See only what I want you to see

Our latest example of spin comes from today’s paper where Senator Dunkley of the United Bermuda Party where he highlights the incredible drop in visitor spending from 2007 to 2009.  Mr. Dunkley is indeed correct in his analysis however one could be forgiven for questioning why he compares against only the last two years?  Indeed, looking back to 2001 through 2006 tells a different story than the picture he paints.  That doesn’t lend itself to his argument now does it?  When tourism was on its way up, the incumbent could do little less than to spin numbers in every way possible to accentuate the job they were doing, conversely now that tourism is on its way down the opposition is taking the opportunity to spin things the other way.  Politicians.

Looking at tourism numbers there is no denying that we’ve seen significant declines since 2007 highs.  Analyzing since 2007 however doesn’t paint a complete picture.

Let’s take a look at an old chart we put together back in 2007.

Admittedly numbers are only presented for the first 3 quarters however a comparison of 2009’s $276 million vs. 2007’s $414 million in visitor expenditure paints a rather incomplete picture.  Noting the above chart we can see annual tourism expenditures and how Bermuda had a pretty poor few years from 2001-2004.   Is it not a bit ingenious disingenuous to leave such years out of your analysis and simply compare against the best recent year while leaving out the details for the previous few?  Though of course, doing so would lessen the dramatic effect now wouldn’t it?

Comments

[Renaissance Man]

Did you mean ingenious, as in cleverly inventive, or disingenuous, as in insincere?

Either way, Dunkley has led people astray with his incomplete information. Thanks for calling him on it.

[Explore Bermuda]

Thanks for this report on tourism. Perhaps you can help spread the word about a great airfare from JFK to Bermuda. It's only $99! Check it out: [moderated - equiv of spam]

[Rummy]

Wow...strong words there Ren. Could Paula Cox be held just as accountable, and others?

[Denis]

Tks Renaissance Man, I did intend disingenuous.

Rummy, should not every politician be held accountable rather than a select few?

[UncleElvis]

Completely disingenuous.

Yet another example of the UBP not getting it.

If you want to lead, show us you can. Don't just keep playing politics.

"Those guys suck" is NOT a valid, honourable platform. Not one that I want to vote for anyway.

Yes, it worked for the PLP.

Rise above.

Looking at the numbers etc, it would be easy to write a damning denunciation of the Government's record, all based on irrefutable truth.

Instead we get the easy way. Fudge the numbers.

Well done, Denis, for pointing this nonsense out.

[Rummy]

Your absolutely correct on that Dennis. Thats not what I said but thats the message you perceived from my comments.

As for select few, depends on who's commenting and the subject as we have seen of late.

As for Dunkley, I'm sure he has more than one basket.

[Renaissance Man]

Not just politicians, but they should be held to a higher standard.

Lack of accountability is symptomatic of the major problems with society in general, and politics in particular.

[Rummy]

"Lack of accountability". Hang on.....let me call Larry Dennis.....................

[Rummy]

Now there' where the 'irony' is Mr. 'Picture'.

Oh where's the Royal Gizzard when we need them...........

[Rummy]

So...Ren Man...Dunkley lead us astray.......oh the irony.

I'm going to open a new shop on Front Street and call it "Ironing Boards". Owned and opperated by Ren.

"If you wrinkle it we will flatten anything"...............

Was that a 'Plantation statement'?................

[Renaissance Man]

My point was, Rummy, that if Mike Dunkley wants to be seen as speaking from the "high ground", he has to ensure that he has all the pertinent facts first. Otherwise his point, valid though parts of it might be, is lost in the greater context.

This goes for any politician. The other method of distraction and misdirection has not served the public well.