ASA Connect

Terry Meyer seems to be wrong on the facts in his recent letter regarding the ASA response to President Trump's tweet about the jobs report. First, President Obama did not do anything similar in 2009 since he had not yet seen the jobs report at the time he made his statement while President Trump had already seen the report. Secondly, there is evidence that President Trump's tweet did indeed move the financial markets so there really is a clear statistical issue making the ASA statement in line with he organizations mission. His Tweet came at 7:21 a.m. Eastern time - for the hour and a half before the Tweet indices for the U.S. dollar were all flat. Then immediately after the Tweet the markets moved upward. See the graph at https://www.theatlas.com/charts/BJ7SqTCkm


Original Message------

I am dismayed to learn that the ASA President and Executive Director sent a letter to the Washington Post on behalf of our organization. Several thoughts:

1. The hyperbole in the letter is unwarranted ("breach of trust", "disservice to our nation", "alarm", "protect the integrity of government statistics"). What happened? President Trump tweeted one hour before the official release of the employment numbers saying "Looking forward to seeing the employment numbers at 8:30 this morning". Doesn't seem like Armageddon or a massive violation of data integrity to me (although I agree he should not have done it).

2. The ASA was worried about "artificial market disruptions", as though there aren't dozens of firms trying to predict the jobs numbers every month for clients all over the world. Almost all of those predictions in this case were positive. Right now, several major econometric firms are predicting 2Q GDP growth at 4.5% to 4.8%. If Trump tweeted a similar vague positive message, would you be able to read his mind? Would you believe the growth to be 4.2% (he's trying to put a positive spin on numbers which though excellent fall short of predictions), 4.6% (he's just saying what everyone knows/assumes) or 5.2% (the actual is much better than the consensus forecast)? Would you like to bet on the information? More to the point, since EVERYONE gets the tweet, no one will have an informational advantage, will they? Every news story, every rumor, every guest who predicts something, every FOMC report, etc. would cause an "artificial market disruption" in the ASA's view. The markets absorb millions of pieces of data every day, many from sources claiming to have private information.

3. The ASA letter is blatantly partisan. There was no strong letter by the ASA to the Washington Post in 2009 when President Obama DID EXACTLY THE SAME THING  20 hours (not 1 hour) before the data release. (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-obama-economy-jobs-sb/obama-another-dismal-jobs-report-is-likely-idUSTRE5145P720090205 ). Where was the ASA's concern about data integrity or artificial market disruption then? Was it because one statement/tweet was by Trump, the other by Obama?

4. This is not about "data integrity' or any other red herring. There is no statistical issue involved at all. It is blatant partisan politics thinly disguised behind some ethical or methodological concern. Having written to the Washington Post and put the ASA bias on display for everyone to see, we label ourselves as a political organization. Further, by the hyperbole, the ASA discredits itself as just another partisan lobbying group. Very disheartening to someone who wants to belong to an organization respected for its professionalism. The business news media covered this "story" - the ASA should not be involved.

5. This is a good use of the ASA's resources. If you want to use our unique talents and perspectives on public policy issues, I can give you a dozen issues to analyze off the top of my head with far more long lasting import than a Trump tweet.

6. Finally, I wish that the ASA would not get involved in politics and pretend to speak for me or other members. If I want a political organization to speak on my behalf, there are dozens I can join and fund. The ASA should concern itself with statistical issues.

Terry G. Meyer, Ph.D.

Original Message------

Terry Meyer seems to be wrong on the facts in his recent letter regarding the ASA response to President Trump's tweet about the jobs report. First, President Obama did not do anything similar in 2009 since he had not yet seen the jobs report at the time he made his statement while President Trump had already seen the report. Secondly, there is evidence that President Trump's tweet did indeed move the financial markets so there really is a clear statistical issue making the ASA statement in line with he organizations mission. His Tweet came at 7:21 a.m. Eastern time - for the hour and a half before the Tweet indices for the U.S. dollar were all flat. Then immediately after the Tweet the markets moved upward. See the graph at https://www.theatlas.com/charts/BJ7SqTCkm

Terry still does not get it.  Nor apparently do some other member of the ASA.  To have the President break the embargo of the BLS employment report is ridiculous, and has not been done before as others pointed out.  

No doubt, when the numbers go the wrong way (as they may do at some point) he will attack the employment report as "rigged" "made up" "fake news" etc.  He did this during the campaign, when he did not want to give Obama credit for employment growth.

Number such as these, or the Census, or any government survey or series should not be turned into a political or partisan exercise.  In short, he is using his position to use his early access to the Job Numbers for partisan advantage.

Going down this road leads to the sorts of statistics that apparently exist in Russia and China, which cannot be trusted.  

It seems to me it is the ASA's role to defend the integrity of such statistics.

Andy


------------------------------
Andrew Beveridge
Professor of Sociology
Queens and Grad Center CUNY
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 06-20-2018 18:14
From: Terry Meyer
Subject: ASA's letter to the Washington Post concerning Trump's tweet

I think Dennis Pearl (and others) are splitting hairs. President Obama's remarks were a mere 20 hours before release and had a specific number in it. Whether he had some advance knowledge (surely he did) is not as important as the fact that he clearly was trying to influence markets by lessening the impact of potential negative news. Moreover, as I said in my point 2, it is very unclear how to read President Trump's statement (above forecast, at forecast, below forecast?). I think all would agree that reading this President's mind is a fool's errand. (PS the chart Dennis Pearl shows was nicely edited, speaking of data integrity. In fact, if you look at a longer period of time before and after, those who thought they knew what Trump was saying and went long at 7 AM with the tweet, lost money within a week.) Moreover, as I said, since the tweet was public, you and everyone else were welcome to interpret it however you wished. Although inappropriate, I don't consider Trump's tweet the end of the federal statistics world as we know it.

Moreover, how is this an issue of data integrity? Political integrity perhaps, ethical integrity perhaps, but there is/was nothing wrong with the data. Can someone explain to me how data integrity is involved as that term is commonly understood and accepted, and hence why the ASA felt necessary to communicate to the world? Again, I'm not condoning Trump's tweet; I am rather questioning the appropriateness of the ASA responding in such a public fashion to a political issueusing ASA resources.

Original Message------

Terry Meyer seems to be wrong on the facts in his recent letter regarding the ASA response to President Trump's tweet about the jobs report. First, President Obama did not do anything similar in 2009 since he had not yet seen the jobs report at the time he made his statement while President Trump had already seen the report. Secondly, there is evidence that President Trump's tweet did indeed move the financial markets so there really is a clear statistical issue making the ASA statement in line with he organizations mission. His Tweet came at 7:21 a.m. Eastern time - for the hour and a half before the Tweet indices for the U.S. dollar were all flat. Then immediately after the Tweet the markets moved upward. See the graph at https://www.theatlas.com/charts/BJ7SqTCkm

Several posters here seem to be taking a very narrow view of the field of statistics. The discipline has long since eclipsed a narrow focus on the traditional analysis of data and the design of its collection. As one example, principles of data ethics, plans for the treatment of data through its entire cycle, maintaining protocol integrity, and the like are now at the core of the profession. The ASA Ethical Guidelines for Statistical Practice are at http://www.amstat.org/ASA/Your-Career/Ethical-Guidelines-for-Statistical-Practice.aspx

Point 5 of the section regarding responsibilities to science and the public reads

"The ethical statistician understands and conforms to confidentiality requirements of data collection, release, and dissemination and any restrictions on its use established by the data provider (to the extent legally required), protecting use and disclosure of data accordingly. Guards privileged information of the employer, client, or funder."

To say that the ASA letter to the Washington Post was not on an important statistical issue is incorrect.

------------------------------
Dennis Pearl
Professor
Penn State University
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 06-19-2018 14:22
From: Dennis Pearl
Subject: ASA's letter to the Washington Post concerning Trump's tweet

Terry Meyer seems to be wrong on the facts in his recent letter regarding the ASA response to President Trump's tweet about the jobs report. First, President Obama did not do anything similar in 2009 since he had not yet seen the jobs report at the time he made his statement while President Trump had already seen the report. Secondly, there is evidence that President Trump's tweet did indeed move the financial markets so there really is a clear statistical issue making the ASA statement in line with he organizations mission. His Tweet came at 7:21 a.m. Eastern time - for the hour and a half before the Tweet indices for the U.S. dollar were all flat. Then immediately after the Tweet the markets moved upward. See the graph at https://www.theatlas.com/charts/BJ7SqTCkm


Original Message------

I am dismayed to learn that the ASA President and Executive Director sent a letter to the Washington Post on behalf of our organization. Several thoughts:

1. The hyperbole in the letter is unwarranted ("breach of trust", "disservice to our nation", "alarm", "protect the integrity of government statistics"). What happened? President Trump tweeted one hour before the official release of the employment numbers saying "Looking forward to seeing the employment numbers at 8:30 this morning". Doesn't seem like Armageddon or a massive violation of data integrity to me (although I agree he should not have done it).

2. The ASA was worried about "artificial market disruptions", as though there aren't dozens of firms trying to predict the jobs numbers every month for clients all over the world. Almost all of those predictions in this case were positive. Right now, several major econometric firms are predicting 2Q GDP growth at 4.5% to 4.8%. If Trump tweeted a similar vague positive message, would you be able to read his mind? Would you believe the growth to be 4.2% (he's trying to put a positive spin on numbers which though excellent fall short of predictions), 4.6% (he's just saying what everyone knows/assumes) or 5.2% (the actual is much better than the consensus forecast)? Would you like to bet on the information? More to the point, since EVERYONE gets the tweet, no one will have an informational advantage, will they? Every news story, every rumor, every guest who predicts something, every FOMC report, etc. would cause an "artificial market disruption" in the ASA's view. The markets absorb millions of pieces of data every day, many from sources claiming to have private information.

3. The ASA letter is blatantly partisan. There was no strong letter by the ASA to the Washington Post in 2009 when President Obama DID EXACTLY THE SAME THING  20 hours (not 1 hour) before the data release. (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-obama-economy-jobs-sb/obama-another-dismal-jobs-report-is-likely-idUSTRE5145P720090205 ). Where was the ASA's concern about data integrity or artificial market disruption then? Was it because one statement/tweet was by Trump, the other by Obama?

4. This is not about "data integrity' or any other red herring. There is no statistical issue involved at all. It is blatant partisan politics thinly disguised behind some ethical or methodological concern. Having written to the Washington Post and put the ASA bias on display for everyone to see, we label ourselves as a political organization. Further, by the hyperbole, the ASA discredits itself as just another partisan lobbying group. Very disheartening to someone who wants to belong to an organization respected for its professionalism. The business news media covered this "story" - the ASA should not be involved.

