On one level, the figures speak for themselves:
|Day||Attempts||Near Misses||Baskets||Effort (Baskets/ Attempt)||Baskets/ Minute (BPM)||FeelGood Factor||Total time||Total Shots||Total Baskets||Success rate|
It’s taken 15 days to reach the target I set myself, and now of course will go on to set new targets of double the number of shots, seeing how long it will now take to reach 26 shots and who knows what else? I’m open to all sorts of other configurations of challenges which involve basketballs, hoops and the number 26. As long as it’s all completed by 23 May.
On another level though, figures don’t really speak for themselves do they? They need interpreters or mediators: figures in authority who can tell you what they really really really mean. The rhetoric of the Covid-19 Pandemic has been driven by the exhortation that we should follow the data; that the data tell us all we need to know when it comes to designing and implementing new public policy relating to social distancing, economic shut down and preserving the NHS. Arguing with the data – or more accurately with those who supply and communicate it – is only likely to end in tears and insults on Twitter.
So we need to step carefully when making any public comment on basketballs converted, numbers of near misses, the time its taken and other factors which look indisputable to those with an eye on the numbers. The data may look like they’re speaking for themselves but more often than not they’re the dummy to some-one else’s ventriloquists act.