Or, truth and reality versus a show with false impressions and misrepresentations

More and more the written press and even more broadcasters and digital media seem to be in a contest to make a show, and sorry to say, more and more at the cost of common sense, truth and reality.

Below, examples where the show effect is pushing back common sense and misrepresentation results.  

In technology

The Boeing 737 MAX issue

The Boeing 737 MAX issue is presented as just an issue of badly designed software relying on a single unreliable sensor.

What is missing in information:

This software is needed to control the consequences of an anomaly in the aerodynamic design. Solving the control system design and software issues solves the problem at most partially. And making the MCAS system standalone, non-integrated was a fatal mistake.

The Porsche electric battery super batteries

Porsche announced electric car charging: 5 to 80% of capacity in 15 minutes; this is presented and received as a fantastic step forward for Electric Vehicles.

What is missing in information:

It would be if the electricity grid to all houses could be upgraded dramatically and quickly: the fast charging requires 400 kW charging power, equivalent to about the maximum power of 12 households . . .  So, let’s hope Porsche owners only use the 11 kW / 9 hours chargers at home.

The ‘TESLA Cybertruck’:

TESLA’s Musk made a nice show of this very strong truck and collected lots of orders.

What is missing in information:

There may be some issues with the car, resulting from the tough, difficult to shape stainless steel:

  • RIGGED and STRONG, has no energy absorption zones, which means danger for the occupants;
  • With sharp edged shapes, it may be a danger for people outside the car, incl. pedestrians;
  • Tough, difficult to shape stainless steel risks to bring along manufacturing problems.

 

In politics, presentation and analysis of the recent UK general election

Presenting election results as a ‘bicycle race’:

1 - ‘Will Corbyn tonight reduce the gap with the Tories?’

2. - ‘The constituency that gives the Tories the majority’

What is missing in information:

  1. Once the ballot boxes are closed, the counting begins, and there is no more possibility to influence the outcome (unless there is election fraud), whatever Mr. Corbyn (or others) may do that evening. Presenting the results of the counting, or better, the time it takes to count the votes in a certain constituency, as a bicycle race is entertaining but misleading.
  2. The constituency that brought the Tories the majority is pure coincidental (unless the responsible for the counting by purpose has delayed announcing the results to the ‘right’ moment . . .)

 

Is it true that former Labour voters have massively voted for the Tory party and Boris Johnson?

 BBC analysts and programs are voicing this to be true, (view A); an example, a quote from Laura Kuenssberg (Political editor)                  https://www.bbc.com/news/election-2019-50775041

‘Boris Johnson gambled that he could win an election with support from towns and communities where voting Conservative might almost have seemed a sin.’

What is missing in information:

However, no evidence for this, and rather indications to the contrary:

what has happened, likely, is former Labour voters voting for other parties, which allowed Tory candidates, without significantly more votes, take the majority and get elected (view B).

 Superficially, the change in elected seats at national level might be interpreted as supporting View A: Labour lost 59 seats that went to Tories (47) and SN (12). 

     https://www.bbc.com/news/election/2019/results

But while the numbers of seats are correct, the changes are not: looking at Scotland, one gets a better idea of what has happened:   https://www.bbc.com/news/election/2019/results/scotland

  • The SN won 13 seats, 7 from the Tories, 6 from Labour
  • The Tories still have 6 seats with only 693,000 votes total in Scotland, while Labour has left 1 seat with 512,000 votes total in Scotland

 In other words, in the majority voting system there are big differences in representation that are based on the relative spread of votes and not on the total number of votes (‘the popular vote’)

Is it true that former Labour voters have massively voted for the Tory party and Boris Johnson?

 The answer seems to be no:

  • The Tories did NOT get a large increase in votes, so unlikely many former Labour voters voted Tory
  • The total turnout in the election was down from the 2017 election by 1.5 %
  • The percentage of Tory votes in total was up only 1.2 %
    • Unless one assumes that an important part of the Labour votes went to the Tories, and the Tories lost votes (in addition to SN) to e.g. LibDem, then one has to assume that Labour votes went primarily to other parties than the Tories
      • Labour lost 7.9 % in votes, while LibDem won 4.2 %, Brexit 2.0 %, Green 1.1 %
      • The smaller number of Labour votes toppled constituencies to the Tories

 So, in conclusion

  • The Tories won many seats, as the other large party, Labour, lost its competitive edge with loosing voters to other parties
  • In a majority voting system, voting for small parties benefits the largest party
  • Newly elected Tory representatives in former Labour led constituencies will have to consider a large minority of Labour voters, and even a majority of non-Tory voters
  • For Boris Johnson there is no difference in the relationship with Labour and smaller party voters: they were there also before the election (the votes are divided differently between Labour, LibDem and other smaller parties, before and after the Dec. 2019 elections)

 The effect of the majority system is also illustrated by the total national votes / seat

  • The Tories get    365 seats    with about   14.0 M votes,            or 38,263 votes / seat
  • Labour gets        203 seats    with about   12.3 M votes,            or 50,586 votes / seat
  • The SN get          48 seats     with about     1.2 M votes,            or 25,875 votes / seat
  • The LibDem get   11 seats    with about     3.7 M votes,          or 336,000  votes / seat