5. This is a good use of the ASA's resources. If you want to use our unique talents and perspectives on public policy issues, I can give you a dozen issues to analyze off the top of my head with far more long lasting import than a Trump tweet.

6. Finally, I wish that the ASA would not get involved in politics and pretend to speak for me or other members. If I want a political organization to speak on my behalf, there are dozens I can join and fund. The ASA should concern itself with statistical issues.

Terry G. Meyer, Ph.D.

Statistical Policy Directive number 3 that governs this was issued by the Office of Management and Budget back in 1985 (you can find it here: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/about/policies/statistical-policy-directive-no-3.pdf )

One key reason why the rule was established at the behest of the federal statisticians of that era was to "…preserve the distinction between the policy-neutral release of data by statistical agencies and their interpretation by policy officials."

Policy-neutral dissemination procedures – reporting and release time – are an important statistical component of the protocol here (e.g. by design, the wording of the press release is essentially identical from month-to-month).

If key economic series are released in a manner that is not policy-neutral it lessens the public confidence in their unbiasedness, changes market behavior, and fosters lower response rates in succeeding months surveys.

------------------------------
Dennis Pearl
Professor
Penn State University
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 06-21-2018 13:46
From: Dennis Pearl
Subject: ASA's letter to the Washington Post concerning Trump's tweet

Several posters here seem to be taking a very narrow view of the field of statistics. The discipline has long since eclipsed a narrow focus on the traditional analysis of data and the design of its collection. As one example, principles of data ethics, plans for the treatment of data through its entire cycle, maintaining protocol integrity, and the like are now at the core of the profession. The ASA Ethical Guidelines for Statistical Practice are at http://www.amstat.org/ASA/Your-Career/Ethical-Guidelines-for-Statistical-Practice.aspx

Point 5 of the section regarding responsibilities to science and the public reads

"The ethical statistician understands and conforms to confidentiality requirements of data collection, release, and dissemination and any restrictions on its use established by the data provider (to the extent legally required), protecting use and disclosure of data accordingly. Guards privileged information of the employer, client, or funder."

To say that the ASA letter to the Washington Post was not on an important statistical issue is incorrect.

------------------------------
Dennis Pearl
Professor
Penn State University

Original Message:
Sent: 06-19-2018 14:22
From: Dennis Pearl
Subject: ASA's letter to the Washington Post concerning Trump's tweet

Terry Meyer seems to be wrong on the facts in his recent letter regarding the ASA response to President Trump's tweet about the jobs report. First, President Obama did not do anything similar in 2009 since he had not yet seen the jobs report at the time he made his statement while President Trump had already seen the report. Secondly, there is evidence that President Trump's tweet did indeed move the financial markets so there really is a clear statistical issue making the ASA statement in line with he organizations mission. His Tweet came at 7:21 a.m. Eastern time - for the hour and a half before the Tweet indices for the U.S. dollar were all flat. Then immediately after the Tweet the markets moved upward. See the graph at https://www.theatlas.com/charts/BJ7SqTCkm


Original Message------

I am dismayed to learn that the ASA President and Executive Director sent a letter to the Washington Post on behalf of our organization. Several thoughts:

1. The hyperbole in the letter is unwarranted ("breach of trust", "disservice to our nation", "alarm", "protect the integrity of government statistics"). What happened? President Trump tweeted one hour before the official release of the employment numbers saying "Looking forward to seeing the employment numbers at 8:30 this morning". Doesn't seem like Armageddon or a massive violation of data integrity to me (although I agree he should not have done it).

2. The ASA was worried about "artificial market disruptions", as though there aren't dozens of firms trying to predict the jobs numbers every month for clients all over the world. Almost all of those predictions in this case were positive. Right now, several major econometric firms are predicting 2Q GDP growth at 4.5% to 4.8%. If Trump tweeted a similar vague positive message, would you be able to read his mind? Would you believe the growth to be 4.2% (he's trying to put a positive spin on numbers which though excellent fall short of predictions), 4.6% (he's just saying what everyone knows/assumes) or 5.2% (the actual is much better than the consensus forecast)? Would you like to bet on the information? More to the point, since EVERYONE gets the tweet, no one will have an informational advantage, will they? Every news story, every rumor, every guest who predicts something, every FOMC report, etc. would cause an "artificial market disruption" in the ASA's view. The markets absorb millions of pieces of data every day, many from sources claiming to have private information.

3. The ASA letter is blatantly partisan. There was no strong letter by the ASA to the Washington Post in 2009 when President Obama DID EXACTLY THE SAME THING  20 hours (not 1 hour) before the data release. (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-obama-economy-jobs-sb/obama-another-dismal-jobs-report-is-likely-idUSTRE5145P720090205 ). Where was the ASA's concern about data integrity or artificial market disruption then? Was it because one statement/tweet was by Trump, the other by Obama?

4. This is not about "data integrity' or any other red herring. There is no statistical issue involved at all. It is blatant partisan politics thinly disguised behind some ethical or methodological concern. Having written to the Washington Post and put the ASA bias on display for everyone to see, we label ourselves as a political organization. Further, by the hyperbole, the ASA discredits itself as just another partisan lobbying group. Very disheartening to someone who wants to belong to an organization respected for its professionalism. The business news media covered this "story" - the ASA should not be involved.

5. This is a good use of the ASA's resources. If you want to use our unique talents and perspectives on public policy issues, I can give you a dozen issues to analyze off the top of my head with far more long lasting import than a Trump tweet.

6. Finally, I wish that the ASA would not get involved in politics and pretend to speak for me or other members. If I want a political organization to speak on my behalf, there are dozens I can join and fund. The ASA should concern itself with statistical issues.

Terry G. Meyer, Ph.D.

Very refreshing read with relevant and excellent points.  Kudos to Terry, enjoyed reading thoroughly!

------------------------------
Mani Lakshminarayanan
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 06-18-2018 19:52
From: Terry Meyer
Subject: ASA's letter to the Washington Post concerning Trump's tweet

I am dismayed to learn that the ASA President and Executive Director sent a letter to the Washington Post on behalf of our organization. Several thoughts:

1. The hyperbole in the letter is unwarranted ("breach of trust", "disservice to our nation", "alarm", "protect the integrity of government statistics"). What happened? President Trump tweeted one hour before the official release of the employment numbers saying "Looking forward to seeing the employment numbers at 8:30 this morning". Doesn't seem like Armageddon or a massive violation of data integrity to me (although I agree he should not have done it).

2. The ASA was worried about "artificial market disruptions", as though there aren't dozens of firms trying to predict the jobs numbers every month for clients all over the world. Almost all of those predictions in this case were positive. Right now, several major econometric firms are predicting 2Q GDP growth at 4.5% to 4.8%. If Trump tweeted a similar vague positive message, would you be able to read his mind? Would you believe the growth to be 4.2% (he's trying to put a positive spin on numbers which though excellent fall short of predictions), 4.6% (he's just saying what everyone knows/assumes) or 5.2% (the actual is much better than the consensus forecast)? Would you like to bet on the information? More to the point, since EVERYONE gets the tweet, no one will have an informational advantage, will they? Every news story, every rumor, every guest who predicts something, every FOMC report, etc. would cause an "artificial market disruption" in the ASA's view. The markets absorb millions of pieces of data every day, many from sources claiming to have private information.

3. The ASA letter is blatantly partisan. There was no strong letter by the ASA to the Washington Post in 2009 when President Obama DID EXACTLY THE SAME THING  20 hours (not 1 hour) before the data release. (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-obama-economy-jobs-sb/obama-another-dismal-jobs-report-is-likely-idUSTRE5145P720090205 ). Where was the ASA's concern about data integrity or artificial market disruption then? Was it because one statement/tweet was by Trump, the other by Obama?

4. This is not about "data integrity' or any other red herring. There is no statistical issue involved at all. It is blatant partisan politics thinly disguised behind some ethical or methodological concern. Having written to the Washington Post and put the ASA bias on display for everyone to see, we label ourselves as a political organization. Further, by the hyperbole, the ASA discredits itself as just another partisan lobbying group. Very disheartening to someone who wants to belong to an organization respected for its professionalism. The business news media covered this "story" - the ASA should not be involved.

5. This is a good use of the ASA's resources. If you want to use our unique talents and perspectives on public policy issues, I can give you a dozen issues to analyze off the top of my head with far more long lasting import than a Trump tweet.

6. Finally, I wish that the ASA would not get involved in politics and pretend to speak for me or other members. If I want a political organization to speak on my behalf, there are dozens I can join and fund. The ASA should concern itself with statistical issues.

Terry G. Meyer, Ph.D.

​If I could just note one factual detail and leave the politics to others ... by longstanding tradition the president sees the jobs numbers the *night* before their release. President Obama spoke about what was expected in the report the *day* before, as you note. To my mind conveying expectations before seeing the data is not the same as seeing the data and then leaking information prior to its release.
Respectfully,

------------------------------
Vincent Staggs, PhD
Research Faculty, Biostatistics & Epidemiology, Children's Mercy Kansas City;
Associate Professor, School of Medicine, University of Missouri-Kansas City
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 06-18-2018 19:52
From: Terry Meyer
Subject: ASA's letter to the Washington Post concerning Trump's tweet

I am dismayed to learn that the ASA President and Executive Director sent a letter to the Washington Post on behalf of our organization. Several thoughts:

1. The hyperbole in the letter is unwarranted ("breach of trust", "disservice to our nation", "alarm", "protect the integrity of government statistics"). What happened? President Trump tweeted one hour before the official release of the employment numbers saying "Looking forward to seeing the employment numbers at 8:30 this morning". Doesn't seem like Armageddon or a massive violation of data integrity to me (although I agree he should not have done it).

2. The ASA was worried about "artificial market disruptions", as though there aren't dozens of firms trying to predict the jobs numbers every month for clients all over the world. Almost all of those predictions in this case were positive. Right now, several major econometric firms are predicting 2Q GDP growth at 4.5% to 4.8%. If Trump tweeted a similar vague positive message, would you be able to read his mind? Would you believe the growth to be 4.2% (he's trying to put a positive spin on numbers which though excellent fall short of predictions), 4.6% (he's just saying what everyone knows/assumes) or 5.2% (the actual is much better than the consensus forecast)? Would you like to bet on the information? More to the point, since EVERYONE gets the tweet, no one will have an informational advantage, will they? Every news story, every rumor, every guest who predicts something, every FOMC report, etc. would cause an "artificial market disruption" in the ASA's view. The markets absorb millions of pieces of data every day, many from sources claiming to have private information.

3. The ASA letter is blatantly partisan. There was no strong letter by the ASA to the Washington Post in 2009 when President Obama DID EXACTLY THE SAME THING  20 hours (not 1 hour) before the data release. (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-obama-economy-jobs-sb/obama-another-dismal-jobs-report-is-likely-idUSTRE5145P720090205 ). Where was the ASA's concern about data integrity or artificial market disruption then? Was it because one statement/tweet was by Trump, the other by Obama?

