Retired Generals, Rumsfeld, Innumeracy (Again!) and How the Media Can Lie About Anything
There has been a lot of media hype over the past few days about "retired generals" calling for Don Rumsfeld to resign as Secretary of Defense. The media reports the stories of several (less than ten so far as I can tell) retired generals criticizing Rumsfeld without -- again, again, again! -- providing the necessary numerical context.
The necessary context is this: the Army and the other armed services are very, very large institutions, larger than any company, larger than any other branch of government. There are millions and millions of people in the armed services. Those millions and millions of people are commanded by hundreds of thousands of officers (lieutenants, captains, majors, ensigns, naval lieutenants, lieutenant commanders), who are commanded by tens of thousands of senior officers (colonels, captains), who are commanded by thousands of general officers (generals, admirals). There are about 5,000 retired generals and admirals in America. Again, the Army and the Navy are big, big, big.
So, the upshot is, when 4 or 5 "retired generals" criticize the Secretary of Defense, all that really means is that 1/10th of 1 percent of the retired generals don't like him and wish he'd resign.
In short, the story's headline could just as easily, and more truthfully be, "99.9% of Retired Generals and Admirals Either Support Rumsfeld, or Else Think That Commenting On the Political Decisions Made By the Secretary of Defense Is Out of Place For Retired Officers."
Hat tip to Brain Shavings.
The necessary context is this: the Army and the other armed services are very, very large institutions, larger than any company, larger than any other branch of government. There are millions and millions of people in the armed services. Those millions and millions of people are commanded by hundreds of thousands of officers (lieutenants, captains, majors, ensigns, naval lieutenants, lieutenant commanders), who are commanded by tens of thousands of senior officers (colonels, captains), who are commanded by thousands of general officers (generals, admirals). There are about 5,000 retired generals and admirals in America. Again, the Army and the Navy are big, big, big.
So, the upshot is, when 4 or 5 "retired generals" criticize the Secretary of Defense, all that really means is that 1/10th of 1 percent of the retired generals don't like him and wish he'd resign.
In short, the story's headline could just as easily, and more truthfully be, "99.9% of Retired Generals and Admirals Either Support Rumsfeld, or Else Think That Commenting On the Political Decisions Made By the Secretary of Defense Is Out of Place For Retired Officers."
Hat tip to Brain Shavings.
posted by PDB at 9:27 AM
2 Comments:
I can't agree. The fallacy that many in the media fall into is assuming that generals aren't political animals. But the fact is that the military is made up of people just like you and me, some of whom are Republicans and some of whom are Democrats. Some of the former rise in rank during a Republican administration; others mige to high rank rise in rank during the eight Clinton years, and then fall into disfavor during the Bush years. I think the media assumes that everyone in the military is a Republican or a conservative, so when they criticize Bush they somehow have some greater credibility. But what if they are just Democrats who are intent on bringing Democrats back to power?
I'm impressed with your site, very nice graphics!
»
Post a Comment
<< Home