The AP's headline gravely informs us that Alcohol-related driving deaths up. Yet, here is a wonderful case where a headline screams an alarmist message that the story itself does not really substantiate. Now, it is true that columnists and journalists rarely, if ever, write their own headlines so maybe we shouldn't tsk tsk writer Natasha T. Metzler. But, one would hope that the so-called professionals who write the headlines that appear at the top of a story would actually read the story before creating such a header. In this case, it seems that the headline writer went straight for sensationalism without bothering to read most of the story he was capping. And, naturally, the sensationalism is that alcohol related deaths have "increased" over the 2005 stats.
Granted the first paragraph of the story makes the bald faced statement that "fatalities increased" in 2006, but as you read the story closer, that claim proves chimerical if not practically false even by the stats cited in the story itself.
ARLINGTON, Va. - Drunken driving fatalities increased in 22 states in 2006 and fell in 28 states, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico, federal transportation officials said Monday.
As the piece goes on, though, there are so many qualifications and out right exaggerations that the claim of an alarmist "fatalities increased" seems not as obvious as it at first appears. And, notice the caveat in that first paragraph, anyway. The header says "Deaths Up," but the story says it was only "up" in less than half the states.
In fact, the very next paragraph shows that deaths are down nationally where alcohol was involved.
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration released data showing there were 13,470 deaths in 2006 involving drivers and motorcycle operators with blood alcohol levels of .08 or higher, which is the legal limit for adults throughout the country. The number was down slightly from 2005, when 13,582 people died in crashes involving legally drunk drivers.
Then the AP finally divulges the stats that caused them to say deaths were "up":
The overall number of deaths involving drivers and motorcycle operators with any amount of alcohol in their blood was 17,602 last year. That was up from 17,590 in 2005, according to spokeswoman Heather Ann Hopkins.
"Up" 12 deaths from one year to the next! That is barely a statistical blip in a nation of 300 million people. It barely even registers as a rise. Is THIS enough to say deaths are "up," AP? To most statisticians, that would be a stat showing that the number of deaths remained fairly constant.
The US government is even debunking the headline as U.S. Transportation Secretary Mary Peters says, "The number of people who died on the nation's roads actually fell last year."
So, as it all turns out, alcohol deaths aren't really up. In fact, overall they are down. Yet, here is the AP with a headline and an alarmist first paragraph that makes it seem as if things are getting worse. And thanks to the AP for taking what is sort of good news into an alarm of worry.














Editor at Large

Comments Policy
Accruate, Scmaccurate
August 21, 2007 - 05:50 ET by motherbeltIt got your attention, didn't it?
They tried, but they just couldn't fit "(in some states)" into the headline.
This is like those "teasers" for the 11 o'clock news where they say: "A new study exploring the link between XXXX and breast cancer. Find out if you're at risk". Then you watch the news and find out it's a tenuous link at best, has all kinds of qualifiers, and the answer, basically is: No.
Here is how they SHOULD have
August 21, 2007 - 06:06 ET by Warner Todd HustonHere is how they SHOULD have titled their story:
"DRUNKS KILLING MORE ON HIGHWAYS, NO ONE IS SAFE ANYWHERE
...well, not really. We are just trying to get a cheap headline thrill here, OK?"
Warner, I know it's
August 21, 2007 - 06:17 ET by LeonWarner,
I know it's essential for most of the NB's world view to label their enemies (ala Goebbels) with dehumanizing terms, but I think you guys might be getting dangerously close to overusing and abusing two words: alarmist & derangement. Can we get more creative? Is anyone that reports on bad news going to be an alarmist from now on? If I report on a car bomb killing 100 people in Baghdad am i an Iraq Alarmist? If I write a story detailing Bob Murray's history of hating his own workers, am I suffering from Bob Murray Derangement Syndrome? <br>
Do you NOT think that a
August 21, 2007 - 06:34 ET by Warner Todd HustonDo you NOT think that a headline that says deaths are up when they are NOT is alarmist?
Congratulations, Warner
August 21, 2007 - 06:41 ET by RJYou have now been labeled (along with "most" of NB) a "Nazi alarmist."
Don't you love the irony?
Broad, dehumanizing exaggeration in a post complaining about dehumanizing exaggeration.
