They’re taking anecdotal claims and using them to personalise actual statistics.
40 per cent of children leaving primary school are unable to swim 50 metres, while only 32 per cent could tread water for two minutes – the national benchmarks for swimming and water safety in 12-year-olds
And that was pre-COVID, before lockdowns meant many children were missing out on learn to swim at key ages. Post-COVID,
39 per cent of year 10 students do not meet the 12-year-old benchmarks, while 84 per cent of 15- to 16-year-olds can’t swim 400 metres and tread water for five minutes – a basic lifesaving requirement and the benchmark for 17-year-olds
They’re taking anecdotal claims and using them to personalise actual statistics.
Which is my problem with them, they have actual research and they use a stay at home mums personal experience to try make the situation sound worse than it is.
It’s cheap journalism.
Just present the facts and research and stop reaching for ridiculous headlines designed to draw clicks. Kids can still swim, its less than before but we dont have an entire generation that are incapable of doing so.
Connecting people with data is fine, but using it to draw conclusions the data doesn’t support - like saying aussie kids cannot swim anymore - is just overselling the issue to get more clicks.
Stick to the facts, give case examples of this happening and don’t use sensationalism.
You came into this conversation with an argumentative tone, don’t put that on me. It didn’t even make sense. The article presents data and shares anecdotes that do a good job of personalising that data. Why are you accusing it of inventing problems when its data pretty solidly supports that. If you wanted to criticise the source of the data or the methodology by which the conclusions were drawn from the data, that would be one thing (and we could evaluate the merits of that kind of reasoning in context), but you didn’t…you just claimed they were presenting anecdotes that create fear unsupported by data, despite the fact that that couldn’t be further from the truth.
You came into this conversation with an argumentative tone, don’t put that on me.
What are you talking about lol? I was giving the article shit… Did you take that personally, I mean have you been imagining an argument between us this whole time…?
Also how do I come into a conversation with an argumentive tone when I started this comment chain (there wasn’t even a conversation yet) I just gave my opinion on this article and you are already triggered. If anything you came in with an argumentive tone when you replied to me.
The article presents data and shares anecdotes that do a good job of personalising that data. Why are you accusing it of inventing problems when its data pretty solidly supports that.
The headline is that kids can’t swim anymore, that alone is a sensationalist title used to garter clicks, and the use of one women’s experience to justify this title is poor journalism imo.
If you wanted to criticise the source of the data or the methodology by which the conclusions were drawn from the data, that would be one thing (and we could evaluate the merits of that kind of reasoning in context), but you didn’t…you just claimed they were presenting anecdotes that create fear unsupported by data, despite the fact that that couldn’t be further from the truth.
I agreed with the data several times, what I disagreed with was the presentation of the data by this article. The RLSS has done good research, and then the Herald took some anecdotal takes and extrapolated it out to “kids cannot swim anymore”. This in my opinion skews the facts as most people don’t read past headlines these days and will take shit at face value.
You really need to take this down a notch, I am happy to continue this conversation and discuss our opinions, but if you just reply with more accusations I’ll just move on. Please chill.
I was giving the article shit… Did you take that personally, I mean have you been imagining an argument between us this whole time…?
It doesn’t really matter to me whether you’re criticising me personally or the article. What matters is the quality of that argument. And it has, so far, been atrocious.
The headline is that kids can’t swim anymore
When the data suggests 4 in 5 can’t swim to an appropriate standard, that headline seems appropriate to me. It’s an overwhelming statistic, and as another user pointed out, humanising that by putting a face to it goes a long way to making the news digestible to readers. Your anger at this, and the fight that you have decided to pick with me for suggesting your anger is misplaced, is absurd.
You really need to take this down a notch, I am happy to continue this conversation and discuss our opinions,
Oh yes, the guy who responds to being called out for bad behaviour by stalking the person they’ve decided to pick a fight with and downvoting them in entirely unrelated threads, trying to play the “let’s all be civil” card. Give me a break.
Oh yes, the guy who responds to being called out for bad behaviour by stalking the person they’ve decided to pick a fight with and downvoting them in entirely unrelated threads
Wtf are you talking about? You have been imagining an argument with me this whole time… You know karma doesn’t exist on lemmy.
