VIEWS AND LIKES AND LIES

We're spoiled for data these days, and spoiled for opportunities to use it meaningless ways. I read a column recently about the alleged evils of wi-fi and its impact on children. It profiled a doctor from the "wi-fi is evil" camp and noted how many thousand videos her YouTube lecture had. This was offered as evidence that what she said was valid. Which is, of course, pointless.

YouTube views are exactly the kind of vanity stats that get trotted out all the time as evidence of the importance of something. But all that means is a bunch of people have watched your video. It tells you nothing about why they watched or what they thought of it. Popularity is no proxy for validity or value. If we're to believe otherwise, it would mean that Gangnam Style with its billions of views is the best music we have, and I don't think anyone is prepared to make that argument.

I'm not judging the validity of the wi-fi doctor's argument. I'm just saying how many people watch (or don't watch) her video has no bearing on its validity, and it's dishonest to suggest it does. History is filled with popular but wrong ideas that ended up being set aside, and less popular ideas that changed the world. Just ask Galilieo or Rosa Parks. The point is, if likes or visits are the best evidence you have to support your argument, you need either better evidence or a better argument.