4. This is not about "data integrity' or any other red herring. There is no statistical issue involved at all. It is blatant partisan politics thinly disguised behind some ethical or methodological concern. Having written to the Washington Post and put the ASA bias on display for everyone to see, we label ourselves as a political organization. Further, by the hyperbole, the ASA discredits itself as just another partisan lobbying group. Very disheartening to someone who wants to belong to an organization respected for its professionalism. The business news media covered this "story" - the ASA should not be involved.

5. This is a good use of the ASA's resources. If you want to use our unique talents and perspectives on public policy issues, I can give you a dozen issues to analyze off the top of my head with far more long lasting import than a Trump tweet.

6. Finally, I wish that the ASA would not get involved in politics and pretend to speak for me or other members. If I want a political organization to speak on my behalf, there are dozens I can join and fund. The ASA should concern itself with statistical issues.

Terry G. Meyer, Ph.D.

Original Message------

I am dismayed to learn that the ASA President and Executive Director sent a letter to the Washington Post on behalf of our organization. Several thoughts:

1. The hyperbole in the letter is unwarranted ("breach of trust", "disservice to our nation", "alarm", "protect the integrity of government statistics"). What happened? President Trump tweeted one hour before the official release of the employment numbers saying "Looking forward to seeing the employment numbers at 8:30 this morning". Doesn't seem like Armageddon or a massive violation of data integrity to me (although I agree he should not have done it).

2. The ASA was worried about "artificial market disruptions", as though there aren't dozens of firms trying to predict the jobs numbers every month for clients all over the world. Almost all of those predictions in this case were positive. Right now, several major econometric firms are predicting 2Q GDP growth at 4.5% to 4.8%. If Trump tweeted a similar vague positive message, would you be able to read his mind? Would you believe the growth to be 4.2% (he's trying to put a positive spin on numbers which though excellent fall short of predictions), 4.6% (he's just saying what everyone knows/assumes) or 5.2% (the actual is much better than the consensus forecast)? Would you like to bet on the information? More to the point, since EVERYONE gets the tweet, no one will have an informational advantage, will they? Every news story, every rumor, every guest who predicts something, every FOMC report, etc. would cause an "artificial market disruption" in the ASA's view. The markets absorb millions of pieces of data every day, many from sources claiming to have private information.

3. The ASA letter is blatantly partisan. There was no strong letter by the ASA to the Washington Post in 2009 when President Obama DID EXACTLY THE SAME THING  20 hours (not 1 hour) before the data release. (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-obama-economy-jobs-sb/obama-another-dismal-jobs-report-is-likely-idUSTRE5145P720090205 ). Where was the ASA's concern about data integrity or artificial market disruption then? Was it because one statement/tweet was by Trump, the other by Obama?

4. This is not about "data integrity' or any other red herring. There is no statistical issue involved at all. It is blatant partisan politics thinly disguised behind some ethical or methodological concern. Having written to the Washington Post and put the ASA bias on display for everyone to see, we label ourselves as a political organization. Further, by the hyperbole, the ASA discredits itself as just another partisan lobbying group. Very disheartening to someone who wants to belong to an organization respected for its professionalism. The business news media covered this "story" - the ASA should not be involved.

5. This is a good use of the ASA's resources. If you want to use our unique talents and perspectives on public policy issues, I can give you a dozen issues to analyze off the top of my head with far more long lasting import than a Trump tweet.

6. Finally, I wish that the ASA would not get involved in politics and pretend to speak for me or other members. If I want a political organization to speak on my behalf, there are dozens I can join and fund. The ASA should concern itself with statistical issues.

Terry G. Meyer, Ph.D.

Original Message------

I am dismayed to learn that the ASA President and Executive Director sent a letter to the Washington Post on behalf of our organization. Several thoughts:

1. The hyperbole in the letter is unwarranted ("breach of trust", "disservice to our nation", "alarm", "protect the integrity of government statistics"). What happened? President Trump tweeted one hour before the official release of the employment numbers saying "Looking forward to seeing the employment numbers at 8:30 this morning". Doesn't seem like Armageddon or a massive violation of data integrity to me (although I agree he should not have done it).

2. The ASA was worried about "artificial market disruptions", as though there aren't dozens of firms trying to predict the jobs numbers every month for clients all over the world. Almost all of those predictions in this case were positive. Right now, several major econometric firms are predicting 2Q GDP growth at 4.5% to 4.8%. If Trump tweeted a similar vague positive message, would you be able to read his mind? Would you believe the growth to be 4.2% (he's trying to put a positive spin on numbers which though excellent fall short of predictions), 4.6% (he's just saying what everyone knows/assumes) or 5.2% (the actual is much better than the consensus forecast)? Would you like to bet on the information? More to the point, since EVERYONE gets the tweet, no one will have an informational advantage, will they? Every news story, every rumor, every guest who predicts something, every FOMC report, etc. would cause an "artificial market disruption" in the ASA's view. The markets absorb millions of pieces of data every day, many from sources claiming to have private information.

3. The ASA letter is blatantly partisan. There was no strong letter by the ASA to the Washington Post in 2009 when President Obama DID EXACTLY THE SAME THING  20 hours (not 1 hour) before the data release. (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-obama-economy-jobs-sb/obama-another-dismal-jobs-report-is-likely-idUSTRE5145P720090205 ). Where was the ASA's concern about data integrity or artificial market disruption then? Was it because one statement/tweet was by Trump, the other by Obama?

4. This is not about "data integrity' or any other red herring. There is no statistical issue involved at all. It is blatant partisan politics thinly disguised behind some ethical or methodological concern. Having written to the Washington Post and put the ASA bias on display for everyone to see, we label ourselves as a political organization. Further, by the hyperbole, the ASA discredits itself as just another partisan lobbying group. Very disheartening to someone who wants to belong to an organization respected for its professionalism. The business news media covered this "story" - the ASA should not be involved.

5. This is a good use of the ASA's resources. If you want to use our unique talents and perspectives on public policy issues, I can give you a dozen issues to analyze off the top of my head with far more long lasting import than a Trump tweet.

6. Finally, I wish that the ASA would not get involved in politics and pretend to speak for me or other members. If I want a political organization to speak on my behalf, there are dozens I can join and fund. The ASA should concern itself with statistical issues.

Terry G. Meyer, Ph.D.

I agree with the OP that the ASA letter was partisan, hysterical, and in an inappropriate spirit. Trump's tweet, while not the best idea, did in fact NOT state what the jobs report would look like. As such, if there was ANY effect (which cannot be demonstrated in any definitive manner), I doubt that the impact was strong. It would be best for the ASA to refrain from partisanship in marginal situations, such as this one. Trump is a provocateur. Engaging with him at the level of politics is a mistake for a scientific organization.

------------------------------
Paul Thompson
Principal Biostatistician
Sanford Research/USD
Sioux Falls, SD
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 06-18-2018 19:52
From: Terry Meyer
Subject: ASA's letter to the Washington Post concerning Trump's tweet

I am dismayed to learn that the ASA President and Executive Director sent a letter to the Washington Post on behalf of our organization. Several thoughts:

1. The hyperbole in the letter is unwarranted ("breach of trust", "disservice to our nation", "alarm", "protect the integrity of government statistics"). What happened? President Trump tweeted one hour before the official release of the employment numbers saying "Looking forward to seeing the employment numbers at 8:30 this morning". Doesn't seem like Armageddon or a massive violation of data integrity to me (although I agree he should not have done it).

2. The ASA was worried about "artificial market disruptions", as though there aren't dozens of firms trying to predict the jobs numbers every month for clients all over the world. Almost all of those predictions in this case were positive. Right now, several major econometric firms are predicting 2Q GDP growth at 4.5% to 4.8%. If Trump tweeted a similar vague positive message, would you be able to read his mind? Would you believe the growth to be 4.2% (he's trying to put a positive spin on numbers which though excellent fall short of predictions), 4.6% (he's just saying what everyone knows/assumes) or 5.2% (the actual is much better than the consensus forecast)? Would you like to bet on the information? More to the point, since EVERYONE gets the tweet, no one will have an informational advantage, will they? Every news story, every rumor, every guest who predicts something, every FOMC report, etc. would cause an "artificial market disruption" in the ASA's view. The markets absorb millions of pieces of data every day, many from sources claiming to have private information.

3. The ASA letter is blatantly partisan. There was no strong letter by the ASA to the Washington Post in 2009 when President Obama DID EXACTLY THE SAME THING  20 hours (not 1 hour) before the data release. (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-obama-economy-jobs-sb/obama-another-dismal-jobs-report-is-likely-idUSTRE5145P720090205 ). Where was the ASA's concern about data integrity or artificial market disruption then? Was it because one statement/tweet was by Trump, the other by Obama?

4. This is not about "data integrity' or any other red herring. There is no statistical issue involved at all. It is blatant partisan politics thinly disguised behind some ethical or methodological concern. Having written to the Washington Post and put the ASA bias on display for everyone to see, we label ourselves as a political organization. Further, by the hyperbole, the ASA discredits itself as just another partisan lobbying group. Very disheartening to someone who wants to belong to an organization respected for its professionalism. The business news media covered this "story" - the ASA should not be involved.

5. This is a good use of the ASA's resources. If you want to use our unique talents and perspectives on public policy issues, I can give you a dozen issues to analyze off the top of my head with far more long lasting import than a Trump tweet.

6. Finally, I wish that the ASA would not get involved in politics and pretend to speak for me or other members. If I want a political organization to speak on my behalf, there are dozens I can join and fund. The ASA should concern itself with statistical issues.

Terry G. Meyer, Ph.D.

Totally agree with Terry's comments. We should be teaching our students to avoid bias in sampling and in statistics. Must practice what we teach in the real world!

William L. Seaver
Associate Professor in Business Analytics and Statistics
2007 Allen Keally Outstanding Teacher Award
2001 University's Excellence in Teaching Award

Business Analytics and Statistics
Haslam College of Business
University of Tennessee
Knoxville, TN 37996-0532
865-974-6862


Original Message------

I am dismayed to learn that the ASA President and Executive Director sent a letter to the Washington Post on behalf of our organization. Several thoughts:

1. The hyperbole in the letter is unwarranted ("breach of trust", "disservice to our nation", "alarm", "protect the integrity of government statistics"). What happened? President Trump tweeted one hour before the official release of the employment numbers saying "Looking forward to seeing the employment numbers at 8:30 this morning". Doesn't seem like Armageddon or a massive violation of data integrity to me (although I agree he should not have done it).

