone, “I kept waiting for him to respond, and he never did.”

Shock! TEA-Party Members Aren’t Knuckle-Dragging Ignoramuses!

KevinLeave a comment

Got this one via Instapundit.  (Sorry for the dearth of posting, but I’ve been working a LOT of hours.)

So a Yale law professor (and apparently amateur statistician) did a study.  Reports Politico:

Yale law professor Dan Kahan posted on his blog this week that he analyzed the responses of more than 2,000 American adults recruited for another study and found that, on average, people who leaned liberal were more science literate than those who leaned conservative.

However, those who identified as part of the tea party movement were actually better versed in science than those who didn’t, Kahan found. The findings met the conventional threshold of statistical significance, the professor said.

At the actual post, the Professor says:

I’ve got to confess, though, I found this result surprising. As I pushed the button to run the analysis on my computer, I fully expected I’d be shown a modest negative correlation between identifying with the Tea Party and science comprehension.

But then again, I don’t know a single person who identifies with the Tea Party.

Paging Pauline Kael!

All my impressions come from watching cable tv — & I don’t watch Fox News very often — and reading the “paper” (New York Times daily, plus a variety of politics-focused internet sites like Huffington Post & Politico).

I’m a little embarrassed, but mainly I’m just glad that I no longer hold this particular mistaken view.

Of course, I still subscribe to my various political and moral assessments–all very negative– of what I understand the “Tea Party movement” to stand for. I just no longer assume that the people who happen to hold those values are less likely than people who share my political outlooks to have acquired the sorts of knowledge and dispositions that a decent science comprehension scale measures.

But that’s not the best part.

The blog comment thread is.

At the time of this writing, it runs 249 comments long, overwhelmingly pro-TEA Party, and IMHO this one is the best:

Let me add an international twist:

I am a Brazilian self-taught Software Engineer. I also taught myself English, to the point where I managed to hold a Cambridge CPE, despite the fact that I’ve never stepped on anglophonic soil and zero formal training. So my analytic and reasoning faculties seem to be in working order.

Now, with that out of the way, here’s why I strongly identify with the Tea Party: in my view, they are right, and they are the US’s lifeline. They represent the virtues that led to American Exceptionalism (and YES, this does exist).

I find caricaturing Tea Partiers extremely ironic, and it would be hilarious, weren’t it so revolting. In my experience, being a lefty liberal is EASY. It is the default stance of the intellectually lazy. All you have to do is feel (specially “good about myself” kind of feel), and never solve anything. Here’s, in my view, why:

I live in the logical endpoint of Fabian socialism. Born to and raised in a culture where the concepts of “right” and “left” are non-existent (I take that back, actually “right” is a language stand-in for “evil”). We have over 30 political parties, and they are all some variant of the left. From Social Democrat parties to “Trotsky-ish” parties. Our *current* constitution, which dates back all the way to the Gun’n’ Roses era (1988), is pretty much a Soviet Constitution (1936) copy/paste job. Culturally, the population is in pretty much a state of “1984 meets Brave New World” in terms of ideology.

Brazil is also a country where:

– the utter government control of the private sector trough bureaucracy managed to destroy entrepreneurship. To the point that it exists, it has to deal with the accepted fact of life that the bribes which feed the corrupt bureaucrats demand to allow business to exist have to be factored in business plans.

– a crushing tax burden that sustain a permanent dependent underclass of favelados in welfare ensures the populists remain eternally in power and that any semblance upward mobility is quickly “corrected”. For an employer to put 10.000 in the pocket of an employee, with will costs him nearly 18.000, so jobs market are always tepid at best so informal work and tax dodging schemes are commonplace.

– The relentless attack on Catholicism (the historical prevalent brand of Christianity practiced here) over the past decades eroded any semblance of morality form a large chunk of the country, and that coupled with utter corruption and/or incompetence of law enforcement made way for drug cartels to take over. Violence and crime spiraled to such inhuman degrees that between the 50K murders in average a year, this year we saw a soccer referee stab a player to death and then be beheaded and quartered in the field by the spectators for his trouble. His head was placed in a spike in the middle of the field, as an added dramatic bonus (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2357453/Brazilian-referee-beheaded-Angry-fans-head-stake-stabbing-player.html).
This act barely caused a murmur.

I could go on for ages with more evidence of social rot, but you probably already got the gist of it.

Now, remember, being immersed in this cultural cesspool since birth I, like most Brazilians, never even *knew* that this wasn’t actually just “the way things are”. I mean, we get a gut feeling that something is off, but like Plato’s cave dwellers, light is something really frightening and instinctively avoided. And the *obvious* solutions by all the *smart people* are always the same: more government “compassion”. More “social programs”. More “awareness”. Less “greedyness”.

Imagine my shock when by a quirk of fate a Mark Levin book ended in my hands. That led me to Burke, Locke, Smith, Mises, Friedman, Hayek and many others. Conservative philosophy is what gave me a glimpse of the shinning city in the hill and a will to fight, along with a battle plan, to improve my lot in life, and of those I can reach.

