By Thomas Kinsella

Statistics play a crucial role in newspaper reporting. However, when journalists get them wrong, they can skew their readerships’ understanding of important issues.

A bizarre example of misinterpreting statistics came when The Telegraph claimed that cyclists in London were travelling at speeds faster than ever recorded on a pedal bike and therefore causing grave danger to other road users. This was due to a misunderstanding of user-reported data on the website Strava. Whilst the story at first seems harmless it shows the ease with which newspapers carelessly misinterpret statistics and share them with their readership. In January of 2025 alone there have been two examples of significant statistical misunderstandings with substantial consequences.

The Sun: ‘Surge’ in grooming cases since 2016

The recent media and political interest in “grooming gang” cases in England has led to a wave of coverage surrounding the issue in the British press. Amongst this, there was an article published by the Sun that exemplifies the way in which statistics can be misreported.

On the 11^th of January, The Sun published an article on their website claiming there had been a “surge” in grooming cases since 2016 and went on to claim that the number of cases had increased by 550% in an eight-year period.

However, the article was based on an incorrect interpretation of ONS statistics by The Sun. In 2017 the Sexual Grooming classification was expanded to include a new offence that brought digital communications under the same umbrella. To compare the figures before and after the classification change was therefore not statistically sound, and the ONS confirmed in a statement to Full Fact that “these figures are not compatible”. The ONS has also previously made it clear that comparing police reporting statistics is not a “reliable measure of trends” as changes in policing methods, social attitudes and other factors can lead to changes in the reporting statistics.

The article has since been removed, but poor journalism has already done its damage. In reporting on statistics, especially around such sensitive topics, it is imperative that we can trust the press to accurately convey statistics and interpret them correctly. No mention of the article can be found on The Sun’s own “clarifications and corrections” page, and they will almost certainly avoid any sanction from IPSO. Until the press is properly regulated in the UK, we can expect to continue to see inaccurate reporting of statistics go unpunished.

The Telegraph: “1 in 12 in London is an illegal immigrant”

On the 22^nd of January, The Telegraph published a front-page article stating that “One in 12 in London is an illegal migrant”. This already constituted a dangerous lack of care in reporting as within the article they went on to make clear that this number was an upper estimate and could be significantly lower.

However, the statistic was also substantially wrong and misleading, the correct statistic is that up to 1 in 13 people in London may be an illegal immigrant. There were several issues with the method they had used to reach this conclusion. Firstly, this statistic is only correct when using the Thames Water service area as your definition of London, which unsurprisingly is not standard when reporting statistics relating to London. This resulted in London’s population being under one million less than the population number for London in the 2021 census. Secondly, the classification that they used to count the number of illegal immigrants included those with “leave to remain” who are therefore not illegally in the UK and would not commonly fall under the definition of “illegal immigrants”.

This claim went on to be repeated by numerous other publications and was even repeated on Sunday Morning Live without the qualifying “as many as”. Jonathan Portes did well to correct the record live on air, however, this example shows the danger of how incorrect statistics with no statistical backing can spread very quickly. Furthermore, the fact that this repetition on Sunday Morning Live came after the publication of corrections from the Telegraph (amongst others) shows the ineffectiveness of these methods. IPSO must act to ensure that publications face substantial sanctions when found to have spread inaccurate statistics.