2. The ASA was worried about "artificial market disruptions", as though there aren't dozens of firms trying to predict the jobs numbers every month for clients all over the world. Almost all of those predictions in this case were positive. Right now, several major econometric firms are predicting 2Q GDP growth at 4.5% to 4.8%. If Trump tweeted a similar vague positive message, would you be able to read his mind? Would you believe the growth to be 4.2% (he's trying to put a positive spin on numbers which though excellent fall short of predictions), 4.6% (he's just saying what everyone knows/assumes) or 5.2% (the actual is much better than the consensus forecast)? Would you like to bet on the information? More to the point, since EVERYONE gets the tweet, no one will have an informational advantage, will they? Every news story, every rumor, every guest who predicts something, every FOMC report, etc. would cause an "artificial market disruption" in the ASA's view. The markets absorb millions of pieces of data every day, many from sources claiming to have private information.

3. The ASA letter is blatantly partisan. There was no strong letter by the ASA to the Washington Post in 2009 when President Obama DID EXACTLY THE SAME THING  20 hours (not 1 hour) before the data release. (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-obama-economy-jobs-sb/obama-another-dismal-jobs-report-is-likely-idUSTRE5145P720090205 ). Where was the ASA's concern about data integrity or artificial market disruption then? Was it because one statement/tweet was by Trump, the other by Obama?

4. This is not about "data integrity' or any other red herring. There is no statistical issue involved at all. It is blatant partisan politics thinly disguised behind some ethical or methodological concern. Having written to the Washington Post and put the ASA bias on display for everyone to see, we label ourselves as a political organization. Further, by the hyperbole, the ASA discredits itself as just another partisan lobbying group. Very disheartening to someone who wants to belong to an organization respected for its professionalism. The business news media covered this "story" - the ASA should not be involved.

5. This is a good use of the ASA's resources. If you want to use our unique talents and perspectives on public policy issues, I can give you a dozen issues to analyze off the top of my head with far more long lasting import than a Trump tweet.

6. Finally, I wish that the ASA would not get involved in politics and pretend to speak for me or other members. If I want a political organization to speak on my behalf, there are dozens I can join and fund. The ASA should concern itself with statistical issues.

Terry G. Meyer, Ph.D.

I tend to agree with Terry here (though against point #3 I understand that "Count on Stats" is a new initiative, thus it did not exist during the President Obama's tenure.)  For the ASA to publicly pick a fight over something like this tweet seems petty.  And putting this item as the first in the member news bulletin also shows that someone wants to highlight this, which I'm not sure what that signifies. 

If one were to couple that along with the language used in the release, it does more credence to the idea that ASA is picking political sides.   I'd go as far to say that the whole Advocacy Initiative by the ASA seems very biased to me, in general. Letters Organized, Signed, and/or Sent.  If I'm being honest, seeing things like this over and over cause me to me lose confidence in the ASA's ability to maintain a politically neutral posture.

Back to the original issue - If the intention of the Count on Stats initiative is to promote public faith in federal statistics, then part of that trust building exercise is to ensure that the ASA, in general, show no political bias.  So stop with these messages.

------------------------------
Weston McManus
SAS Institute
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 06-18-2018 19:52
From: Terry Meyer
Subject: ASA's letter to the Washington Post concerning Trump's tweet

I am dismayed to learn that the ASA President and Executive Director sent a letter to the Washington Post on behalf of our organization. Several thoughts:

1. The hyperbole in the letter is unwarranted ("breach of trust", "disservice to our nation", "alarm", "protect the integrity of government statistics"). What happened? President Trump tweeted one hour before the official release of the employment numbers saying "Looking forward to seeing the employment numbers at 8:30 this morning". Doesn't seem like Armageddon or a massive violation of data integrity to me (although I agree he should not have done it).

2. The ASA was worried about "artificial market disruptions", as though there aren't dozens of firms trying to predict the jobs numbers every month for clients all over the world. Almost all of those predictions in this case were positive. Right now, several major econometric firms are predicting 2Q GDP growth at 4.5% to 4.8%. If Trump tweeted a similar vague positive message, would you be able to read his mind? Would you believe the growth to be 4.2% (he's trying to put a positive spin on numbers which though excellent fall short of predictions), 4.6% (he's just saying what everyone knows/assumes) or 5.2% (the actual is much better than the consensus forecast)? Would you like to bet on the information? More to the point, since EVERYONE gets the tweet, no one will have an informational advantage, will they? Every news story, every rumor, every guest who predicts something, every FOMC report, etc. would cause an "artificial market disruption" in the ASA's view. The markets absorb millions of pieces of data every day, many from sources claiming to have private information.

3. The ASA letter is blatantly partisan. There was no strong letter by the ASA to the Washington Post in 2009 when President Obama DID EXACTLY THE SAME THING  20 hours (not 1 hour) before the data release. (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-obama-economy-jobs-sb/obama-another-dismal-jobs-report-is-likely-idUSTRE5145P720090205 ). Where was the ASA's concern about data integrity or artificial market disruption then? Was it because one statement/tweet was by Trump, the other by Obama?

4. This is not about "data integrity' or any other red herring. There is no statistical issue involved at all. It is blatant partisan politics thinly disguised behind some ethical or methodological concern. Having written to the Washington Post and put the ASA bias on display for everyone to see, we label ourselves as a political organization. Further, by the hyperbole, the ASA discredits itself as just another partisan lobbying group. Very disheartening to someone who wants to belong to an organization respected for its professionalism. The business news media covered this "story" - the ASA should not be involved.

5. This is a good use of the ASA's resources. If you want to use our unique talents and perspectives on public policy issues, I can give you a dozen issues to analyze off the top of my head with far more long lasting import than a Trump tweet.

6. Finally, I wish that the ASA would not get involved in politics and pretend to speak for me or other members. If I want a political organization to speak on my behalf, there are dozens I can join and fund. The ASA should concern itself with statistical issues.

Terry G. Meyer, Ph.D.

Original Message------

I am dismayed to learn that the ASA President and Executive Director sent a letter to the Washington Post on behalf of our organization. Several thoughts:

1. The hyperbole in the letter is unwarranted ("breach of trust", "disservice to our nation", "alarm", "protect the integrity of government statistics"). What happened? President Trump tweeted one hour before the official release of the employment numbers saying "Looking forward to seeing the employment numbers at 8:30 this morning". Doesn't seem like Armageddon or a massive violation of data integrity to me (although I agree he should not have done it).

2. The ASA was worried about "artificial market disruptions", as though there aren't dozens of firms trying to predict the jobs numbers every month for clients all over the world. Almost all of those predictions in this case were positive. Right now, several major econometric firms are predicting 2Q GDP growth at 4.5% to 4.8%. If Trump tweeted a similar vague positive message, would you be able to read his mind? Would you believe the growth to be 4.2% (he's trying to put a positive spin on numbers which though excellent fall short of predictions), 4.6% (he's just saying what everyone knows/assumes) or 5.2% (the actual is much better than the consensus forecast)? Would you like to bet on the information? More to the point, since EVERYONE gets the tweet, no one will have an informational advantage, will they? Every news story, every rumor, every guest who predicts something, every FOMC report, etc. would cause an "artificial market disruption" in the ASA's view. The markets absorb millions of pieces of data every day, many from sources claiming to have private information.

3. The ASA letter is blatantly partisan. There was no strong letter by the ASA to the Washington Post in 2009 when President Obama DID EXACTLY THE SAME THING  20 hours (not 1 hour) before the data release. (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-obama-economy-jobs-sb/obama-another-dismal-jobs-report-is-likely-idUSTRE5145P720090205 ). Where was the ASA's concern about data integrity or artificial market disruption then? Was it because one statement/tweet was by Trump, the other by Obama?

4. This is not about "data integrity' or any other red herring. There is no statistical issue involved at all. It is blatant partisan politics thinly disguised behind some ethical or methodological concern. Having written to the Washington Post and put the ASA bias on display for everyone to see, we label ourselves as a political organization. Further, by the hyperbole, the ASA discredits itself as just another partisan lobbying group. Very disheartening to someone who wants to belong to an organization respected for its professionalism. The business news media covered this "story" - the ASA should not be involved.

5. This is a good use of the ASA's resources. If you want to use our unique talents and perspectives on public policy issues, I can give you a dozen issues to analyze off the top of my head with far more long lasting import than a Trump tweet.

6. Finally, I wish that the ASA would not get involved in politics and pretend to speak for me or other members. If I want a political organization to speak on my behalf, there are dozens I can join and fund. The ASA should concern itself with statistical issues.

Terry G. Meyer, Ph.D.

One must presume that Terry Meyers is concerned about this Letter to the Editor: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/tweeting-about-the-jobs-report-early-was-a-breach-of-trust/2018/06/06/53c93fe8-683b-11e8-a335-c4503d041eaf_story.html?utm_term=.971e1e7ed9c2

and

http://www.amstat.org/ASA/News/ASA_Speaks_Out_on_Trumps_Tweet_Ahead_of_Monthly_BLS_Jobs_Report.aspx

Unfortunately, a link was not provided by Dr. Meyers.

In my opinion, a U.S. President (any U.S. President) should respect "the integrity of government statistics" and should not comment before their release, even if he/she has not seen the official report.  It is the business of the American Statistical Association to send a letter to the editor to make such an assertion, and to wish to "protect" that statistical integrity. That said, I believe that Dr. Meyer is on firmer ground in objecting to the tone of phrasing like "breach of trust", "disservice to our nation" and "alarm".  I, for one, would much prefer it if the ASA had sent a letter making the same points, but in much more dull and boring terms.

Finally, although Dr. Meyers asserts that "President Obama DID EXACTLY THE SAME THING", Mr. Pearl and Dr. Staggs argue that it was not exactly the same, since Obama had not seen the report.  (And why is it necessary to SHOUT?)

 

------------------------------
George Divine
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 06-18-2018 19:52
From: Terry Meyer
Subject: ASA's letter to the Washington Post concerning Trump's tweet

I am dismayed to learn that the ASA President and Executive Director sent a letter to the Washington Post on behalf of our organization. Several thoughts:

1. The hyperbole in the letter is unwarranted ("breach of trust", "disservice to our nation", "alarm", "protect the integrity of government statistics"). What happened? President Trump tweeted one hour before the official release of the employment numbers saying "Looking forward to seeing the employment numbers at 8:30 this morning". Doesn't seem like Armageddon or a massive violation of data integrity to me (although I agree he should not have done it).

