Quite a job working out statistics

The National Bureau of Statistics has stopped releasing youth jobless figures. A spokesman defended the decision, citing a need to review how age-group specific breakdowns may be measured with a view to improving the way these numbers are computed.

Does that make good sense?

There is probably a need to review how the numbers may be counted after the calculation produced the record-high figure of 21.3 percent - showing that more than one in five mainlanders in the 16-24 age group were jobless in June.

The finding stunned not only mainlanders but also foreign observers.

However, even this astonishing estimate was deemed too conservative by Peking University associate professor Zhang Dandan.

After considering young people excluded from calculation by the bureau, he estimated that the unemployment rate of young mainlanders could be as high as 46.5 percent.

Not surprisingly, Zhang's estimate was quickly erased from social media platforms thanks to the highly efficient censorship regimes in place.

A 46.5 pecent figure would be a world record for such a colossal economy as China.

But Zhang's contradiction of the official statistics did help bring up a long-standing concern over the reliability of mainland official data.

In the past, the National Bureau of Statistics released the unemployment rates for the16-24 and 25-59 age groups.

Its decision to stop publishing these age-group specific breakdowns with immediate effect may be a genuine attempt to improve the reliability of government figures.

The puzzling question is: if the statisticians were uncertain about the employment situations of those within the 16-24 and 25-59 age groups, how was it possible for them to arrive at the conclusion that the nation's overall unemployment for July rose slightly to 5.3 percent from June?

Were they also trying to tell us that even the 5.3 percent could be anything but solid?

Perhaps by keeping youth unemployment figures from public view, party cadres tasked to solve the country's widespread unemployment could at least be confident that they would unlikely be confronted by another embarrassing incident similar to the one brought up by a Peking University academic.

The irony is: Zhang's eye-popping estimate was by no means absolute as it could also be wrong.

Had the bureau also made a genuine attempt to dispute it with sound scientific data rather than multiple definitions of employment and unemployment, it could have readily dismissed Zhang's bone-chilling estimate.

The problem is that it has not attempted to do so. Instead, it has decided to keep these essential figures for official eyes only.

Perhaps it offers them the easiest escape from the dilemma, assuming that - as long as it is not announced - nobody can be said to be unemployed.

And figures become "genuine."

In the mainland, figures are often considered sensitive.

In the wake of the storms that devastated Beijing and surrounding provinces, President Xi Jinping admitted there were "heavy casualties" in the capital and surrounding regions.

Then, state media reported at least 20 people were killed and 19 were issing.

Mainland figures were always supposed to be "true" - unless otherwise, that is.