Data is Beautiful

3569 readers

905 users here now

Be respectful

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

KnowledgeIsPower@mander.xyz

Beaver@lemmy.ca

WanderingPhoenix@mander.xyz

752

deadly (infosec.pub)

submitted 1 day ago by Deceptichum@quokk.au to c/dataisbeautiful@mander.xyz

88 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 13 points 20 hours ago* (last edited 20 hours ago) (1 children)

At first sight it seems to me that the coverage being positivelly correlated with how unusual a death is and the number of people dying in a single event, would explain that graph.

I bet if we dig into the details of the Accidents class we would see a pattern were uncommon kinds of accidents and/or those with a large number of deaths ("man killed by falling crane", "plane crash") get lots of coverage whilst common kinds of accidents with few victims per event ("a car crash involving a single car") get a lot less coverage.

[–] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 8 points 16 hours ago

Yeah, it's not a conspiracy. They sell clicks, or "public interest" if you want to be generous. It's just that in doing so, they present a scary, distorted version of the world.