Cherry-picking

The convenient comparison

We’re #1 — among the competitors we chose.

a.k.a. benchmark shopping · the stacked deck

Any bar looks tall next to the right neighbors. Pick the comparison set after seeing the numbers and “leading the industry” becomes a certainty rather than an achievement.

How to spot it

Ask who is missing from the lineup.
Oddly specific qualifiers: “among mid-size providers in the Northeast.”

The fix

Define the comparison set before looking at the numbers — and include the awkward competitors.

In the gallery

Dark navy briefing slide, masthead “Morning Health Briefing · Lyon, 26 October 2015”, headlined “Your breakfast is now a Group 1 carcinogen”. A subhead reads: twenty-two scientists from ten countries, convened by the World Health Organization’s cancer agency, considered more than 800 studies on cancer in humans and reached a verdict; processed meat — bacon, ham, sausages, hot dogs — is carcinogenic to humans, the agency’s top category, the one that already holds tobacco smoking and asbestos, and every 50 g eaten daily raises the risk of bowel cancer by 18%. The main panel is labelled “Group 1 · carcinogenic to humans · sufficient evidence in humans” and holds seven bars of identical length, one per agent: tobacco smoking, asbestos, plutonium, ultraviolet radiation, alcoholic beverages and formaldehyde in blue, processed meat in gold at the bottom. Every bar is annotated “sufficient evidence”, and a caption underneath reads “Every agent above sits at the top of the agency’s scale”. Below it, a second chart headed “Increase in bowel-cancer risk per 50 g of processed meat eaten daily” shows a single gold bar reaching +18% on an axis marked +0%, +5%, +10%, +15%, +20% — an axis of percentage increases, with no case counts anywhere on the slide. Three ticked boxes run along the bottom: “Twenty-two experts, ten countries — a Working Group convened by the WHO’s cancer agency in Lyon, sitting for eight days”, “More than 800 studies — considered on cancer in humans, across more than a dozen types of cancer”, and “The top category — Group 1, sufficient evidence in humans. There is no higher class to be put in.” Down the right, a card carries the figure +18% in large gold type over the words “increase in the risk of bowel cancer for every 50 g portion of processed meat eaten daily. IARC Monographs, Volume 114.” A second card, “Where the agency filed it”, lists processed meat, tobacco smoking, asbestos and plutonium at Group 1 and red meat at Group 2A. A third, “The agency’s ladder”, gives Group 1 carcinogenic to humans, Group 2A probably carcinogenic, Group 2B possibly carcinogenic, Group 3 not classifiable. A gold-bordered card headed “The verdict” reads: sufficient evidence in humans that the consumption of processed meat causes colorectal cancer — twenty-two experts, ten countries, one category, the same one as tobacco. Beneath it, in small grey type, sits the disclosure: “The agency’s classifications describe the strength of the scientific evidence about an agent being a cause of cancer, rather than assessing the level of risk.” A footnote credits IARC Monographs Volume 114 (2015) and the WHO Q&A on the carcinogenicity of red meat and processed meat, and calls the slide a demonstration drawn by us in the style of the coverage that followed.

The convenient comparison

How to spot it

The fix

In the gallery

The 18% that never says 18% of what

The smell leaderboard that started in sixth place

The framework race React wasn’t invited to