We love how your visual representations help the reader comprehend complex information quickly and clearly and can be easily shared across the Internet. Take this one, for example, highlighting that 95% of Fortune 500 CEOs played college sports.
However, a pretty picture does not equate to credibility. If you fail to identify your sources, no one is going to take your message seriously. Need proof? Here's what the Internet thought about this:
I really, really want to quote this study by Mom Central Consulting to highlight the influence of mommy bloggers but where are the technical details? Did they work with a respected fieldwork partner or was this a survey of moms they knew? Did they make sure the sample was representative of all moms or were their respondents biased in some way? When was the survey conducted? How many people did they interview? Presumably the interviews were conducted online but there is no indication.
And what about their finding that 84% of moms visit blogs to "read authentic content about topics that interest them". Ever heard a mom use the words "authentic" and "content" in the same sentence outside of a marketing department? These questions were written from the perspective of the marketer, not the audience being surveyed.
"How we prefer pets to in-laws: 22% consider furry friends as members of the family - compared to 21% who mentioned in-laws"
This is the Daily Mail's headline taken from a national YouGov survey commissioned by Matalan, the British clothing and home ware retailer.
I have various issues with this conclusion:
Further, pets that don't make it into the inner family circle are regularly abandoned. According to the Dogs Trust, for example, local authorities are handling over 100,000 unwanted dogs a year. In-laws aren't so easily disposed of.
So in-laws, please don't worry about your place at the family table.
A King Charles spaniel and a pug making a run for it (ranked as the 9th and 13th most likely dog breeds to runaway by Blue Cross)
The Telegraph reports today that the "labrador retriever is the breed of dog most likely to run away from home" followed by the cocker spaniel and the Jack Russell. This finding comes from a survey of 2,000 dog owners by the pet charity, Blue Cross.
The domestic dog is thought to be the most varied mammal on the planet. The Kennel Club in the United Kingdom recognizes just over 200 different breeds of dog. To provide an accurate ranking of a breed's propensity to go AWOL, one would need to ensure that a) enough owners of each breed were covered by the survey and b) the results for each owner group were isolated before ranking.
For an ideal methodology template, see the Consumer Reports annual survey of car ownership satisfaction. To rank the satisfaction levels of around 350 different models, Consumer Reports surveys 350,000 car owners (around 1,000 owners for each model covered) then compares satisfaction levels across the groups of model owner.
The Blue Cross survey simply couldn't have surveyed enough dog owners to ensure all breeds were fairly represented. It also seems unlikely that the results for each owner group were isolated before ranking. Indeed, ten of the dogs in Blue Cross' list of the top 15 runaway dogs also feature in The Kennel Club's list of the top 15 registered dogs with the Retriever and Cocker Spaniel sharing the same top two spots in both rankings.
All that the Blue Cross results provides is a list of the most popular dogs and confirmation that dogs runaway sometimes.