Writing Tip: When the numbers don’t add up, use words and comparisons

Most of us can’t visualize large numbers. Charts help. So do words.

Unless you’re the narcissistic billionaire in Silicon Valley, who says he “might as well be broke” when his savings dips to $986 million from over $1 billion and he is out of the “three comma club,” the difference between several hundred million and a billion dollars probably doesn’t carry a lot of weight for you.

Chris Diamantopoulos as Russ Hanneman in Silicon Valley

You may not care much about the difference between 95 tons of concrete and 100; 500 horsepower or 600; or 3,500 acres or 22,000.

This is a phenomenon called Integer Cognizance Limit. (Okay, I made up the term “Integer Cognizance Limit,” but it sounds enough like a real psychological phenomenon that maybe you’ll start using it.) There are a few ways to overcome Integer Cognizance Limit:

1. Strike the numbers from what you’re writing
2. Use a chart
3. Find a comparison that will help the reader/listener understand the difference between the two quantities

The first option likely won’t work because if you’re using numbers we’ll just assume you have to use them. The second option can be great. The company I work for specializes in taking complex data and economic policies and explaining them with charts. (See examples here.) But sometimes you can’t use charts, and sometimes words are just better.

When should you use comparisons for big numbers?

There is a simple test for determining whether the numbers you use need more context: Would your audience understand the value and or scope of the numbers you’re using, or are you trying to use the numbers to make a larger point?

AUDIENCE: Depending on your audience, comparisons may or may not be necessary if you’re using numbers to make a simple point. Readers of The Wall Street Journal are comfortable with large financial numbers while the readers of Town & Country might not be. For WSJ readers, merely saying Etsy is valued at about $1 billion is enough; for Town & Country readers you might need to say something like, “That means the online crafts bazaar is part of an elite group of startups called ‘unicorns’ in Silicon Valley parlance.”

Scrooge McDuck, swimming in his $$.

LARGER POINT: If you’re trying to make a larger point, to put a specific number in context outside its specific meaning, using a comparison is important. Writing about Goldman Sachs’s quarterly profit this week, the WSJ said simply that the bank earned $2.09 billion in profit. (For non-subscribers see this story in Yahoo News.) But when the WSJ learned that one Goldman Sachs trade earned $100 million they wrote an entire story about this rare event and called it a “windfall.”

What they didn’t do, but should have, is put that $100 million in context using a succinct comparison. The point they were trying to make is that earning $100 million is rare. While they quoted a lot of people making that point, they could’ve made it more memorable. Here’s one way:

One trader at Goldman Sachs made $100 million in the third quarter buying junk bonds or about five percent of the company’s entire profit. That means he’s the Tiger Woods of bond trading: Near the height of his career in 2007, Tiger Woods earned $11 million in tournament winnings, or about 4 percent of all the winnings on the PGA Tour for that year. On average, players made $1 million. (h/t Mac O'Brien)

Memorable Comparisons

There are two recent memorable examples of using comparisons to help put large numbers in context.

There have been thousands of stories about income inequality and thousands of stories about the salaries of executives, celebrities, and hedge fund managers. Annually, the media swarm around data called the “Rich List” about the amount of money earned by the top hedge fund managers.

In 2014, the 25 top hedge fund managers earned $21 billion. For any of them individually, that’s what I call buy-a-private-island money. But if you told me the top 25 hedge fund managers earned $10 billion, $5 billion, or heck even $500 million, I’d still think they’d entered the rarefied space of people who can buy a ticket to mars, own an island, and quit worrying about life for a while.

But what does their earnings say about income inequality? Enter Vox, which pointed out that the top 25 hedge fund managers earned more than twice as much as all the kindergarten teachers in America combined. That’s a number you can remember. The comparison was so good that when New York Times Paul Krugman wrote about the hedge fund managers, he repeated the comparison and cited Vox.

The Economist recently wrote about what is becoming a perennial issue and concern among economic observers: China’s housing situation. Because of the historical migration of Chinese people from the country to cities, China is struggling to ensure they have enough housing in the right place.

So how much housing does China need? The author could’ve merely used numbers and said China needs about 800 million square meters of new housing annually between now and 2030. Instead, the author helped the reader out with a great comparison:

“Fitch, a ratings agency, calculates that it will need about 800m square metres of new housing — roughly the size of Singapore — every year between now and 2030 to meet demand from people moving to cities and buying nicer homes.”

That’s a lot of housing.

Coming up with these comparisons isn’t easy, but doing so will elevate what you’re writing and make it easier for readers to understand the significance of your story.