 |
| Rush hour on the Garden State Parkway. |
Editor's note: Wednesday's front-page rewrite of a study on decals for probationary drivers was full of errors, according to a reader. Here is the reader's latest e-mail to Road Warrior John Cichowski, Editor Marty Gottlieb of The Record and others.
"John,
"The 10/24 Road Warrior column is once again preventing readers from receiving reliable, fact-based and common-sense reporting.
"Once again, you misreport and miscomprehend the facts from a recent report on the impact of NJ's decal law on crash rates for probationary drivers under 21, similar to the way I showed that you butchered and miscomprehended the facts in your 9/21 article reviewing the N.J. State Police report for fatal crashes for 2011.
"It does not promote the integrity of The Record and offends informative readers.
"This is the 8th article of mistaken reporting I have notified you about since your 9/12 article. You make no attempt to correct or respond to your mistaken reporting and advice.
"No effort is being made by you or The Record to resolve these matters.
"Pretty soon, we will have a Top 10 list of Road Warrior misadventures, I mean columns, that I will publicize with other media personnel, news organizations and your readers.
"Clearly, you did not comprehend the same study, http://ajpmonline.org/webfiles/images/journals/amepre/AMEPRE_3621%5B3%5D-stamped.pdf, which you and I read.
"You leave your informative and uninformative readers in a state of confusion based on your brief study of this extensive study.
"You failed to mention that initial positive results (5/1/10 - 5/31/11) for probationary drivers in the first year after the decal law may not hold up in subsequent years, as the study clearly indicated, along with stating that further studies in future years are needed. You were derelict to NOT mention that these initial results have also been challenged by the fact that young inexperienced drivers (20 and younger) were involved in 20.9% more fatal crashes and 64.7% more deaths in 2011 than 2010, when the decal law passed (see your inaccurate and misleading 9/21 column, which I commented on, about large increase in teenager crashes and deaths in 2011). Fatal crash results for 2012 seem to be on same increased pace as 2011.
"The Record should correct your false statements below.
"1. Your 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. Your 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. Your 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.'
"Here's hoping to change and better fact checking, corrections, and reviewing by Record's editors, columnists, and reporters, for more reliable, accurate, and common sense info prior to publication."
"The 10/24 Road Warrior column is once again preventing readers from receiving reliable, fact-based and common-sense reporting.
"Once again, you misreport and miscomprehend the facts from a recent report on the impact of NJ's decal law on crash rates for probationary drivers under 21, similar to the way I showed that you butchered and miscomprehended the facts in your 9/21 article reviewing the N.J. State Police report for fatal crashes for 2011.
"It does not promote the integrity of The Record and offends informative readers.
"This is the 8th article of mistaken reporting I have notified you about since your 9/12 article. You make no attempt to correct or respond to your mistaken reporting and advice.
"No effort is being made by you or The Record to resolve these matters.
"Pretty soon, we will have a Top 10 list of Road Warrior misadventures, I mean columns, that I will publicize with other media personnel, news organizations and your readers.
"Clearly, you did not comprehend the same study, http://ajpmonline.org/webfiles/images/journals/amepre/AMEPRE_3621%5B3%5D-stamped.pdf, which you and I read.
"You leave your informative and uninformative readers in a state of confusion based on your brief study of this extensive study.
"You failed to mention that initial positive results (5/1/10 - 5/31/11) for probationary drivers in the first year after the decal law may not hold up in subsequent years, as the study clearly indicated, along with stating that further studies in future years are needed. You were derelict to NOT mention that these initial results have also been challenged by the fact that young inexperienced drivers (20 and younger) were involved in 20.9% more fatal crashes and 64.7% more deaths in 2011 than 2010, when the decal law passed (see your inaccurate and misleading 9/21 column, which I commented on, about large increase in teenager crashes and deaths in 2011). Fatal crash results for 2012 seem to be on same increased pace as 2011.
"The Record should correct your false statements below.
"1. Your 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. Your 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] 1624 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. Your 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 12:01 AM and 5:00 AM decreased 13%'.... 'Crashes that occurred during this time period comprised only 6% of all probationary drivers’ crashes.'
"4. Your 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.'
"Here's hoping to change and better fact checking, corrections, and reviewing by Record's editors, columnists, and reporters, for more reliable, accurate, and common sense info prior to publication."
No comments:
Post a Comment
If you want your comment to appear, refrain from personal attacks on the blogger. Anonymous comments are no longer accepted. Keep your racism to yourself.