2. The ASA was worried about "artificial market disruptions", as though there aren't dozens of firms trying to predict the jobs numbers every month for clients all over the world. Almost all of those predictions in this case were positive. Right now, several major econometric firms are predicting 2Q GDP growth at 4.5% to 4.8%. If Trump tweeted a similar vague positive message, would you be able to read his mind? Would you believe the growth to be 4.2% (he's trying to put a positive spin on numbers which though excellent fall short of predictions), 4.6% (he's just saying what everyone knows/assumes) or 5.2% (the actual is much better than the consensus forecast)? Would you like to bet on the information? More to the point, since EVERYONE gets the tweet, no one will have an informational advantage, will they? Every news story, every rumor, every guest who predicts something, every FOMC report, etc. would cause an "artificial market disruption" in the ASA's view. The markets absorb millions of pieces of data every day, many from sources claiming to have private information.

3. The ASA letter is blatantly partisan. There was no strong letter by the ASA to the Washington Post in 2009 when President Obama DID EXACTLY THE SAME THING  20 hours (not 1 hour) before the data release. (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-obama-economy-jobs-sb/obama-another-dismal-jobs-report-is-likely-idUSTRE5145P720090205 ). Where was the ASA's concern about data integrity or artificial market disruption then? Was it because one statement/tweet was by Trump, the other by Obama?

4. This is not about "data integrity' or any other red herring. There is no statistical issue involved at all. It is blatant partisan politics thinly disguised behind some ethical or methodological concern. Having written to the Washington Post and put the ASA bias on display for everyone to see, we label ourselves as a political organization. Further, by the hyperbole, the ASA discredits itself as just another partisan lobbying group. Very disheartening to someone who wants to belong to an organization respected for its professionalism. The business news media covered this "story" - the ASA should not be involved.

5. This is a good use of the ASA's resources. If you want to use our unique talents and perspectives on public policy issues, I can give you a dozen issues to analyze off the top of my head with far more long lasting import than a Trump tweet.

6. Finally, I wish that the ASA would not get involved in politics and pretend to speak for me or other members. If I want a political organization to speak on my behalf, there are dozens I can join and fund. The ASA should concern itself with statistical issues.

Terry G. Meyer, Ph.D.

Original Message------

I am dismayed to learn that the ASA President and Executive Director sent a letter to the Washington Post on behalf of our organization. Several thoughts:

1. The hyperbole in the letter is unwarranted ("breach of trust", "disservice to our nation", "alarm", "protect the integrity of government statistics"). What happened? President Trump tweeted one hour before the official release of the employment numbers saying "Looking forward to seeing the employment numbers at 8:30 this morning". Doesn't seem like Armageddon or a massive violation of data integrity to me (although I agree he should not have done it).

2. The ASA was worried about "artificial market disruptions", as though there aren't dozens of firms trying to predict the jobs numbers every month for clients all over the world. Almost all of those predictions in this case were positive. Right now, several major econometric firms are predicting 2Q GDP growth at 4.5% to 4.8%. If Trump tweeted a similar vague positive message, would you be able to read his mind? Would you believe the growth to be 4.2% (he's trying to put a positive spin on numbers which though excellent fall short of predictions), 4.6% (he's just saying what everyone knows/assumes) or 5.2% (the actual is much better than the consensus forecast)? Would you like to bet on the information? More to the point, since EVERYONE gets the tweet, no one will have an informational advantage, will they? Every news story, every rumor, every guest who predicts something, every FOMC report, etc. would cause an "artificial market disruption" in the ASA's view. The markets absorb millions of pieces of data every day, many from sources claiming to have private information.

3. The ASA letter is blatantly partisan. There was no strong letter by the ASA to the Washington Post in 2009 when President Obama DID EXACTLY THE SAME THING  20 hours (not 1 hour) before the data release. (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-obama-economy-jobs-sb/obama-another-dismal-jobs-report-is-likely-idUSTRE5145P720090205 ). Where was the ASA's concern about data integrity or artificial market disruption then? Was it because one statement/tweet was by Trump, the other by Obama?

4. This is not about "data integrity' or any other red herring. There is no statistical issue involved at all. It is blatant partisan politics thinly disguised behind some ethical or methodological concern. Having written to the Washington Post and put the ASA bias on display for everyone to see, we label ourselves as a political organization. Further, by the hyperbole, the ASA discredits itself as just another partisan lobbying group. Very disheartening to someone who wants to belong to an organization respected for its professionalism. The business news media covered this "story" - the ASA should not be involved.

5. This is a good use of the ASA's resources. If you want to use our unique talents and perspectives on public policy issues, I can give you a dozen issues to analyze off the top of my head with far more long lasting import than a Trump tweet.

6. Finally, I wish that the ASA would not get involved in politics and pretend to speak for me or other members. If I want a political organization to speak on my behalf, there are dozens I can join and fund. The ASA should concern itself with statistical issues.

Terry G. Meyer, Ph.D.

Even though Donald Trump is a noxious mediocrity it is important not to reflexively oppose/criticize everything he does so point taken. However, I believe it is appropriate for the ASA to touch on politics to a certain extent when we have politicians in the U.S. waging war on science.

------------------------------
Robert O'Brien
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 06-18-2018 19:52
From: Terry Meyer
Subject: ASA's letter to the Washington Post concerning Trump's tweet

I am dismayed to learn that the ASA President and Executive Director sent a letter to the Washington Post on behalf of our organization. Several thoughts:

1. The hyperbole in the letter is unwarranted ("breach of trust", "disservice to our nation", "alarm", "protect the integrity of government statistics"). What happened? President Trump tweeted one hour before the official release of the employment numbers saying "Looking forward to seeing the employment numbers at 8:30 this morning". Doesn't seem like Armageddon or a massive violation of data integrity to me (although I agree he should not have done it).

2. The ASA was worried about "artificial market disruptions", as though there aren't dozens of firms trying to predict the jobs numbers every month for clients all over the world. Almost all of those predictions in this case were positive. Right now, several major econometric firms are predicting 2Q GDP growth at 4.5% to 4.8%. If Trump tweeted a similar vague positive message, would you be able to read his mind? Would you believe the growth to be 4.2% (he's trying to put a positive spin on numbers which though excellent fall short of predictions), 4.6% (he's just saying what everyone knows/assumes) or 5.2% (the actual is much better than the consensus forecast)? Would you like to bet on the information? More to the point, since EVERYONE gets the tweet, no one will have an informational advantage, will they? Every news story, every rumor, every guest who predicts something, every FOMC report, etc. would cause an "artificial market disruption" in the ASA's view. The markets absorb millions of pieces of data every day, many from sources claiming to have private information.

3. The ASA letter is blatantly partisan. There was no strong letter by the ASA to the Washington Post in 2009 when President Obama DID EXACTLY THE SAME THING  20 hours (not 1 hour) before the data release. (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-obama-economy-jobs-sb/obama-another-dismal-jobs-report-is-likely-idUSTRE5145P720090205 ). Where was the ASA's concern about data integrity or artificial market disruption then? Was it because one statement/tweet was by Trump, the other by Obama?

4. This is not about "data integrity' or any other red herring. There is no statistical issue involved at all. It is blatant partisan politics thinly disguised behind some ethical or methodological concern. Having written to the Washington Post and put the ASA bias on display for everyone to see, we label ourselves as a political organization. Further, by the hyperbole, the ASA discredits itself as just another partisan lobbying group. Very disheartening to someone who wants to belong to an organization respected for its professionalism. The business news media covered this "story" - the ASA should not be involved.

5. This is a good use of the ASA's resources. If you want to use our unique talents and perspectives on public policy issues, I can give you a dozen issues to analyze off the top of my head with far more long lasting import than a Trump tweet.

6. Finally, I wish that the ASA would not get involved in politics and pretend to speak for me or other members. If I want a political organization to speak on my behalf, there are dozens I can join and fund. The ASA should concern itself with statistical issues.

Terry G. Meyer, Ph.D.

I sit on a School Improvement Team in our local school district as well as the PTA.  We get training on the difference between things that are 'political' and things that are 'partisan'.  We are told it's okay to be 'political' and to advocate for schools, teachers, and education.  However, it's not okay to be 'partisan' in doing so.  I like this distinction and it's an important one.

I'm in favor of defending statistics. Unfortunately, it's hard to avoid being political when every topic can be made political. ASA should not be partisan in their defense of statistics. My interpretation is that the letter was political -- the strong reactions (not the letter itself) were mostly partisan. Sure, we can debate the wording and context and intentions - but generally, people on this thread seem to agree that disclosing embargoed statistical information is not a good idea. Full stop.  












------------------------------
Rachael DiSantostefano
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 06-19-2018 17:34
From: Robert O''Brien
Subject: ASA's letter to the Washington Post concerning Trump's tweet

Even though Donald Trump is a noxious mediocrity it is important not to reflexively oppose/criticize everything he does so point taken. However, I believe it is appropriate for the ASA to touch on politics to a certain extent when we have politicians in the U.S. waging war on science.

------------------------------
Robert O'Brien

Original Message:
Sent: 06-18-2018 19:52
From: Terry Meyer
Subject: ASA's letter to the Washington Post concerning Trump's tweet

I am dismayed to learn that the ASA President and Executive Director sent a letter to the Washington Post on behalf of our organization. Several thoughts:

1. The hyperbole in the letter is unwarranted ("breach of trust", "disservice to our nation", "alarm", "protect the integrity of government statistics"). What happened? President Trump tweeted one hour before the official release of the employment numbers saying "Looking forward to seeing the employment numbers at 8:30 this morning". Doesn't seem like Armageddon or a massive violation of data integrity to me (although I agree he should not have done it).

2. The ASA was worried about "artificial market disruptions", as though there aren't dozens of firms trying to predict the jobs numbers every month for clients all over the world. Almost all of those predictions in this case were positive. Right now, several major econometric firms are predicting 2Q GDP growth at 4.5% to 4.8%. If Trump tweeted a similar vague positive message, would you be able to read his mind? Would you believe the growth to be 4.2% (he's trying to put a positive spin on numbers which though excellent fall short of predictions), 4.6% (he's just saying what everyone knows/assumes) or 5.2% (the actual is much better than the consensus forecast)? Would you like to bet on the information? More to the point, since EVERYONE gets the tweet, no one will have an informational advantage, will they? Every news story, every rumor, every guest who predicts something, every FOMC report, etc. would cause an "artificial market disruption" in the ASA's view. The markets absorb millions of pieces of data every day, many from sources claiming to have private information.

3. The ASA letter is blatantly partisan. There was no strong letter by the ASA to the Washington Post in 2009 when President Obama DID EXACTLY THE SAME THING  20 hours (not 1 hour) before the data release. (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-obama-economy-jobs-sb/obama-another-dismal-jobs-report-is-likely-idUSTRE5145P720090205 ). Where was the ASA's concern about data integrity or artificial market disruption then? Was it because one statement/tweet was by Trump, the other by Obama?

