Though both groups of headlines are true, the second set of headlines is a more accurate representation of the truth. Another truthful framing would be to break it down by a yearly average -- which comes out to be just under $56,000 if you’re counting from 1985 and 2019, or roughly $80,000 per year if you’re looking at this from the perspective of the years between her first (1985) and final (2009) listed case.

How journalists represent data can affect what audiences take away from their work.

In 1983’s Return of the Jedi, Luke Skywalker confronts Obi-Wan Kenobi about his father. Obi-Wan told Luke that Darth Vader killed his father, when in fact, Darth Vader was his father. Faced with his own misdirection, Obi-Wan responded, “What I told you was true, from a certain point of view. … You’re going to find that many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on our own point of view.”

The same is true of how we receive information in the real world. Headlines touting Warren’s $1.9 million earnings without additional context are almost certainly meant to evoke a sense of shock in readers. Noting the average of $80,000 per year -- or $56,000 per year -- just doesn’t have the same ring to it and is much less sensational.

There’s a reason Lotto and Powerball jackpots list the largest possible number a grand prize winner could theoretically get (the Powerball jackpot is currently $140 million) if they choose to receive payments over a span of 29 years, even though the most someone can possibly get in a single payment is significantly less ($95.4 million). There’s a reason gas stations charge $2.499 per gallon instead of $2.50 or a retailer sells a couch for $499 rather than $500.

When similar concepts are applied to the world of news, it’s called “spin.” Politicians palter all the time, and it’s their hope that journalists will unquestionably accept the framing they’re given, even if it’s misleading. One major example of such spinning came in 2017 and 2018 when Republicans were trying to move their health care bills through Congress. Though their bills all weakened the pre-existing conditions protections provided under current law, the party claimed that House Republicans wanted “to ensure Americans with pre-existing conditions are protected.” This was a claim that, while technically true in a twisted way that would make Obi-Wan proud, didn’t hold up to scrutiny. As the New York Times wrote: