 |
| New Jersey State Police patch. (Wikipedia) |
Editor's note: A careful reader continues to dispute the accuracy of Road Warrior John Cichowski, citing numerous problems with Sunday's column on the Local front of The Record. Below is his latest e-mail to the reporter and Deputy Assignment Editor Dan Sforza, who has been unable to fix the broken column.
"John / Dan,
"Based on 10/28 Road Warrior column, it becomes clear that The Record needs more oversight of its fact checking group & John's misreporting, which suffers from false info, miscomprehension of facts, lack of reliability & common sense, & misleading viewpoints.
"Perhaps, it is time for a Graduated Reporting License for Road Warrior reporting since you both ignore my clearly stated, fact-based, required corrections to his misreporting.
"Taking no actions to correct this situation does not promote the integrity of The Record and offends informative readers.
"This is the 9th article on which I've notified you about mistaken reporting since John's 9/12 article.
"This misreporting is even more egregious than his other 8 columns because it also revised similar false info, which contradicts known facts that I previously pointed out from his 10/24 article about this exact same topic, and again reported it wrong in conflict with the study.
"In his 10/28 article, John only corrected one of 7 false items, which are in contradiction to stated facts in the study, that were in 4 false statements from his 10/24 article.
"To make matters even worse, the column includes additional false info & miscomprehension of facts based on the Tuesday, 10/23, study report on the impact of NJ's driver decal law.
"The Record should correct all false statements below from the 10/28 and 10/24 articles.
"Please explain if you disagree with any of these corrections.
"Please also respond to my 10/26 e-mail to Dan [Sforza] about the problems with Road Warrior columns based on 8 previous articles from 9/12 -10/24.
"Here's hoping to change and better fact checking, corrections, & reviewing by The Record's editors, columnists, & reporters, for more reliable, accurate, and common sense info prior to publication.
"ROAD WARRIOR 10/28 ARTICLE
1. False Statement - "Research by the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia said the red tags prevented 1,624 crashes in the 12 months after changes in New Jersey's Graduated Driver License law began requiring decals on May 1, 2010"
CORRECT FACTS - "Research by the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia estimated there were 1,624 young probationary drivers for whom a crash was prevented by the red tags in the 13 months [May 1, 2010 to May 31, 2011] after changes in New Jersey's Graduated Driver License law began requiring decals on May 1, 2010"
Study states several times there was an "estimated 1,624 PROBATIONARY DRIVERS for whom crashes were prevented". This is completely different than estimating that 1.624 CRASHES were prevented. As an example, if the red tag law prevented 2 probationary drivers from crashing their cars into each other, then the red tag law prevented 1 multi-car crash, but there were 2 probationary drivers for whom a crash was prevented.
The study clearly also states the estimated 1,624 probationary drivers are for the first year post law period, which the study clearly defines several times as the 13 month period from May 1, 2010 - May 31, 2011. It would have been correct if John stated it covered the first year, rather than the first "12 months" after the law started on 5/1/10.
These 2 mistakes are even more egregious since John revised 2 mistakes about similar info, which I pointed out in his 10/24 column, & again reported it wrong in conflict with study.
Why are you so obstinate in mistakenly reporting this info twice in 2 articles ?? Every news report that I have read, (Ex: http://www.app.com/article/20121023/NJNEWS/310230062/NJ-teen-driver-law-reduced-crashes?nclick_check=1) reported it correctly.
2. False Statement - "hospital group's research showed a 14 percent rise in GDL violations during the same 12-month period after the decal law took effect"
CORRECT FACTS - "hospital group's research showed a 14 percent rise in GDL violations during the same 13-month period after the decal law took effect"
Everyone that I know, including the study authors, understand that all reported results, incl. 14 percent rise in GDL violations, was for the 13 month period, 5/1/10 - 5/31/11.
This mistake is even more egregious since John revised a mistake about similar info, which I pointed out in his 10/24 column, & again reported it wrong in conflict w/study.
3. False Statement - "all states have adopted GDL laws barring young drivers from such actions as operating vehicles with more than one passenger, driving after 11 p.m., or using any electronic devices"
CORRECT FACTS - "all states have adopted GDL laws, with most, but not all, barring young drivers from one or more such actions as operating vehicles with more than one passenger, driving late at night, or using cellphone devices"
Only 48 states bar driving late at night. Some state restrictions start later than 11 pm.
Only 45 states have restriction on number of passengers.
Only 31 states bar all cellphone use. I am not aware of any state, incl. NJ, which bars all electronic devices. NJ bars interactive, wireless communication devices, incl. cellphones.
4. Misleading False Statement - "New Jersey has tried to solve this problem by mandating removable identity decals that roughly 65,000 17-year-olds stick on their license plates annually for a one-year period."
CORRECT FACTS - "New Jersey has tried to solve this problem by mandating removable identity decals for all probationary drivers under 21. It covers decals that roughly 65,000 17-year-olds would need to stick on their license plates annually for a one-year period.
5. Misleading False Statement -"no data had supported the theory that decals lead to fewer crashes — until the Philadelphia study was released on Monday [October 22]."
CORRECT FACTS - "no study had supported the theory that decals lead to fewer crashes — until the Philadelphia study was released on October 23, which was Tuesday"
Data from NJ State Police report for Fatal Motor Vehicle Statistics for 2010 already showed a significant drop in fatalities and fatal crashes for young drivers in 2010, when the decal law became effective, from previous years.
The Philadelphia study correlated the data from the more comprehensive NJ MVC data base to support the theory that decals lead to fewer crashes. Researchers know there is a big difference between data supporting a theory and a study, which is based on evaluating data, supporting a theory.
6. False Statement - " studies are now under way to better determine the value of teen decals, which are used in Canada, Europe and Asia, but only one state [NJ} in America."
CORRECT FACTS - "studies are now under way to better determine the value of teen decals, which are required in parts of Canada, Europe and Asia, but only one state [NJ] in America. Magnetic teen decals are used [distributed to requesting parents], but not required, in Delaware."
The study is not as effective if decals are only used (optional) rather than required by a governing jurisdiction since there usually is more data based on compliance.
ROAD WARRIOR 10/24 ARTICLE - The only one of 7 corrections to false info, which was in contradiction to the study, that was included in the 10/28 column is red highlighted below.
1. False Statement - The study "analysis shows crashes among drivers under 21 had declined 9 percent from May 2010 to April 2011."
CORRECT FACTS - Study "analysis shows crashes among probationary drivers under 21 had declined 9 percent from May 2010 to May 31,2011". As clearly stated on 1st page, the results focused on probationary drivers and NOT ALL drivers under 21. Probationary drivers under 21 are a much smaller subset of all drivers under 21. As clearly stated on the 2nd page, the post-[decal] law published results were for May 1, 2010 thru May 31, 2011.
2. False Statement - "1,624 fewer crashes occurred during this period [May 2010 to April 2011] compared with monthly averages in the two prior years."
4. False Statement - "Besides reducing collisions by 9 percent among drivers under 21, the study showed that police issued 14 percent more tickets for violations during the first year of the decal requirement."
CORRECT FACTS - "Besides reducing collisions by 9 percent among probationary drivers under 21, the
study showed that police issued 14 percent more GDL tickets for violations
during the first year of the decal requirement."
"Based on 10/28 Road Warrior column, it becomes clear that The Record needs more oversight of its fact checking group & John's misreporting, which suffers from false info, miscomprehension of facts, lack of reliability & common sense, & misleading viewpoints.
"Perhaps, it is time for a Graduated Reporting License for Road Warrior reporting since you both ignore my clearly stated, fact-based, required corrections to his misreporting.
"Taking no actions to correct this situation does not promote the integrity of The Record and offends informative readers.
"This is the 9th article on which I've notified you about mistaken reporting since John's 9/12 article.
"This misreporting is even more egregious than his other 8 columns because it also revised similar false info, which contradicts known facts that I previously pointed out from his 10/24 article about this exact same topic, and again reported it wrong in conflict with the study.
"In his 10/28 article, John only corrected one of 7 false items, which are in contradiction to stated facts in the study, that were in 4 false statements from his 10/24 article.
"To make matters even worse, the column includes additional false info & miscomprehension of facts based on the Tuesday, 10/23, study report on the impact of NJ's driver decal law.
"The Record should correct all false statements below from the 10/28 and 10/24 articles.
"Please explain if you disagree with any of these corrections.
"Please also respond to my 10/26 e-mail to Dan [Sforza] about the problems with Road Warrior columns based on 8 previous articles from 9/12 -10/24.
"Here's hoping to change and better fact checking, corrections, & reviewing by The Record's editors, columnists, & reporters, for more reliable, accurate, and common sense info prior to publication.
"ROAD WARRIOR 10/28 ARTICLE
1. False Statement - "Research by the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia said the red tags prevented 1,624 crashes in the 12 months after changes in New Jersey's Graduated Driver License law began requiring decals on May 1, 2010"
CORRECT FACTS - "Research by the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia estimated there were 1,624 young probationary drivers for whom a crash was prevented by the red tags in the 13 months [May 1, 2010 to May 31, 2011] after changes in New Jersey's Graduated Driver License law began requiring decals on May 1, 2010"
Study states several times there was an "estimated 1,624 PROBATIONARY DRIVERS for whom crashes were prevented". This is completely different than estimating that 1.624 CRASHES were prevented. As an example, if the red tag law prevented 2 probationary drivers from crashing their cars into each other, then the red tag law prevented 1 multi-car crash, but there were 2 probationary drivers for whom a crash was prevented.
The study clearly also states the estimated 1,624 probationary drivers are for the first year post law period, which the study clearly defines several times as the 13 month period from May 1, 2010 - May 31, 2011. It would have been correct if John stated it covered the first year, rather than the first "12 months" after the law started on 5/1/10.
These 2 mistakes are even more egregious since John revised 2 mistakes about similar info, which I pointed out in his 10/24 column, & again reported it wrong in conflict with study.