4. This is not about "data integrity' or any other red herring. There is no statistical issue involved at all. It is blatant partisan politics thinly disguised behind some ethical or methodological concern. Having written to the Washington Post and put the ASA bias on display for everyone to see, we label ourselves as a political organization. Further, by the hyperbole, the ASA discredits itself as just another partisan lobbying group. Very disheartening to someone who wants to belong to an organization respected for its professionalism. The business news media covered this "story" - the ASA should not be involved.

5. This is a good use of the ASA's resources. If you want to use our unique talents and perspectives on public policy issues, I can give you a dozen issues to analyze off the top of my head with far more long lasting import than a Trump tweet.

6. Finally, I wish that the ASA would not get involved in politics and pretend to speak for me or other members. If I want a political organization to speak on my behalf, there are dozens I can join and fund. The ASA should concern itself with statistical issues.

Terry G. Meyer, Ph.D.

Saying that Donald Trump is a “noxious mediocrity” is a tell. One can find examples of professional bodies that have become infected with and degraded by politics. It would be nice if the ASA would remain above that kind of fray.

Sent from my iPhone


Original Message------

Even though Donald Trump is a noxious mediocrity it is important not to reflexively oppose/criticize everything he does so point taken. However, I believe it is appropriate for the ASA to touch on politics to a certain extent when we have politicians in the U.S. waging war on science.

------------------------------
Robert O'Brien
------------------------------

Original Message------

Saying that Donald Trump is a “noxious mediocrity” is a tell. One can find examples of professional bodies that have become infected with and degraded by politics. It would be nice if the ASA would remain above that kind of fray.

Sent from my iPhone

​The tweet that Trump sent an hour before the release of the jobs numbers is analogous to the CEO of a pharma company sending a tweet that he was looking forward to the results of a confirmatory trial an hour before those results are released.  Would that be appropriate?  Would it signal information to the market?  Would it show integrity?  I think the answers are no, yes, and no, respectively.  This isn't about partisanship, and it's not about politics.  It's about ethics and intelligence, two crucial components of integrity.  Sadly, neither were in evidence in his tweet.

------------------------------
R. Suzanne Swann
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 06-19-2018 17:34
From: Robert O''Brien
Subject: ASA's letter to the Washington Post concerning Trump's tweet

Even though Donald Trump is a noxious mediocrity it is important not to reflexively oppose/criticize everything he does so point taken. However, I believe it is appropriate for the ASA to touch on politics to a certain extent when we have politicians in the U.S. waging war on science.

------------------------------
Robert O'Brien

Original Message:
Sent: 06-18-2018 19:52
From: Terry Meyer
Subject: ASA's letter to the Washington Post concerning Trump's tweet

I am dismayed to learn that the ASA President and Executive Director sent a letter to the Washington Post on behalf of our organization. Several thoughts:

1. The hyperbole in the letter is unwarranted ("breach of trust", "disservice to our nation", "alarm", "protect the integrity of government statistics"). What happened? President Trump tweeted one hour before the official release of the employment numbers saying "Looking forward to seeing the employment numbers at 8:30 this morning". Doesn't seem like Armageddon or a massive violation of data integrity to me (although I agree he should not have done it).

2. The ASA was worried about "artificial market disruptions", as though there aren't dozens of firms trying to predict the jobs numbers every month for clients all over the world. Almost all of those predictions in this case were positive. Right now, several major econometric firms are predicting 2Q GDP growth at 4.5% to 4.8%. If Trump tweeted a similar vague positive message, would you be able to read his mind? Would you believe the growth to be 4.2% (he's trying to put a positive spin on numbers which though excellent fall short of predictions), 4.6% (he's just saying what everyone knows/assumes) or 5.2% (the actual is much better than the consensus forecast)? Would you like to bet on the information? More to the point, since EVERYONE gets the tweet, no one will have an informational advantage, will they? Every news story, every rumor, every guest who predicts something, every FOMC report, etc. would cause an "artificial market disruption" in the ASA's view. The markets absorb millions of pieces of data every day, many from sources claiming to have private information.

3. The ASA letter is blatantly partisan. There was no strong letter by the ASA to the Washington Post in 2009 when President Obama DID EXACTLY THE SAME THING  20 hours (not 1 hour) before the data release. (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-obama-economy-jobs-sb/obama-another-dismal-jobs-report-is-likely-idUSTRE5145P720090205 ). Where was the ASA's concern about data integrity or artificial market disruption then? Was it because one statement/tweet was by Trump, the other by Obama?

4. This is not about "data integrity' or any other red herring. There is no statistical issue involved at all. It is blatant partisan politics thinly disguised behind some ethical or methodological concern. Having written to the Washington Post and put the ASA bias on display for everyone to see, we label ourselves as a political organization. Further, by the hyperbole, the ASA discredits itself as just another partisan lobbying group. Very disheartening to someone who wants to belong to an organization respected for its professionalism. The business news media covered this "story" - the ASA should not be involved.

5. This is a good use of the ASA's resources. If you want to use our unique talents and perspectives on public policy issues, I can give you a dozen issues to analyze off the top of my head with far more long lasting import than a Trump tweet.

6. Finally, I wish that the ASA would not get involved in politics and pretend to speak for me or other members. If I want a political organization to speak on my behalf, there are dozens I can join and fund. The ASA should concern itself with statistical issues.

Terry G. Meyer, Ph.D.

I completely agree with Terry Meyer on this subject of political statements by ASA officials presuming to speak for the entire organization. I could not have said it better. I am not sure I could have been so polite as he.

Dennis Robbins


Original Message------

I am dismayed to learn that the ASA President and Executive Director sent a letter to the Washington Post on behalf of our organization. Several thoughts:

1. The hyperbole in the letter is unwarranted ("breach of trust", "disservice to our nation", "alarm", "protect the integrity of government statistics"). What happened? President Trump tweeted one hour before the official release of the employment numbers saying "Looking forward to seeing the employment numbers at 8:30 this morning". Doesn't seem like Armageddon or a massive violation of data integrity to me (although I agree he should not have done it).

2. The ASA was worried about "artificial market disruptions", as though there aren't dozens of firms trying to predict the jobs numbers every month for clients all over the world. Almost all of those predictions in this case were positive. Right now, several major econometric firms are predicting 2Q GDP growth at 4.5% to 4.8%. If Trump tweeted a similar vague positive message, would you be able to read his mind? Would you believe the growth to be 4.2% (he's trying to put a positive spin on numbers which though excellent fall short of predictions), 4.6% (he's just saying what everyone knows/assumes) or 5.2% (the actual is much better than the consensus forecast)? Would you like to bet on the information? More to the point, since EVERYONE gets the tweet, no one will have an informational advantage, will they? Every news story, every rumor, every guest who predicts something, every FOMC report, etc. would cause an "artificial market disruption" in the ASA's view. The markets absorb millions of pieces of data every day, many from sources claiming to have private information.

3. The ASA letter is blatantly partisan. There was no strong letter by the ASA to the Washington Post in 2009 when President Obama DID EXACTLY THE SAME THING  20 hours (not 1 hour) before the data release. (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-obama-economy-jobs-sb/obama-another-dismal-jobs-report-is-likely-idUSTRE5145P720090205 ). Where was the ASA's concern about data integrity or artificial market disruption then? Was it because one statement/tweet was by Trump, the other by Obama?

4. This is not about "data integrity' or any other red herring. There is no statistical issue involved at all. It is blatant partisan politics thinly disguised behind some ethical or methodological concern. Having written to the Washington Post and put the ASA bias on display for everyone to see, we label ourselves as a political organization. Further, by the hyperbole, the ASA discredits itself as just another partisan lobbying group. Very disheartening to someone who wants to belong to an organization respected for its professionalism. The business news media covered this "story" - the ASA should not be involved.

5. This is a good use of the ASA's resources. If you want to use our unique talents and perspectives on public policy issues, I can give you a dozen issues to analyze off the top of my head with far more long lasting import than a Trump tweet.

6. Finally, I wish that the ASA would not get involved in politics and pretend to speak for me or other members. If I want a political organization to speak on my behalf, there are dozens I can join and fund. The ASA should concern itself with statistical issues.

Terry G. Meyer, Ph.D.

I agree with Terry and other members concerned with ASA's letter.  I like participating in political discussions but NOT in the context of a professional organization such as ASA.  I did not like people telling me that because I am female I must vote for H. Clinton (whether I did or not) nor do I like anyone representing themselves on my behalf either individual or as a function of membership of a group without my consent.  Please remember members of ASA are from diverse backgrounds, belief systems, and political orientations among other types of groups.  It is NOT appropriate for leadership of ASA to 'speak' for the group. Keep it professional and focused on stats, not politics.

------------------------------
Melinda Hess, PhD
Associate Professor
Gallaudet University
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 06-19-2018 17:38
From: Dennis Robbins
Subject: ASA's letter to the Washington Post concerning Trump's tweet

I completely agree with Terry Meyer on this subject of political statements by ASA officials presuming to speak for the entire organization. I could not have said it better. I am not sure I could have been so polite as he.

Dennis Robbins


Original Message------

I am dismayed to learn that the ASA President and Executive Director sent a letter to the Washington Post on behalf of our organization. Several thoughts:

1. The hyperbole in the letter is unwarranted ("breach of trust", "disservice to our nation", "alarm", "protect the integrity of government statistics"). What happened? President Trump tweeted one hour before the official release of the employment numbers saying "Looking forward to seeing the employment numbers at 8:30 this morning". Doesn't seem like Armageddon or a massive violation of data integrity to me (although I agree he should not have done it).

2. The ASA was worried about "artificial market disruptions", as though there aren't dozens of firms trying to predict the jobs numbers every month for clients all over the world. Almost all of those predictions in this case were positive. Right now, several major econometric firms are predicting 2Q GDP growth at 4.5% to 4.8%. If Trump tweeted a similar vague positive message, would you be able to read his mind? Would you believe the growth to be 4.2% (he's trying to put a positive spin on numbers which though excellent fall short of predictions), 4.6% (he's just saying what everyone knows/assumes) or 5.2% (the actual is much better than the consensus forecast)? Would you like to bet on the information? More to the point, since EVERYONE gets the tweet, no one will have an informational advantage, will they? Every news story, every rumor, every guest who predicts something, every FOMC report, etc. would cause an "artificial market disruption" in the ASA's view. The markets absorb millions of pieces of data every day, many from sources claiming to have private information.

3. The ASA letter is blatantly partisan. There was no strong letter by the ASA to the Washington Post in 2009 when President Obama DID EXACTLY THE SAME THING  20 hours (not 1 hour) before the data release. (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-obama-economy-jobs-sb/obama-another-dismal-jobs-report-is-likely-idUSTRE5145P720090205 ). Where was the ASA's concern about data integrity or artificial market disruption then? Was it because one statement/tweet was by Trump, the other by Obama?

