Reporting back again… We’ve checked the overall simulations and they check out when you use the summary data here (https://github.com/the-pudding/country-radio-

Reporting back again… We’ve checked the overall simulations and they check out when you use the summary data here (https://github.com/the-pudding/country-radio-data/blob/main/output/summary.csv https://github.com/the-pudding/country-radio-data/blob/main/...) for the total number of songs (total_COUNT) and the percentage of women’s songs (onlyWomenSongs_PERCENT) for each station. For San Antonio (KCYY-FM), that would mean that the total observed number of women’s back-to-back songs (64) is within the realm of possibilities across all 19 days if left up to chance. But, the observed number is on the low end of the overall distribution, with the majority of numbers landing between 70-100. I have been able to recreate this using sxp’s original Javascript. When we’re talking about a difference of say 20 songs (across 19 days) you can’t visually see it, which is why the single day example was a poor choice for communicating this, especially because San Antonio (KCYY-FM) is one of the “better” stations. We’ve removed the simulation section from the intro, made it clear what data the simulations use further into the story, and added a correction. Thank you again for keeping us honest.