Go argue with some who actually want to argue with you, im moving on now.
@Zagorath, I don’t fully understand this, could you explain? If you think that the article has a poor base, why are you posting the article to Australia@aussie.zone?
They’re taking anecdotal claims and using them to personalise actual statistics.
And that was pre-COVID, before lockdowns meant many children were missing out on learn to swim at key ages. Post-COVID,
Which is my problem with them, they have actual research and they use a stay at home mums personal experience to try make the situation sound worse than it is.
It’s cheap journalism.
Just present the facts and research and stop reaching for ridiculous headlines designed to draw clicks. Kids can still swim, its less than before but we dont have an entire generation that are incapable of doing so.
Data doesn’t stop people from smoking, being antivax, etc. Stories move people more than data when emotions are involved. So whoever is writing this is just doing what the data say to do, ironically.
Connecting people with data is fine, but using it to draw conclusions the data doesn’t support - like saying aussie kids cannot swim anymore - is just overselling the issue to get more clicks.
Stick to the facts, give case examples of this happening and don’t use sensationalism.
You mean facts like more than 4 in 5 teenagers don’t meet the basic expected minimum‽ Those stats?
Why are you trying to turn this into an argument, I was happy to have this conversation but you are getting a bit butt hurt.
Chill out dude.
You came into this conversation with an argumentative tone, don’t put that on me. It didn’t even make sense. The article presents data and shares anecdotes that do a good job of personalising that data. Why are you accusing it of inventing problems when its data pretty solidly supports that. If you wanted to criticise the source of the data or the methodology by which the conclusions were drawn from the data, that would be one thing (and we could evaluate the merits of that kind of reasoning in context), but you didn’t…you just claimed they were presenting anecdotes that create fear unsupported by data, despite the fact that that couldn’t be further from the truth.
What are you talking about lol? I was giving the article shit… Did you take that personally, I mean have you been imagining an argument between us this whole time…?
Also how do I come into a conversation with an argumentive tone when I started this comment chain (there wasn’t even a conversation yet) I just gave my opinion on this article and you are already triggered. If anything you came in with an argumentive tone when you replied to me.
The headline is that kids can’t swim anymore, that alone is a sensationalist title used to garter clicks, and the use of one women’s experience to justify this title is poor journalism imo.
I agreed with the data several times, what I disagreed with was the presentation of the data by this article. The RLSS has done good research, and then the Herald took some anecdotal takes and extrapolated it out to “kids cannot swim anymore”. This in my opinion skews the facts as most people don’t read past headlines these days and will take shit at face value.
You really need to take this down a notch, I am happy to continue this conversation and discuss our opinions, but if you just reply with more accusations I’ll just move on. Please chill.
It doesn’t really matter to me whether you’re criticising me personally or the article. What matters is the quality of that argument. And it has, so far, been atrocious.
When the data suggests 4 in 5 can’t swim to an appropriate standard, that headline seems appropriate to me. It’s an overwhelming statistic, and as another user pointed out, humanising that by putting a face to it goes a long way to making the news digestible to readers. Your anger at this, and the fight that you have decided to pick with me for suggesting your anger is misplaced, is absurd.
Oh yes, the guy who responds to being called out for bad behaviour by stalking the person they’ve decided to pick a fight with and downvoting them in entirely unrelated threads, trying to play the “let’s all be civil” card. Give me a break.
Wtf are you talking about? You have been imagining an argument with me this whole time… You know karma doesn’t exist on lemmy.
Go argue with some who actually want to argue with you, im moving on now.
Nice job justifying harassing behaviour.
Sounds like you want an ABS spreadsheet, not a news article.
Those statistics are terrifying. Have you seen how much water we play in, in this country?!
@Zagorath, I don’t fully understand this, could you explain? If you think that the article has a poor base, why are you posting the article to Australia@aussie.zone?
I don’t think the article was poor. @Noite_Etion@lemmy.world does, for reasons that seem perplexingly out of touch to me.
Oh I’ve misunderstood you at first, sorry. 🙈 I think I understand what you meant now.