4. This is not about "data integrity' or any other red herring. There is no statistical issue involved at all. It is blatant partisan politics thinly disguised behind some ethical or methodological concern. Having written to the Washington Post and put the ASA bias on display for everyone to see, we label ourselves as a political organization. Further, by the hyperbole, the ASA discredits itself as just another partisan lobbying group. Very disheartening to someone who wants to belong to an organization respected for its professionalism. The business news media covered this "story" - the ASA should not be involved.

5. This is a good use of the ASA's resources. If you want to use our unique talents and perspectives on public policy issues, I can give you a dozen issues to analyze off the top of my head with far more long lasting import than a Trump tweet.

6. Finally, I wish that the ASA would not get involved in politics and pretend to speak for me or other members. If I want a political organization to speak on my behalf, there are dozens I can join and fund. The ASA should concern itself with statistical issues.

Terry G. Meyer, Ph.D.

Original Message------

I am dismayed to learn that the ASA President and Executive Director sent a letter to the Washington Post on behalf of our organization. Several thoughts:

1. The hyperbole in the letter is unwarranted ("breach of trust", "disservice to our nation", "alarm", "protect the integrity of government statistics"). What happened? President Trump tweeted one hour before the official release of the employment numbers saying "Looking forward to seeing the employment numbers at 8:30 this morning". Doesn't seem like Armageddon or a massive violation of data integrity to me (although I agree he should not have done it).

2. The ASA was worried about "artificial market disruptions", as though there aren't dozens of firms trying to predict the jobs numbers every month for clients all over the world. Almost all of those predictions in this case were positive. Right now, several major econometric firms are predicting 2Q GDP growth at 4.5% to 4.8%. If Trump tweeted a similar vague positive message, would you be able to read his mind? Would you believe the growth to be 4.2% (he's trying to put a positive spin on numbers which though excellent fall short of predictions), 4.6% (he's just saying what everyone knows/assumes) or 5.2% (the actual is much better than the consensus forecast)? Would you like to bet on the information? More to the point, since EVERYONE gets the tweet, no one will have an informational advantage, will they? Every news story, every rumor, every guest who predicts something, every FOMC report, etc. would cause an "artificial market disruption" in the ASA's view. The markets absorb millions of pieces of data every day, many from sources claiming to have private information.

3. The ASA letter is blatantly partisan. There was no strong letter by the ASA to the Washington Post in 2009 when President Obama DID EXACTLY THE SAME THING  20 hours (not 1 hour) before the data release. (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-obama-economy-jobs-sb/obama-another-dismal-jobs-report-is-likely-idUSTRE5145P720090205 ). Where was the ASA's concern about data integrity or artificial market disruption then? Was it because one statement/tweet was by Trump, the other by Obama?

4. This is not about "data integrity' or any other red herring. There is no statistical issue involved at all. It is blatant partisan politics thinly disguised behind some ethical or methodological concern. Having written to the Washington Post and put the ASA bias on display for everyone to see, we label ourselves as a political organization. Further, by the hyperbole, the ASA discredits itself as just another partisan lobbying group. Very disheartening to someone who wants to belong to an organization respected for its professionalism. The business news media covered this "story" - the ASA should not be involved.

5. This is a good use of the ASA's resources. If you want to use our unique talents and perspectives on public policy issues, I can give you a dozen issues to analyze off the top of my head with far more long lasting import than a Trump tweet.

6. Finally, I wish that the ASA would not get involved in politics and pretend to speak for me or other members. If I want a political organization to speak on my behalf, there are dozens I can join and fund. The ASA should concern itself with statistical issues.

Terry G. Meyer, Ph.D.

Original Message------

While I might not agree with Terry on political issues overall I share his concern about the downside of ASA entering the political fray.  I question what proportion of ASA members feel this particular issue is so egregious that it is worth the risk of ASA being perceived as a political operation to address it.  Frankly this is (relatively speaking) a pretty minor infraction to get upset about given some of the other things going on, but I digress...

For those of us who feel like we must speak up about political issues in a statistical context, please do! But we need to decide what the criteria are for the ASA banner to be flown in cases such as this one. I'd think we want a period of time for rank and file members to comment and vote on letters or statements such as this one. We might learn that this approach is overly restrictive and ultimately leads to the ASA never commenting on any issue that has even a tangential connection to politics.  If so, then we can form other statistically savvy organizations to advocate for the field on more politically sensitive issues, where we can self-select into those organizations based on political ideology.  It would be great to have some of those organizations, but that is not what I think the ASA should be. I do not consent to ASA leadership representing my political views without my approval or at least majority approval of the association.  

Thanks Terry for bringing this up.

Best,

Chris Franck

I am inclined to agree with Dr. Meyer here.

I would recommend reserving ASA objections and keeping our partisan powder dry to address very egregious behavior that fundamentally impacts the ability of scientists to do their work and the basic reliability of scientific data, behavior whose nature more resembles the Andreas Georgeiou prosecution.

While an ongoing study has separate issues, once a study and its report are final, when to publicize it is a management or political matter rather than a scientific one, and any mistiming issue do not impact the results’ fundamental scientific reliability or integrity. I think this means it’s not our issue.

Statisticians are sometimes criticized that we are stodgy people who can be more concerned about rituals and prerogatives than science or the public welfare. It would be unwise to do anything that might strengthen that criticism.

If the President wishes to be the center of attention and seeks to change past practices to enable him to be more so, it is not our job, as scientists or professionals, to challenge it. Our job is to make sure that whatever is released, whenever and by whomever, has reliability and integrity. It is in general for the public to decide whether attention-seeking behavior is consistent with the public interest or not, and we as scientists don’t really have any more to say on the matter than the public generally.

The last thing I would want to do would be to contribute to creating an impression that what’s really going on is we have competing desires, don’t like the spotlight taken away from us, and are cloaking these parochial desires in the garb of scientific integrity. Conduct which could have the effect of contributing to such an impression about us could significantly damage our claim to represent scientific integrity and the public interest. And we are living in a society where it is in many people’s interest to seek out any apparent flaw in us they can find.

For this reason, I believe that before speaking out on an issue as a profession, we need to be very, very confident that (a) it involves grave jeopardy to matters central to our mission, and (b) the risk of us being misconstrued otherwise is very low.

I don’t believe this issue meets either of these two criteria.

Jonathan Siegel
Associate Director Clinical Statistics

Sent from my iPhone


Original Message------

I am dismayed to learn that the ASA President and Executive Director sent a letter to the Washington Post on behalf of our organization. Several thoughts:

1. The hyperbole in the letter is unwarranted ("breach of trust", "disservice to our nation", "alarm", "protect the integrity of government statistics"). What happened? President Trump tweeted one hour before the official release of the employment numbers saying "Looking forward to seeing the employment numbers at 8:30 this morning". Doesn't seem like Armageddon or a massive violation of data integrity to me (although I agree he should not have done it).

2. The ASA was worried about "artificial market disruptions", as though there aren't dozens of firms trying to predict the jobs numbers every month for clients all over the world. Almost all of those predictions in this case were positive. Right now, several major econometric firms are predicting 2Q GDP growth at 4.5% to 4.8%. If Trump tweeted a similar vague positive message, would you be able to read his mind? Would you believe the growth to be 4.2% (he's trying to put a positive spin on numbers which though excellent fall short of predictions), 4.6% (he's just saying what everyone knows/assumes) or 5.2% (the actual is much better than the consensus forecast)? Would you like to bet on the information? More to the point, since EVERYONE gets the tweet, no one will have an informational advantage, will they? Every news story, every rumor, every guest who predicts something, every FOMC report, etc. would cause an "artificial market disruption" in the ASA's view. The markets absorb millions of pieces of data every day, many from sources claiming to have private information.

3. The ASA letter is blatantly partisan. There was no strong letter by the ASA to the Washington Post in 2009 when President Obama DID EXACTLY THE SAME THING  20 hours (not 1 hour) before the data release. (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-obama-economy-jobs-sb/obama-another-dismal-jobs-report-is-likely-idUSTRE5145P720090205 ). Where was the ASA's concern about data integrity or artificial market disruption then? Was it because one statement/tweet was by Trump, the other by Obama?

4. This is not about "data integrity' or any other red herring. There is no statistical issue involved at all. It is blatant partisan politics thinly disguised behind some ethical or methodological concern. Having written to the Washington Post and put the ASA bias on display for everyone to see, we label ourselves as a political organization. Further, by the hyperbole, the ASA discredits itself as just another partisan lobbying group. Very disheartening to someone who wants to belong to an organization respected for its professionalism. The business news media covered this "story" - the ASA should not be involved.

5. This is a good use of the ASA's resources. If you want to use our unique talents and perspectives on public policy issues, I can give you a dozen issues to analyze off the top of my head with far more long lasting import than a Trump tweet.

6. Finally, I wish that the ASA would not get involved in politics and pretend to speak for me or other members. If I want a political organization to speak on my behalf, there are dozens I can join and fund. The ASA should concern itself with statistical issues.

Terry G. Meyer, Ph.D.

If I understand this correctly, Trump's tweet potentially caused some 'Information Asymmetry' for one hour potentially altering some stock market transactions which, while unethical, is not a statistical issue per se. Sounds more like an economics or finance problem to me.

------------------------------
Matthew Robinson
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 06-20-2018 23:08
From: Jonathan Siegel
Subject: ASA's letter to the Washington Post concerning Trump's tweet

I am inclined to agree with Dr. Meyer here.

I would recommend reserving ASA objections and keeping our partisan powder dry to address very egregious behavior that fundamentally impacts the ability of scientists to do their work and the basic reliability of scientific data, behavior whose nature more resembles the Andreas Georgeiou prosecution.

While an ongoing study has separate issues, once a study and its report are final, when to publicize it is a management or political matter rather than a scientific one, and any mistiming issue do not impact the results' fundamental scientific reliability or integrity. I think this means it's not our issue.

Statisticians are sometimes criticized that we are stodgy people who can be more concerned about rituals and prerogatives than science or the public welfare. It would be unwise to do anything that might strengthen that criticism.

If the President wishes to be the center of attention and seeks to change past practices to enable him to be more so, it is not our job, as scientists or professionals, to challenge it. Our job is to make sure that whatever is released, whenever and by whomever, has reliability and integrity. It is in general for the public to decide whether attention-seeking behavior is consistent with the public interest or not, and we as scientists don't really have any more to say on the matter than the public generally.

The last thing I would want to do would be to contribute to creating an impression that what's really going on is we have competing desires, don't like the spotlight taken away from us, and are cloaking these parochial desires in the garb of scientific integrity. Conduct which could have the effect of contributing to such an impression about us could significantly damage our claim to represent scientific integrity and the public interest. And we are living in a society where it is in many people's interest to seek out any apparent flaw in us they can find.

