I love Statista and I use it a fair bit to find bits of data. I see lots of other people value it too, and will often include a chart and a link as the “source” of their data.
Is Statista really a “source” though?
They consolidate data from other sources. A lot of what I see referenced as “Statista” is easily traced to the organisation that did the research, invested the time and provides the context around the numbers. You will know this “primary source” if you paid for a subscription.
The primary source will give you far more than a freebie bar chart. You’ll understand more about what the research was trying to achieve. There will be insights from the authors. It may be placed into a wider context that adds greater value. A few times I’ve even seen the much-heralded bar chart contradicted.
Statista is a useful and powerful resource for finding data to support or inform your blogging. However, as a researcher looking to build credibility, you should look into the primary source.
It may mean a little more work, but you’ll demonstrate how you’re more than a cheap blogger using freebie screenshots.
All our businesses are hurting, but we can make it through this
Are you ready to survive a recession?
Statutory Sick Pay vs the minimum wage
Kid on a mobile phone
The UK’s “Economically Inactive” 8.5 million people
Forget “sales”: UK retail needs something better.
The annual pension review: turning bland into engaging