Categories: OLD Media Moves

Financial literacy and business journalism

Felix Salmon of Reuters writes Thursday about the importance of financial literacy for business journalists.

Salmon writes, “But there’s a superficial exactness to numbers that doesn’t exist in words, and so people have a tendency to believe that all numbers are much more precise than in fact they are. If the Labor Department releases a report saying that payrolls rose by 148,000 in September, then a reporter who said that payrolls rose by 150,000 would be considered to have her facts wrong — even though the headline number is only accurate to within 100,000 people either way. The actual number of new jobs could easily be anywhere between 44,000 and 252,000 — and indeed there’s a 5% chance that it’s outside even that large range. But because everybody insists on one hard number, one hard number is what they get.

“One of the most important skills in financial journalism is numeracy — having a basic feel for numbers. In this case, the reporters covering the story got the numbers right: they should be applauded for that, rather than having brickbats thrown at them. After all, it’s not hard to find examples of reporters getting numbers very wrong. Consider this story, from the New York Post, under the headline ‘Verizon increases cell bills 7.1% for 95M customers’:

Verizon didn’t sign up as many new cell phone customers in the third quarter as Wall Street expected — but it still earned more than forecast as it managed to increase the average bill of its 95.2 million wireless customers by 7.1 percent.

The average Verizon Wireless bill jumped to $155.75 a month as of Sept. 30 from $154.63 last year, the company said Thursday.

“Now that is a math error — and evidence of deep innumeracy on the part of the journalist who wrote it, as well as a whole series of editors. If you want to work out exactly what the increase is, in percentage terms, of going from $154.63 to $155.75, then you might need a calculator. But if you were numerate, you would know intuitively that it’s very small, on the order of 1%, and that it’s nowhere near 7%. If you get a result of 7.1%, then that means you’ve pressed a wrong button somewhere, and you should do your sums again.”

Read more here.

Chris Roush

Chris Roush was the dean of the School of Communications at Quinnipiac University in Hamden, Connecticut. He was previously Walter E. Hussman Sr. Distinguished Professor in business journalism at UNC-Chapel Hill. He is a former business journalist for Bloomberg News, Businessweek, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, The Tampa Tribune and the Sarasota Herald-Tribune. He is the author of the leading business reporting textbook "Show me the Money: Writing Business and Economics Stories for Mass Communication" and "Thinking Things Over," a biography of former Wall Street Journal editor Vermont Royster.

Recent Posts

The evolution of the WSJ beyond finance

Rahat Kapur of Campaign looks at the evolution The Wall Street Journal. Kapur writes, "The transformation…

9 hours ago

Silicon Valley Biz Journal seeks a reporter

This position will be Hybrid in the office/market 3 days per week, and those days…

9 hours ago

Economist’s Bennet, WSJ’s Morrow receive awards

The Fund for American Studies presented James Bennet of The Economist with the Kenneth Y. Tomlinson Award…

16 hours ago

WSJ is testing AI-generated article summaries

The Wall Street Journal is experimenting with AI-generated article summaries that appear at the top…

17 hours ago

Cohen joining Bloomberg Tax

Zach Cohen is joining Bloomberg Tax to cover the fiscal cliff and tax issues on…

17 hours ago

Avila named interim editor for Automotive Dive

Larry Avila has been named interim editor for Automotive Dive, an Industry Dive publication. He…

18 hours ago