Warner, "Up" 12 deaths
August 21, 2007 - 07:51 ET by LeonWarner,
"Up" 12 deaths from one year to the next! That is barely a statistical blip in a nation of 300 million people. It barely even registers as a rise. Is THIS enough to say deaths are "up," AP? To most statisticians, that would be a stat showing that the number of deaths remained fairly constant.
Not up much, but up nonetheless. Pretty sure that UP means up, even if it's only 12. Now, the AP would have been wrong had they said 'up' and not provided the actual stat of 12 additional deaths from 2005, but they did provide the stat, thus qualifying their headline.
Considering the damage drunk driving causes every single year, I don't think it's ever 'alarmist' to promote the statistics concerning the actual damage they cause.
Not sure about you, but I'd like to prevent drunk driving and one sure fire way to do that is to let people know how many deaths occur each year.
In closing, you ask:
Do you NOT think that a headline that says deaths are up when they are NOT is alarmist?
But they are up. As you pointed out in your post. Now what?
The headline states that
August 21, 2007 - 08:49 ET by KC BeachThe headline states that Alcohol related driving deaths are up. The story clearly points out that deaths involving blood alcohol levels of .08 or more (the legal definition of DWI) are actually down. The story goes on to say that deaths involving ANY alcohol were up by a quantity of 12. Only if you believe that a BAC of .001 would be the cause of an accident, then the headline is accurate. The fact that a person with a measurable but inconsequential amount of alcohol in their system is involved in a traffic accident where a fatality occurred does not have any bearing on true “alcohol related traffic deaths”.
KC, That's strange but I
August 21, 2007 - 09:10 ET by LeonKC,
That's strange but I don't remember people making this same distinction with marijuana.
Must just be a personal belief kind of thing.
Call me crazy, but in my mind, accidents involving any amount of alcohol provide an important statistic.
Again, the headline remains accurate. Notice it says ALCOHOL-Related, not DUI related.
When and where did I say the
August 21, 2007 - 09:24 ET by Warner Todd HustonWhen and where did I say the headline was a lie?
Here are the words I used to describe the headline:
Senastionalism
an alarmist message
exaggerations
Not as obvious
I also said it was "practically" false and that the headline is "not really" substantiated. Both phrases I used are qualified terms. I never said it was an outright lie.
I qualified all my discussions on the headline showing that it was misleading and couched my whole analysis on the predicate that it was much ado about nothing. But, I never said it was an outright lie.
But, if you are happy that in a nation of 300 million people, 12 deaths more one year to the next is enough to shout from the rooftops that deaths are rising and that everyone should hide under their bed... well, what can one say to that? You are an alarmist, yourself. So, no amount of further discussion is logical with such as yourself.
Thanks for playing though, Chicken Little.
Uh Warner, 1) I'm an
August 21, 2007 - 09:48 ET by LeonUh Warner,
1) I'm an alarmist? How so? Provide evidence if possible.
2) The article is not supposed to make you run and hide under your bed. What are you talking about? It's supposed to let you know that many many Americans die in alcohol realted accidents. The article should ALARM you in the sense that you might think twice before driving drunk. Now is that really alarmism or is it good advice?
Arguing for its own sake
August 21, 2007 - 09:57 ET by Cool ArrowLeon, can you concede that 12 more deaths within one year over another may be nothing more than a couple more days under hazardous driving conditions. We are talking about 17,602 vs 17,590.
12 more traffic deaths is tragic, but hardly statistical evidence of a shift when the numbers are so high.
~LYDSEXICS UNTIE!~
Give it up, Cool Arrow.
August 21, 2007 - 10:17 ET by Warner Todd HustonGive it up, Cool Arrow.
Chicken Little is running and screaming way too loud to hear you!
}}---> Agreed, WTH
August 21, 2007 - 10:21 ET by Cool ArrowIt would be nice if we had some logical Liberal debaters in here.
Wait a minute? I just made a funny!
~LYDSEXICS UNTIE!~
Oxymoron?
August 21, 2007 - 10:23 ET by Warner Todd HustonOxymoron?
}}---> Yep
August 21, 2007 - 10:28 ET by Cool ArrowAnd moroff than on.
~LYDSEXICS UNTIE!~
LOL
August 21, 2007 - 10:30 ET by Warner Todd HustonLOL
Population increase should be considered
August 21, 2007 - 07:39 ET by Blogger Guy00001From one year to the next the US population has increased. This increase alone should account for the 12 death increase.
