I am going to move to Howick.
I am not doing so because I particularly want to live in Asia, but because a recent Auckland Council funded survey revealed that Howick was the safest Auckland suburb in which to live.
The survey results were published in the NZ Herald which in its characteristic way used both a grammar error and a negative spin on the story in this headline: “Revealed: Most dangerous suburbs”.
I thought at first the survey and the story may have alluded to crime statistics, and that would certainly have made sense and could have led to some form of targeted rectification; but, no, the statistics alluded to were personal injury, the rectification of which I suggest is a lot more problematic, certainly on a suburb by suburb basis.
Injuries—accidental or otherwise—happen, but does it really matter whether they happen more often in Helensville than Howick? And what can we do about them anyway?
Even more perversely the survey areas used for comparisons were not so much suburbs, but local board areas; the reasoning being that, “the new injury data was also being shared with local boards and community groups to help them identify the injury priorities and address them together.” Really? So a new-found responsibility of our about to be elected local boards is help address personal injuries? That’ll be news to them, I’m sure.
The point is that, in my view, surveys such as this are of little practical use and therefore a waste of my money. The survey industry itself is probably third-only to counsellors and Greenpeace as self-perpetuating saviours of little practical benefit. Colin Craig’s Conservative Party is another.
Perhaps the real fascination lies with the sheer weirdness of some surveys. Perversely the more impractical the empirical data the more fascinating it may get. Forget the cost, who could not fail to be fascinated by surveys that reveal:
· One in seven people break up a relationship by text.
· On average, women spend 20 years of their life feeling miserable about their hair.
· 17% of English tourists abroad have resorted to miming to demonstrate a need to use a loo (how?).
· Men with purple bedrooms have more sex than the rest of us (mine is predominantly white, but I am changing it).
· Nearly 40% of female librarians said they'd sleep with the fictional character Pee-wee Herman if he were the last man on the planet.
· 80% of the residents in the cemetery across the road said they prefer staying where they are to living in Hamilton.
Yeah, I made up that last one up, but so too I imagine do most of the surveys.
Have a good weekend.
I am not doing so because I particularly want to live in Asia, but because a recent Auckland Council funded survey revealed that Howick was the safest Auckland suburb in which to live.
The survey results were published in the NZ Herald which in its characteristic way used both a grammar error and a negative spin on the story in this headline: “Revealed: Most dangerous suburbs”.
I thought at first the survey and the story may have alluded to crime statistics, and that would certainly have made sense and could have led to some form of targeted rectification; but, no, the statistics alluded to were personal injury, the rectification of which I suggest is a lot more problematic, certainly on a suburb by suburb basis.
Injuries—accidental or otherwise—happen, but does it really matter whether they happen more often in Helensville than Howick? And what can we do about them anyway?
Even more perversely the survey areas used for comparisons were not so much suburbs, but local board areas; the reasoning being that, “the new injury data was also being shared with local boards and community groups to help them identify the injury priorities and address them together.” Really? So a new-found responsibility of our about to be elected local boards is help address personal injuries? That’ll be news to them, I’m sure.
The point is that, in my view, surveys such as this are of little practical use and therefore a waste of my money. The survey industry itself is probably third-only to counsellors and Greenpeace as self-perpetuating saviours of little practical benefit. Colin Craig’s Conservative Party is another.
Perhaps the real fascination lies with the sheer weirdness of some surveys. Perversely the more impractical the empirical data the more fascinating it may get. Forget the cost, who could not fail to be fascinated by surveys that reveal:
· One in seven people break up a relationship by text.
· On average, women spend 20 years of their life feeling miserable about their hair.
· 17% of English tourists abroad have resorted to miming to demonstrate a need to use a loo (how?).
· Men with purple bedrooms have more sex than the rest of us (mine is predominantly white, but I am changing it).
· Nearly 40% of female librarians said they'd sleep with the fictional character Pee-wee Herman if he were the last man on the planet.
· 80% of the residents in the cemetery across the road said they prefer staying where they are to living in Hamilton.
Yeah, I made up that last one up, but so too I imagine do most of the surveys.
Have a good weekend.
No comments:
Post a Comment