Are we starting up a myth here? One can replay either a long version of
the interview with Rosling (at
http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_8070000/8070108.stm) or the
shorter version that was actually broadcast (at
http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_8076000/8076456.stm , the
actual item is near the end of the page (0845)) and neither have him
introduced as a statistician, not that I can hear anyway. At the end of
the longer one, the interviewer Evan Davies describes him as "a great
spokesperson for the world of statistics", which is perhaps a bit over
the top (the /whole/ world of statistics?), but isn't describing him as
a statistician. (Davies is a very competent economist, and some might
recall him as a speaker at an RSS conference some years ago.) Rosling,
when he's not doing his gapminder.org work, is a professor of public
health science at the Karolinska Instituet in Stockholm.
regards,
Kevin
Jay Warner at AT_T wrote (in part):
> From the viewpoint of BBC announcers (_even_ BBC announcers :), anyone
> who can analyze arcane (and potentially mind-numbing) data to find &
> present interesting linkages in graphical form , deserves the title,
> 'statistician.'
>
> I've seen the effect in my neighborhood of Wisconsin, USA, among those
> far less aware than BBC announcers. If you have topically interesting
> analytical results, you're a 'statistician.' Doesn't matter what
> academic education or title you do or don't have.
>
>
|