It's not just the Associated Press that can't get basic facts right.
No wonder Barack Obama doesn't get challenged by the media on fundamentals -- y'know, things like how many states there are in the union (he says 57 or so), whether Illinois is closer to Kentucky than Arkansas (he says it's not), or whether Warren Buffett's income (!) is $56 billion (Obama seems to think that income and net worth are the same).
Apparently, some in the media have similar serious problems with basic economics and math.
Check out this from AFP about Americans' driving (bolds are mine):
Americans drive 4.5 billion fewer miles in April: report
..... beginning in 2004, the number of miles Americans put in on the roads annually began falling between 100 and 300 million miles.
And this year, the fall accelerated sharply on a yearly comparison to 4.4 billion miles.
Observers surmise a possible link between the declining number of miles driven and rising US gasoline prices.
According to a report released in April 2004 by the Congressional Research Service, the average price for petrol in the United States during the summer of 2003 was 1.74 dollars per gallon (around 3.5 liters).
Today, gasoline prices across the United States are around 3.5 times higher, averaging more than four dollars per gallon.
Reaction to first bolded item after the headline: Increasing prices reduces demand Gee, ya think?
Reaction to second bolded item after the headline: On what planet does $4 divided by $1.74 equal 3.5?
The frightening thing is that this might have been reviewed by, and gotten past, multiple layers of editors.
Cross-posted at BizzyBlog.com.
—Tom Blumer is president of a training and development company in Mason, Ohio, and is a contributing editor to NewsBusters
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Well, that explains it...
June 19, 2008 - 15:35 ET by c5thenIf Obama thinks there are 58 states, that explains how he is confident that he can win the election without Ohio or Florida.
I wonder how many electoral votes the mysterious 8 additional states have been awarded by his "advisors"?
The day that "politician" became a career choice is the day we started losing the Republic. Let's get it back! Alan Keyes '08.
These geniuses had better
June 19, 2008 - 15:57 ET by mattmThese geniuses had better not rely on themselves in the event of another recount...
Think he meant 60. He said
June 20, 2008 - 08:51 ET by pbanks7Think he meant 60. He said he'd been to 57 of the 58, and they won't even let him go to Alaska or Hawaii.
MSM - shaping all the perceptions you need to believe.
That's New Maths
June 19, 2008 - 15:59 ET by geoff.galeTom, that calculation ($4/$1.74) was performed by using the new Maths - the answer may not be technically correct, but you feel so good about it that it doesn't matter. Teaching the new Maths is why we need to gut our space programme to fund education for the next five years - we'll then have a batch of engineers who may not get a man to Mars, or the Moon, or even to the ISS, but we'll all feel so good about what they do that it won't matter.
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing."
- Edmund Burke (1729 - 1797)
www.conservativeboot...
A radical thinks two and
June 19, 2008 - 16:11 ET by FirmwormA radical thinks two and two make five. A Liberal is more conservative. He knows two and two make four, but he's unhappy about it.
Herbert Prochnow
I'll bet their bosses love
June 19, 2008 - 16:17 ET by Hero SquadI'll bet their bosses love their lack of math sense, come raise time.
"Hey, we're giving you a 3.5 percent raise, so your salary will go from $35,000 to $35,350. Congratulations!"
*****
"People only insist that a debate stop when they are afraid of what might be learned if it continues." - George Will
The original source of much
June 19, 2008 - 16:35 ET by dscottThe original source of much of this info was from the Federal Hwy Admin. http://www.dot.gov/affairs/dot8408.htm It's interesting to note the source was fairly clear in it's reporting and basically the news agencies flubbed it in spicing it up. The only difference is no gross errors in math.
BTW- the bureaucrats are already whining about how this reduction is affecting them:
“We’re burning less fuel as energy costs change driving patterns, steer people toward more fuel efficient vehicles and encourage more to use transit. Which is exactly why we need a more effective funding source than the gas tax,” Secretary Peters said.
The Secretary said as Americans drive less, the federal Highway Trust Fund receives less revenue from gasoline and diesel sales – 18.4 cents per gallon and 24.4 cents per gallon, respectively.
Hold on to your wallets folks we are about to get screwed again. Never mind that the government is collecting 40% of the oil company's cash revenues BEFORE we even pay their gas tax!!!
If you like to see the driving trends per region go here: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ohim/tvtw/tvtpage.htm The Northeast increased in driving while the rest of the country decreased.
Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, starving the poor one gallon of ethanol at a time. Fill your tank with E85 and cull a village.
Geez ....
June 19, 2008 - 16:36 ET by Tom BlumerI don't like the whining about declining gas-tax revenues at the link.
The better idea is to take some of the pork out the highway bills that are passed, and the feds can get by on declining gas-tax revenues.
I'm sure we'll hear the states whining about the same "problem" shortly.
Actually, the States have
June 19, 2008 - 19:37 ET by dscottActually, the States have been whining for a couple of years. Guess who they blamed? Hybrids and car pooling. They were talking about mandating gps units in cars to charge you according to mileage per year. Apparently, they are too lazy or brain dead to write down the odometer reading on an annual basis. The gps raised objections of big brother tracking our movements, so that killed that idea. Many States have an emissions inspection program, how, difficult is it to record the odometer reading? How difficult could it be to attach it to your car's registration at the DMV?
I believe many states have responded by raising registration fees to offset their so called losses. What no one wants to acknowledge is when people drive less that means LESS wear and tear on the roads, i.e. reduces the intensity of maintenance which translates directly into cost.
Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, starving the poor one gallon of ethanol at a time. Fill your tank with E85 and cull a village.
If the state does this
June 20, 2008 - 10:46 ET by Dan The Man 2If the state does this "record the odometer reading? How difficult could it be to attach it to your car's registration at the DMV" and tries to charge me I will disconnect the OD. Just think of teh boom in selling alternate instrumentation, hmmm.
Nuke em til they glow then shoot em in the dark.
True it is easy to defeat
June 20, 2008 - 11:08 ET by dscottTrue it is easy to defeat the odometer however, it is illegal to tamper with the odometer. Most people wouldn't do that. BTW- if the reading was absurdly low, then the State would have an obvious tip off of tampering. How many people do you know that drive way less than 12,000 miles a year???? Not many.
IMO, as far as I am concerned it's a misguided concern in any event to charge for mileage under the false premise of usage. Whether I drive 1000 miles a year or 100,000 miles, the fact is the road has to be there in the first place to use it. Those who benefit from the road's existance must pay their share to install it. The fairest system would account for the two costs of the road infrastructure. #1 cost of building the road and #2 cost of maintaining the road. Registration fees should pay for building the road everyone using a vehicle should share that cost, and for #2 I propose something that would catch everyone equally would be slapping a pro-rated tax on tires instead of the gasoline tax. All vehicles must have tires, even electric ones. E.g. you buy a 50k rated tire you pay a tax based on 50k mileage. This way, the little old lady from Pasadena who drives only on Sundays would not be replacing tires at a rate a salesperson who drives 24/7. Yeah, there would be a weakness in that plan since people could conceivably run their tires bald, however, we have the problem now anyway and it is against the law to have bald tires in any event. The police check your tires anyway when they make a traffic stop.
Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, starving the poor one gallon of ethanol at a time. Fill your tank with E85 and cull a village.
Math
June 19, 2008 - 17:53 ET by Mike S4.5 billion is a lot of miles. But divide it by 300 million people in the US (I know we aren't all drivers but I'm too lazy to find out how many drivers there are) and you have a decrease of 15 miles per year.
I think the actual news here is that at least in the short term, demand is not very elastic.
Oh, the irony
June 19, 2008 - 18:33 ET by the strugglerThe 3.5 times higher statement is the THIRD bolded item.
Oh, fiddle-dee-dee ....
June 19, 2008 - 22:14 ET by Tom BlumerIt's the second bolded text item after the headline.
I clarified, though I think most readers get that the headline doesn't "count."
"Times Higher" Is Wrong, Too
June 19, 2008 - 20:44 ET by BrookdaleparkToday, gasoline prices across the United States are around 3.5 times higher, averaging more than four dollars per gallon.
Actually, the math is even worse than what's been stated: 3.5 times higher does not mean just 3.5 times the $1.74; it means 4.5 times the $1.74. The phrase "3.5 times higher" actually means 4.5 times as high. Most of the time you see "times higher" in a news story, the writer should have written "times as high."
I see your point ....
June 19, 2008 - 22:22 ET by Tom Blumer.... Though I'm not sure I agree.
"His weight went two times higher" to me would mean that it doubled, but I can see how you'd think it really tripled.
I don't ever recall using phrasing that awkward. I would say "it doubled" or "it went up by 100%."