For this reason, I believe that before speaking out on an issue as a profession, we need to be very, very confident that (a) it involves grave jeopardy to matters central to our mission, and (b) the risk of us being misconstrued otherwise is very low.

I don't believe this issue meets either of these two criteria.

Jonathan Siegel
Associate Director Clinical Statistics

Sent from my iPhone


Original Message------

I am dismayed to learn that the ASA President and Executive Director sent a letter to the Washington Post on behalf of our organization. Several thoughts:

1. The hyperbole in the letter is unwarranted ("breach of trust", "disservice to our nation", "alarm", "protect the integrity of government statistics"). What happened? President Trump tweeted one hour before the official release of the employment numbers saying "Looking forward to seeing the employment numbers at 8:30 this morning". Doesn't seem like Armageddon or a massive violation of data integrity to me (although I agree he should not have done it).

2. The ASA was worried about "artificial market disruptions", as though there aren't dozens of firms trying to predict the jobs numbers every month for clients all over the world. Almost all of those predictions in this case were positive. Right now, several major econometric firms are predicting 2Q GDP growth at 4.5% to 4.8%. If Trump tweeted a similar vague positive message, would you be able to read his mind? Would you believe the growth to be 4.2% (he's trying to put a positive spin on numbers which though excellent fall short of predictions), 4.6% (he's just saying what everyone knows/assumes) or 5.2% (the actual is much better than the consensus forecast)? Would you like to bet on the information? More to the point, since EVERYONE gets the tweet, no one will have an informational advantage, will they? Every news story, every rumor, every guest who predicts something, every FOMC report, etc. would cause an "artificial market disruption" in the ASA's view. The markets absorb millions of pieces of data every day, many from sources claiming to have private information.

3. The ASA letter is blatantly partisan. There was no strong letter by the ASA to the Washington Post in 2009 when President Obama DID EXACTLY THE SAME THING  20 hours (not 1 hour) before the data release. (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-obama-economy-jobs-sb/obama-another-dismal-jobs-report-is-likely-idUSTRE5145P720090205 ). Where was the ASA's concern about data integrity or artificial market disruption then? Was it because one statement/tweet was by Trump, the other by Obama?

4. This is not about "data integrity' or any other red herring. There is no statistical issue involved at all. It is blatant partisan politics thinly disguised behind some ethical or methodological concern. Having written to the Washington Post and put the ASA bias on display for everyone to see, we label ourselves as a political organization. Further, by the hyperbole, the ASA discredits itself as just another partisan lobbying group. Very disheartening to someone who wants to belong to an organization respected for its professionalism. The business news media covered this "story" - the ASA should not be involved.

5. This is a good use of the ASA's resources. If you want to use our unique talents and perspectives on public policy issues, I can give you a dozen issues to analyze off the top of my head with far more long lasting import than a Trump tweet.

6. Finally, I wish that the ASA would not get involved in politics and pretend to speak for me or other members. If I want a political organization to speak on my behalf, there are dozens I can join and fund. The ASA should concern itself with statistical issues.

Terry G. Meyer, Ph.D.

Because of Trump's tweet, everyone may have different views and opinions on the same issue. I do not know why our CEO and president wrote a letter to the Washington Post.

I believe that they had certain reasons for doing this.Similarly, I do not know what the purpose of the Trump's Twitter is.  Maybe he is happy with the number; maybe he wants to push economic development; Maybe...... I am just guessing. I don't think I have enough evidences to judge it.

How to judge a point is right or wrong. For our professional background, we are used to making  statistical reference based on sample size, statistical method, empirical adjustment and so on.  However, the future is still the future. 

"Boast not thyself of tomorrow; for thou knowest not what a day may bring forth." How can we make sure it is a breach of trust and a disservice to our nation, adding "[A]dvance indications about such data can create Artificial market disruptions." ?

Therefore, however well we forecast, we are still left with the certain knowledge that we cannot eliminate all uncertainty. Because of human factors, there will always be certain deviations from reality. This is why we keep working hard and hope can discover some new things.

------------------------------
Josy
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 06-18-2018 19:52
From: Terry Meyer
Subject: ASA's letter to the Washington Post concerning Trump's tweet

I am dismayed to learn that the ASA President and Executive Director sent a letter to the Washington Post on behalf of our organization. Several thoughts:

1. The hyperbole in the letter is unwarranted ("breach of trust", "disservice to our nation", "alarm", "protect the integrity of government statistics"). What happened? President Trump tweeted one hour before the official release of the employment numbers saying "Looking forward to seeing the employment numbers at 8:30 this morning". Doesn't seem like Armageddon or a massive violation of data integrity to me (although I agree he should not have done it).

2. The ASA was worried about "artificial market disruptions", as though there aren't dozens of firms trying to predict the jobs numbers every month for clients all over the world. Almost all of those predictions in this case were positive. Right now, several major econometric firms are predicting 2Q GDP growth at 4.5% to 4.8%. If Trump tweeted a similar vague positive message, would you be able to read his mind? Would you believe the growth to be 4.2% (he's trying to put a positive spin on numbers which though excellent fall short of predictions), 4.6% (he's just saying what everyone knows/assumes) or 5.2% (the actual is much better than the consensus forecast)? Would you like to bet on the information? More to the point, since EVERYONE gets the tweet, no one will have an informational advantage, will they? Every news story, every rumor, every guest who predicts something, every FOMC report, etc. would cause an "artificial market disruption" in the ASA's view. The markets absorb millions of pieces of data every day, many from sources claiming to have private information.

3. The ASA letter is blatantly partisan. There was no strong letter by the ASA to the Washington Post in 2009 when President Obama DID EXACTLY THE SAME THING  20 hours (not 1 hour) before the data release. (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-obama-economy-jobs-sb/obama-another-dismal-jobs-report-is-likely-idUSTRE5145P720090205 ). Where was the ASA's concern about data integrity or artificial market disruption then? Was it because one statement/tweet was by Trump, the other by Obama?

4. This is not about "data integrity' or any other red herring. There is no statistical issue involved at all. It is blatant partisan politics thinly disguised behind some ethical or methodological concern. Having written to the Washington Post and put the ASA bias on display for everyone to see, we label ourselves as a political organization. Further, by the hyperbole, the ASA discredits itself as just another partisan lobbying group. Very disheartening to someone who wants to belong to an organization respected for its professionalism. The business news media covered this "story" - the ASA should not be involved.

5. This is a good use of the ASA's resources. If you want to use our unique talents and perspectives on public policy issues, I can give you a dozen issues to analyze off the top of my head with far more long lasting import than a Trump tweet.

6. Finally, I wish that the ASA would not get involved in politics and pretend to speak for me or other members. If I want a political organization to speak on my behalf, there are dozens I can join and fund. The ASA should concern itself with statistical issues.

Terry G. Meyer, Ph.D.

ASA leadership speaking in a partisan manner is distasteful to me and I would prefer they comment personally and not speak for our large organization in this way.

------------------------------
Paul Reed

------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 06-21-2018 17:47
From: Xi Zhou
Subject: ASA's letter to the Washington Post concerning Trump's tweet

Because of Trump's tweet, everyone may have different views and opinions on the same issue. I do not know why our CEO and president wrote a letter to the Washington Post.

I believe that they had certain reasons for doing this.Similarly, I do not know what the purpose of the Trump's Twitter is.  Maybe he is happy with the number; maybe he wants to push economic development; Maybe...... I am just guessing. I don't think I have enough evidences to judge it.

How to judge a point is right or wrong. For our professional background, we are used to making  statistical reference based on sample size, statistical method, empirical adjustment and so on.  However, the future is still the future. 

"Boast not thyself of tomorrow; for thou knowest not what a day may bring forth." How can we make sure it is a breach of trust and a disservice to our nation, adding "[A]dvance indications about such data can create Artificial market disruptions." ?

Therefore, however well we forecast, we are still left with the certain knowledge that we cannot eliminate all uncertainty. Because of human factors, there will always be certain deviations from reality. This is why we keep working hard and hope can discover some new things.

------------------------------
Josy

Original Message:
Sent: 06-18-2018 19:52
From: Terry Meyer
Subject: ASA's letter to the Washington Post concerning Trump's tweet

I am dismayed to learn that the ASA President and Executive Director sent a letter to the Washington Post on behalf of our organization. Several thoughts:

1. The hyperbole in the letter is unwarranted ("breach of trust", "disservice to our nation", "alarm", "protect the integrity of government statistics"). What happened? President Trump tweeted one hour before the official release of the employment numbers saying "Looking forward to seeing the employment numbers at 8:30 this morning". Doesn't seem like Armageddon or a massive violation of data integrity to me (although I agree he should not have done it).

2. The ASA was worried about "artificial market disruptions", as though there aren't dozens of firms trying to predict the jobs numbers every month for clients all over the world. Almost all of those predictions in this case were positive. Right now, several major econometric firms are predicting 2Q GDP growth at 4.5% to 4.8%. If Trump tweeted a similar vague positive message, would you be able to read his mind? Would you believe the growth to be 4.2% (he's trying to put a positive spin on numbers which though excellent fall short of predictions), 4.6% (he's just saying what everyone knows/assumes) or 5.2% (the actual is much better than the consensus forecast)? Would you like to bet on the information? More to the point, since EVERYONE gets the tweet, no one will have an informational advantage, will they? Every news story, every rumor, every guest who predicts something, every FOMC report, etc. would cause an "artificial market disruption" in the ASA's view. The markets absorb millions of pieces of data every day, many from sources claiming to have private information.

3. The ASA letter is blatantly partisan. There was no strong letter by the ASA to the Washington Post in 2009 when President Obama DID EXACTLY THE SAME THING  20 hours (not 1 hour) before the data release. (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-obama-economy-jobs-sb/obama-another-dismal-jobs-report-is-likely-idUSTRE5145P720090205 ). Where was the ASA's concern about data integrity or artificial market disruption then? Was it because one statement/tweet was by Trump, the other by Obama?

4. This is not about "data integrity' or any other red herring. There is no statistical issue involved at all. It is blatant partisan politics thinly disguised behind some ethical or methodological concern. Having written to the Washington Post and put the ASA bias on display for everyone to see, we label ourselves as a political organization. Further, by the hyperbole, the ASA discredits itself as just another partisan lobbying group. Very disheartening to someone who wants to belong to an organization respected for its professionalism. The business news media covered this "story" - the ASA should not be involved.

5. This is a good use of the ASA's resources. If you want to use our unique talents and perspectives on public policy issues, I can give you a dozen issues to analyze off the top of my head with far more long lasting import than a Trump tweet.

6. Finally, I wish that the ASA would not get involved in politics and pretend to speak for me or other members. If I want a political organization to speak on my behalf, there are dozens I can join and fund. The ASA should concern itself with statistical issues.

Terry G. Meyer, Ph.D.