A Fast Company report gives us a great example of a false-cause fallacy: "Uber Cures Leprosy."
The video pokes fun at Uber's claim that the service reduced the number of drunk driving incidents. Last year, Uber and MADD (Mothers Against Drunk Driving) announced a partnership that includes donations to the organization. However, a news release by MADD, although complimentary of Uber's service, doesn't imply causation:
"The report released today builds upon a study conducted by Uber in May 2014, which estimated that the entrance of Uber in Seattle coincided with a more than 10% reduction in the number of arrests for DUI. "
On the other hand, Uber's promotional materials do:
"A new report conducted in partnership with Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) reveals that when empowered with more transportation options like Uber, people are making better choices that save lives."
- Is this just a difference in semantics or something more?
- Is the Fast Company video too critical of Uber?
- What fallacy does the Fast Company reporter use in comparing Uber's claim to curing leprosy?