So, Dan, I understand you are surprised that your results showed Tea Partiers not the raging bufons the media portrays them as being. The most obvious things are often the easiest to miss. But never doubt that being conservative is quite the intellectual effort, if only to overcome the moroseness of the mind that liberalism creates imposes with all its group-think and easy answers.

Best wishes,

Rodrigo

PS: written in a hurry on lunch break, no time to proof-read, so apologies in advance for eventual typos.

October 18, 2013 Rodrigo Del Cistia Andrade

The anti-Tea Party comments? Mostly ad hominems and “Your data/conclusion is not valid” arguments.

I cannot help but wonder if we’re not approaching another preference cascade.

Edited to add:  I’ll just leave this right here:

[youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eg_SsaP-9V4?rel=0;start=11]

Scaaaaary Numbers!!

KevinLeave a comment

Apparently since the Navy Yard shooting has mysteriously dropped off the media radar (because the perpetrator was a mentally-ill Prius-driving Obama supporter – but I repeat myself – who didn’t use an AR-15, but rather a Joe Biden-approved 12 gauge shotgun and a handgun he took off a security guard) the New York Times has fallen back on a more reliable drum to beat – one made from the skins of dead children.  Just not ones from Chicago.

Yes, the Times anxiously wishes to inform us that:

Children shot accidentally — usually by other children — are collateral casualties of the accessibility of guns in America, their deaths all the more devastating for being eminently preventable.

They die in the households of police officers and drug dealers, in broken homes and close-knit families, on rural farms and in city apartments. Some adults whose guns were used had tried to store them safely; others were grossly negligent. Still others pulled the trigger themselves, accidentally fracturing their own families while cleaning a pistol or hunting.

And there are far more of these innocent victims than official records show.

A New York Times review of hundreds of child firearm deaths found that accidental shootings occurred roughly twice as often as the records indicate, because of idiosyncrasies in how such deaths are classified by the authorities.

And:

As a result, scores of accidental killings are not reflected in the official statistics that have framed the debate over how to protect children from guns.

For those with an eighth-grade reading level or below (e.g: many NYT readers), a “score” is twenty.

Of course, the Eeeeeeevil NRA must be invoked:

The National Rifle Association cited the lower official numbers this year in a fact sheet opposing “safe storage” laws, saying children were more likely to be killed by falls, poisoning or environmental factors — an incorrect assertion if the actual number of accidental firearm deaths is significantly higher.

And its effects on cowed and mind-controlled legislators:

In all, fewer than 20 states have enacted laws to hold adults criminally liable if they fail to store guns safely, enabling children to access them.

Legislative and other efforts to promote the development of childproof weapons using “smart gun” technology have similarly stalled. Technical issues have been an obstacle, but so have N.R.A. arguments that the problem is relatively insignificant and the technology unneeded.

Because of maneuvering in Congress by the gun lobby and its allies, firearms have also been exempted from regulation by the Consumer Product Safety Commission since its inception.

Is gun. Is not safe.

To give credit where due, the Times does make a passing nod at reality:

Even with a proper count, intentional shooting deaths of children — including gang shootings and murder-suicides by family members — far exceed accidental gun deaths.

But they don’t tell you what “far exceed” really means. Nor do they discuss in any way the declining level of accidental death by firearms that has been going on for DECADES – despite the ever-increasing number of firearms in private hands.

Oh, right. I forgot. The other Narrative™ is that those guns are being purchased by fewer and fewer people – mostly aging white males. And perhaps some white Hispanics.

For instance, the Times reports:

Under the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention figures, in fact, gun accidents were the ninth-leading cause of unintentional deaths among children ages 1 to 14 in 2010. (The agency reported 62 such killings that year.) If the actual numbers are, in fact, roughly double, however, gun accidents would rise into the top five or six.

The CDC does report that 62 (that would be three-score and two) deaths of children from infants to 14 were reported in 2010, but this graphic (PDF) does not list accidental death by firearm in the top TEN for any subset of that age group except the 10-14 group where it is, in fact, tenth with a total of 26 (one-score and six) deaths:


(Click for full size.)
However:

308 died as a result of fire.
726 died of drowning.
1,118 died from unintentional suffocation.
1,499 died from vehicular accidents.

And 957 were murdered.

Each death is a tragedy regardless of the cause, but you don’t see the New York Times calling for a ban on swimming pools above a certain size.

Often an accident is just that – an accident.  Occasionally it rises to the level of depraved indifference.  I believe that there probably ought to be more prosecutions of negligence in many of these cases – for which laws already exist – but I also think that prosecutors don’t pursue them in the belief that juries won’t convict grieving parents.

Yes, these deaths are “eminently preventable” – by preventing the private possession of firearms.  (That would be “accessibility.”)  Because “just one death” is always justification for the “next step.”

No Shame

KevinLeave a comment

Obama in July, 2008:

[youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ydZTHPkOnvE?rel=0]
Obama in September, 2013:

[youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=58zamUOSPxk?start=102]

Raising the debt ceiling, which has been done over a hundred times,
does not increase our debt.

