When data speaks for itself, that's when you say nothing at all..

After reading and analyzing how top level decision maker in this country spoke up with figures held by central bureau statistic Indonesia, I begin to see the red line. They treated data in their own way not how it is generated. It makes the translation on data become multi translations. Sure, as a quotation said that statistics is the only science that enables different experts using the same figures to draw different conclusions. (Evan Esar; 1899 - 1995).. but that can not be used as justification on what they did to data. They should treat data very carefully.

First thing first they have to be sure knowing what is the purpose of data collection, after that the methodology. Because, even they have the same purpose if the methodology is not the same, it could draw different conclusions. Say, the collection of Indonesia's population data. The CBS always take every 10 year population census and mid population survey between the census. They collected data by visiting every household, door to door. Meanwhile Dinas Kependudukan collected data based on report. They waited household to report to them about coming and incoming household, about death and birth. Those two kinds of how data collected are not comparable, not apple to apple. Unfortunately, there is still many decision makers, politicians, even researcher and college students blame the difference of the figures. Well, it looks like blaming is a habit of our society, but it won't solve the problem.

Let’s take a look on how they treat or use data. Nowadays, people start to respond on data. They begin to have self awareness on how figures presented. Many advertisements give fact findings by showing the survey result. Politicians also use it to make them look good or to let their vows look bad. And the data itself have nothing to loose but to be used.

It became a common model to have surveys that held by surveyor agencies. Like I said before, even the purpose is the same, if the methodology is different, it would draw different conclusions. The methodology includes the time reference, sampling, estimation method, and a lot of more. When these things happen, people get confused. People seem to loose confidence on data.

Now, what if the purpose is remain the same, the methodology is the same, including the sampling frame, time reference, etc and even the surveyor is the same person. The only thing that is not exactly the same is the institutions that held the survey. What will happen? Do the result the same or not?

The answer is yes the result is the same but the survey is useless..
Why those institutions held the survey with everything the same just to know the same thing and spent a lot of money. Just to prove that statisticians is a man who believes figures don't lie, but admits that under analysis some of them won't stand up either, Evan Esar said. In economics we call it inefficient.

That’s why we need a strong, dependable, trusty, independent institution to hold the survey and census. Especially the result of the survey will be used to draw policies. That will be the CBS role. Still, from statistic’s quotation “there are three kind of lies ; lies, damned lies, and statistics”. But data will speaks for itself, that is when you say nothing at all..