Of course, the news writer has chosen to ignore anything that doesn't fit in with his/her agenda.
Misleading?
August 21, 2007 - 08:16 ET by KarmaSober Drivers Cause Majority of Accidents !
Would this headline be true?
}}---> Cell Phones
August 21, 2007 - 08:23 ET by Cool ArrowCell phone related traffic deaths are up.
~LYDSEXICS UNTIE!~
THE WICKED NUMBERS GAME.
August 21, 2007 - 09:32 ET by CrashOh great statistic god in the sky! Please give us numbers with meaning; like deaths per capita.
More people travel by car thanks to crappy airline services, the influx of illegals, plus more teens with machines. Let's face it, the roads have more traffic than ever before. As the polpulation increases so to will the numbers, along with your odds.
I bet more people died having sex last year than ever ... thanks to Viagra. But, that's life in the fast lane!
Well, all I can say to that
August 21, 2007 - 09:33 ET by Ruths husband BenWell, all I can say to that is if I get to choose whether I am going to die in a car accident or having sex, I know which line I will be in.....
the long one.
But who's the puppet master?
August 21, 2007 - 09:37 ET by CrashPerhaps, the "theys" will find a NASCAR, BUSH/ROVE, Big oil connection by the end of the week.
}}---> NASCAR Drunks
August 21, 2007 - 09:39 ET by Cool ArrowNext, they'll be telling us our Astronauts are a bunch of drunk flyboys. Sheeesh.
~LYDSEXICS UNTIE!~
Talk about a long, hard
August 21, 2007 - 10:22 ET by CrashTalk about a long, hard road.
}}---> Hard road
August 21, 2007 - 10:25 ET by Cool ArrowVIAGRA FALLS! . . . Slowly I turned.
~LYDSEXICS UNTIE!~
It doesn't matter, these
August 21, 2007 - 10:07 ET by rightsideIt doesn't matter, these deaths can all be blamed on chimperor McBushitlerburton, and global warming.
Yes! Have some.
This is a perfect example
August 21, 2007 - 12:00 ET by kgThis is a perfect example of how the liberal mind twists the facts around to fit their view.
"increased in 22 states in 2006 and fell in 28 states" - (Fell in most states)
"involving car drivers and motorcycle operators...number was down slightly from 2005" - (And the number of motorcycles increased slightly! Another decrease!)
"17,602 last year. That was up from 17,590 in 2005" - (12 people a year? Would that be .00001%? And counting
those with little or no alcohol means motorists are still not watching out for motorcycles but yet it still was a slight decline. Lets not mention several states lowering the legal limit.)
"The number of people who died on the nation's roads actually fell last year," - (WOW, where did the headline come from then?)
"Arizona, Kansas and Texas had the greatest increases... But Utah, Kansas and Iowa had the largest percentage increases" - (Maybe the headline refers to Kansas. I don't know the reason except maybe because Kansas lowered the legal limit to .08 instead of .1 but don't look to the vague article for the reason)
"Florida, Missouri and Pennsylvania had the greatest decreases"
The so called "journalist" should perhaps consider a vocation change or at a minimum return to school and learn how to write headlines.
And to think they get PAID TO DO THIS !!!
Abortion-related deaths on the rise:)?
August 21, 2007 - 12:16 ET by TruthMongerWell thankfully it's still much safer to drink and drive than to be a "fetus:)" 1,095,000 killed in 2006 - and that's 12 more than last year!!!!
Also much safer to be a soldier in Iraq...
Statistical Sleight Of Hand?
August 21, 2007 - 12:42 ET by stratmanExactly what does this mean?
Do the statistics include drivers with zero alcohol in their bloodstream who are the cause of the accident and the victim was a driver with some alcohol in his bloodstream but was following proper driving laws/rules and not at fault? If the zero alcohol driver who causes the accident dies, is he counted as a statistic because the other driver has alcohol in their bloodstream even though not at fault for the accident? Or, are they only counting drivers who caused the accident and died and had alcohol in their bloodstream?
Kind of makes a difference, no?
And just for fun with statistics, remove the number of illegal aliens involved in MVA's causing death with measurable amounts of alcohol in their bloodstream. Wonder if that would tilt the balance by at least those additional deaths?
Killing them with kindness isn't working. Time to get scrappy with the Donkeys.