Then why do we need to raise the ceiling? Aren’t we again “taking out a credit card from the Bank of China in the name of our children” and “driving up the national debt”? What’s different now?

The difference is, now he’s the President, and under his administration, the national debt has increased from $10.5 trillion in November of 2008 to over $16.9 trillion today, some $200 billion over the current “ceiling,” – but through accounting sleight-of-hand by the Treasury, it’s been “officially” stuck at $16,699,396,000,000 since mid-May,  an interesting tidbit the MSM hasn’t found interesting enough to comment on.

It’s like they’re protecting him or something.

So, Let’s Review What We Know, Think, Believe About Aaron Alexis

KevinLeave a comment

I love modern media and the 24-hour news cycle.

There were three, two, was only one shooter at the Navy Yard.  It was a mid-fifties white male in fatigues, 34 year-old black male – excuse me, “Texan.”  He had a rifle, pistol, and shotgun an AR-15 a shotgun.  He entered a secure base using someone else’s ID his own ID.  He had a past history of violent behavior, but passed not one, but two background checks very recently to get a “Secret” security clearance.

In other words, we don’t know SHIT.

Give it 24-48 hours.

And please, don’t judge all Buddhists by the acts of one man.

But feel free to judge all gun owners by the acts of one man!

Obama Lied, Privacy Died

KevinLeave a comment

Well, it looks like there are cracks starting to form in the media dike.  David Sirota writes in Salon:

I guess it’s possible Obama has merely been “wrong” but has not been lying. But the implications of that would be just as bad — albeit in a different way — as if he were deliberately lying. It would mean that he is making sweeping and wildly inaccurate statements without bothering to find out if they are actually true. Worse, for him merely to be wrong but not deliberately lying, it would mean that he didn’t know the most basic facts about how his own administration runs. It would, in other words, mean he is so totally out of the loop on absolutely everything — even the public news cycle — that he has no idea what’s going on.

I, of course, don’t buy that at all. I don’t buy that a constitutional lawyer and legal scholar didn’t know that the FISA court is secret — aka the opposite of “transparent.” I don’t buy that he simply didn’t see any of the news showing that spying is happening in the United States. And I don’t buy that he didn’t know that there is evidence — both public and inside his own administration — of the NSA “actually abusing” its power.

I don’t buy any of that because, to say the least, it makes no sense. I just don’t buy that he’s so unaware of the world around him that he made such statements from a position of pure ignorance. On top of that, he has a motive. Yes, Obama has an obvious political interest in trying to hide as much of his administration’s potentially illegal behavior as possible, which means he has an incentive to calculatedly lie. For all of these reasons, it seems safe to suggest that when it comes to the NSA situation, the president seems to be lying.

Still, this is just Salon.com. Now, if the New York Times publishes something like this, the remainder of The Won’s term would be interesting – in the Chinese curse meaning of the word.

So Much To Do, So Little Time…

KevinLeave a comment

Still working 10-12 hour days.  Lots going on out in the real world, and no time to analyze and write about any of it. 

Nobody shows for a “Climate Change Rally” in  Washington.  The snark and schadenfreude just ache to be written.

Obamacare’s implementation of a 30-hour “full time” workweek has spawned an “unintended consequence” – hour cuts to avoid having to provide health care.  “Unintended” my ass.  Everyone who saw that provision KNEW what the result would be.  But the White House says there’s no there, there.  In other Obamacare news, first there was the delay of planned Medicare cuts, then delay of the “employer mandate” for companies with 50 or more employees, and now the cap on out-of-pocket expenses has been delayed by proclamation.  And they’re still telling us that our premiums will go down.

A rodeo clown gets “lifetime ban” for un-PC political speech, and calls for “federal involvement” are raised. 

Jesse Jackson, Jr. and his wife get jail sentences, and CBS doesn’t find his party affiliation newsworthy.  (Hey, the New York Times put it in the first SENTENCE of their story.)

The Federal Government is still running at a loss, but the National Debt has remained at $16,699,396,000,000 since last month.  Truly, if a private business was run like the .gov, it would be shut down in thirty seconds and every officer would be sitting in prison alongside Rep. Jackson, Jr.  And the regular media has nothing to say about this accounting sleight-of-hand, I guess because “the right people” are in charge.

In other money news, apparently while the Fed can create money electronically with ease, the Mint can’t actually PRINT money worth a damn.

Egypt is coming apart at the seams.  Syria isn’t doing any better.  Or Iraq.  That “smart diplomacy” sure is working wonders, no?

Still no motion from the media on IRS-Gate, Bengazi-Gate, or any of the other myriad Obama scandals.  Of course not!  He’s not George W. Bush!

Yeesh.  Maybe I should be happy that I’ve got three more weeks of  busting my ass at work, and at least another month when I get back from Reno.

Please enjoy yourself in the comments and the archives, and a BIG thank you to reader John Hardin who has been making MASSIVE efforts to make available the old JS-Kit/Echo comment threads for a lot of the older posts, like this one.  Thank you, John.  It’s much appreciated, and if I’m ever in your neck of the woods, I owe you a beer or twelve.