I suspect this course is teaching you how to do this type of deconstruction rather than to provide examples that are entertaining or controversial. Teach a person to fish, etc.
Have a look at case studies. Opinions, anecdotal evidence, no sources. There is not even basic fact checking on their sources (they just took a number from Fox News and ran with it).
And I am not sure what to expect from a statistical course build around TED Talks, blog posts and NY Times articles. With chapters named like "The natural ecology of bullshit"...
> (they just took a number from Fox News and ran with it).
I don't know what you think that case study was about, but it isn't about whether the number was true or not. It is about whether that number represents something that is in line with the point of the article.
> And I am not sure what to expect from a statistical course build around TED Talks, blog posts and NY Times articles.
I wouldn't either, but it isn't a statistical course and it isn't build around TED Talks.
It is not about learning what they are saying in a TED Talk, but about dissecting the TED Talk and understanding why you shouldn't just accept the content of it.
And I am not sure what to expect from a statistical course build around TED Talks, blog posts and NY Times articles. With chapters named like "The natural ecology of bullshit"...