The Mig Research study, presented in Warsaw and carried out by Michal Garapich of Krakow University, Poland, and Dorota Osipovic of University College, London, suggests the number of migrants staying permanently will be higher than previous estimates.So - higher than 25% eh? How much higher? We find this out earlier in the story, when the paper says:
Earlier this year, the Joseph Rowntree Foundation placed the figure for all Eastern Europeans planning to remain at 25 per cent.
Researchers found that 15 per cent of those who had arrived here since the expansion of the EU in 2004 had decided to remain for good.Eh? 15% is lower than 25%. How can the paper claim 15 is higher than 25? Here's how:
A further 30 per cent are thinking about staying for the rest of their lives.So, everyone who hasn't decided in fact have decided. And wouldn't you know it - they've all decided to stay! Give the psychics at the Daily Mail a pay rise for such accurate telepathy.
I haven't been able to find a copy of the actual MIG research, which is no surprise. If anyone else can, please give us a link in the comments. I suspect some mucking about with wording, since the Reuters release about this (covered almost word for word in the Scotmsan) there's a subtle difference in wording. It says:
30 percent have not made up their minds, a study showed on Wednesday.I strongly suspect that the study included an option for people who hadn't decided how long they were going to stay at all - not just whether they were going to stay permanently - so of the many options, they hadn't chosen one. Of course, I can't be sure, but even if we give the paper the benefit of the doubt and assume that the question was only about whether these people wanted to stay permanently, it's incredibly dishonest to count don't knows as definitely going to stay - or even planning to stay.
So we have another paint-by-the-numbers Daily Mail article on Eastern European migration. Exaggerated figures - check. Mention of the government's 13,000 prediction without mentioning that was relying on other EU countries placing no restrictions on migration - check. Plug for MigrationWatch - check. Referencing the paper's previous distortions - check.
I realise that at the moment this blog looks like one that's entirely about immigration. I never intended it to be that - I just wanted to examine all the different kinds of distortion that appear in the tabloids. It's just that immigration seems to be the thing that the Mail and other right wing tabloids distort and dissemble about most often and most blatantly. It's got to the point that I already know a Mail story's going to be an exaggerated distortion of the facts just by the fact that the headline mentions immigration. It took me minutes to find the distortions here. It's not even funny anymore.