Why are you so obstinate in mistakenly reporting this info twice in 2 articles ?? Every news report that I have read, (Ex: http://www.app.com/article/20121023/NJNEWS/310230062/NJ-teen-driver-law-reduced-crashes?nclick_check=1) reported it correctly.
2. False Statement - "hospital group's research showed a 14 percent rise in GDL violations during the same 12-month period after the decal law took effect"
CORRECT FACTS - "hospital group's research showed a 14 percent rise in GDL violations during the same 13-month period after the decal law took effect"
Everyone that I know, including the study authors, understand that all reported results, incl. 14 percent rise in GDL violations, was for the 13 month period, 5/1/10 - 5/31/11.
This mistake is even more egregious since John revised a mistake about similar info, which I pointed out in his 10/24 column, & again reported it wrong in conflict w/study.
3. False Statement - "all states have adopted GDL laws barring young drivers from such actions as operating vehicles with more than one passenger, driving after 11 p.m., or using any electronic devices"
CORRECT FACTS - "all states have adopted GDL laws, with most, but not all, barring young drivers from one or more such actions as operating vehicles with more than one passenger, driving late at night, or using cellphone devices"
Only 48 states bar driving late at night. Some state restrictions start later than 11 pm.
Only 45 states have restriction on number of passengers.
Only 31 states bar all cellphone use. I am not aware of any state, incl. NJ, which bars all electronic devices. NJ bars interactive, wireless communication devices, incl. cellphones.
4. Misleading False Statement - "New Jersey has tried to solve this problem by mandating removable identity decals that roughly 65,000 17-year-olds stick on their license plates annually for a one-year period."
CORRECT FACTS - "New Jersey has tried to solve this problem by mandating removable identity decals for all probationary drivers under 21. It covers decals that roughly 65,000 17-year-olds would need to stick on their license plates annually for a one-year period.
5. Misleading False Statement -"no data had supported the theory that decals lead to fewer crashes — until the Philadelphia study was released on Monday [October 22]."
CORRECT FACTS - "no study had supported the theory that decals lead to fewer crashes — until the Philadelphia study was released on October 23, which was Tuesday"
Data from NJ State Police report for Fatal Motor Vehicle Statistics for 2010 already showed a significant drop in fatalities and fatal crashes for young drivers in 2010, when the decal law became effective, from previous years.
The Philadelphia study correlated the data from the more comprehensive NJ MVC data base to support the theory that decals lead to fewer crashes. Researchers know there is a big difference between data supporting a theory and a study, which is based on evaluating data, supporting a theory.
6. False Statement - " studies are now under way to better determine the value of teen decals, which are used in Canada, Europe and Asia, but only one state [NJ} in America."
CORRECT FACTS - "studies are now under way to better determine the value of teen decals, which are required in parts of Canada, Europe and Asia, but only one state [NJ] in America. Magnetic teen decals are used [distributed to requesting parents], but not required, in Delaware."
The study is not as effective if decals are only used (optional) rather than required by a governing jurisdiction since there usually is more data based on compliance.
ROAD WARRIOR 10/24 ARTICLE - The only one of 7 corrections to false info, which was in contradiction to the study, that was included in the 10/28 column is red highlighted below.
1. False Statement - The study "analysis shows crashes among drivers under 21 had declined 9 percent from May 2010 to April 2011."
CORRECT FACTS - Study "analysis shows crashes among probationary drivers under 21 had declined 9 percent from May 2010 to May 31,2011". As clearly stated on 1st page, the results focused on probationary drivers and NOT ALL drivers under 21. Probationary drivers under 21 are a much smaller subset of all drivers under 21. As clearly stated on the 2nd page, the post-[decal] law published results were for May 1, 2010 thru May 31, 2011.
2. False Statement - "1,624 fewer crashes occurred during this period [May 2010 to April 2011] compared with monthly averages in the two prior years."
CORRECT FACTS - The study "only estimated [there were] 1,624 young probationary drivers for whom crashes were prevented between May 2010 to May 31, 2011 [that could be attributed due to implementation of the decal law in 2010]" . This estimate was based on its statistical analysis of crash figure totals. The study NEVER stated 1,624 fewer actual crashes occurred
during this period compared to averages of the 2 prior years. As the
study also indicates, actual differences between the total number of
crashes for these 2 periods were influenced by many other factors beyond
the decal law.
3. False Statement - "Thirteen percent of the [total] crash reduction [of 9%] was attributed to the midnight-to-5 a.m. period."
CORRECT FACTS - As per the study "The actual rate of crashes occurring between 12:01AM and 5:00AM decreased 13%."... "Crashes that occurred during this time period comprised only 6% of all probationary drivers’ crashes."
4. False Statement - "Besides reducing collisions by 9 percent among drivers under 21, the study showed that police issued 14 percent more tickets for violations during the first year of the decal requirement."
This guy does a better job than you, Mr. Sasson. Well-researched and based on current information. Bravo, anonymous Tipster!
ReplyDeleteOf course, if it wasn't for Eye on The Record, you'd have absolutely no knowledge about any of this.
ReplyDelete