Lack of Perspective and Critical Thinking

The news sure keeps us on our toes. There are always examples of perspective issues. Likewise, some information is just passed along by the talking heads without applying any critical thinking. Here are a few examples.

In England, “Kleenex will re-brand its ‘Mansize’ tissues after consumers complained the name was sexist – touching off a social media conversation about what's in a name.” True, this is a story from London and not directly related to a Real American Solution, but it’s not a stretch to imagine the same kind of thing happening on this side of the ocean. These tissues have been going by the same name for over 60 years, and suddenly someone is offended and contacts the company. The company folds under the pressure even though about 99.9% of their customers probably don’t care.

This is a typical case of one or two people having too much time on their hands and not even appreciating the fact that being offended by a tissue box is a much smaller problem than most of their neighbors are facing. Clearly, in this case, perspective has taken a long holiday.

Meanwhile back in the US, “Pet owners will spend nearly half a billion dollars on animal costumes this Halloween,” according to Marketwatch.com. Just admit it, pet costumes for Halloween have got to be in the luxury category, clearly a want and not a need. But it doesn’t end there! “The National Retail Federation says Americans will spend $9 billion celebrating Halloween this year.” 

Things must be pretty sweet, if we can afford to drop $9 billion on one day of celebrating what was originally a pagan holiday. Despite an average credit card debt per household of $5,700, Americans can’t seem to help themselves.

But the situation is similar to the offensive tissues. When this kind of spending tops the to-do list, perhaps it’s time to appreciate how good we have it instead of fighting over trivia on social media and agonizing over petty annoyances. That's what lack of perspective looks like - taking all we have for granted while focusing on the trivia.

Finally, there was this story to challenge critical thinking from AAA. The opening paragraph reads like this: 

"As National Teen Driver Safety Week kicks off (October 21-27), the AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety has released new research which found that when a teen driver has only teen passengers in their vehicle, the fatality rate for all people involved in a crash increased 51 percent. In contrast, when older passengers (35 or older) ride with a teen driver, overall fatality rates in crashes decreased eight percent. Considering the increased risk created by a combination of teen drivers and teen passengers, AAA emphasizes the need for teen drivers to gain adequate supervised training, especially in different driving scenarios, before taking what could be a fatal drive."

All of the reporters read it pretty much word for word.

Does this report actually present any evidence that teens riding with teens are more dangerous? I would tend to believe it is true, but this tells us nothing about it! They didn’t look at the different scenarios: teens with teens, with young adults and with people older than 35, for all miles driven or all trips. They only looked at the crashes to see how many people were killed.

That only means that when a crash happens it’s more dangerous, but it doesn’t mention the frequency of the crashes and is mute on the instances of teens driving alone. Their conclusions and recommendations assume that frequency is higher, but the analysis does not show it. Nice try, AAA. 

Why does no one else raise this question? Could it be because it fits their model of the world – that teens really are more dangerous? That probably is the case, but the news media aren’t paid to think or question, just to pass along information, accurate or not.