Ch 9 News (inc DannyW) AVO against Sam Burgess

[086]

1. Data derived from what sources (in particular, which interest groups who rely upon a biased viewpoint to remain seated on the gravytrain) ?
2. Data is 5 years out of date!
3. Don't see fillicide numbers in your quoted data.

Source for me is the FB group, where they're all too happy to provide the news articles their data is taken from.

Also understandable asking for clarification if the assumption of source is incorrect, thus unable to locate data

 

[CaptainJackson]

1. Data derived from what sources (in particular, which interest groups who rely upon a biased viewpoint to remain seated on the gravytrain) ?
2. Data is 5 years out of date!
3. Don't see fillicide numbers in your quoted data.

Source for me is the FB group, where they're all too happy to provide the news articles their data is taken from.

Also understandable asking for clarification if the assumption of source is incorrect, thus unable to locate data

1. Check the pdf they list a number of national sources including crime figures which have no association with women's groups.

2. That's how REAL studies are conducted. It's not just a presentation of figures. Its a combination of further research into those figures and making sure they are accurate and interpreting those figures with other figures.

3. I posted the wrong page. I'll post the filicide figures at the end of this post. But none the less, it paints a very different picture than your sourced image.

Some individual gathering news articles is not fucking data. By posting garbage like that you bring massive discredit to your stance/point of view

The data compiled in government reports are collected from a myriad of sources (police, hospitals, refuges, etc etc) and then heavily VETTED so that they are void of bias as much as possible.

Meanwhile you make a baseless accusations that people conducting these stats and reports are somehow shonky and more interested in propagating a point of view rather than facts (FYI this is misogynist as your underlying statement is that women can't be trusted and they're just presenting shonky views), while your lone individual on Facebook collects newspaper clippings (where the media doesn't report on every case and will not follow up on cases where more evidence comes to light, ie they initially report on it and then no further follow up) and you deem that his figures are accurate and he has no biases at all.

 

[CaptainJackson]

@086 I'll also add in your Facebook page references quite a bit of Murdoch media so to suggest that it is unbiased I don't accept

 

[086]

Said FB group, is ran by a mix of males and females, made up of people with personal experience and professional qualifications in the field.
The page itself is followed by more females than males as well, who are not afraid of being vocal to call out bias one way or another for either sex.
It may not be perfect, yet thus far, it's the best resource I've found at addressing the issue socially.

I appreciate your passion, even if we're not entirely aligned with our POV's.
We need more people passionate enough to openly discuss the tough issues within society, rather than shirk away in fear of offending or being offended/attacked.