I appeal to everyone in the traffic safety community to identify misinformation, and do your best to refute it.  I am especially concerned by the rash of "X is as bad as Y" stories that some seem compelled to publish to support their newly discovered issues.  As an example, no doubt that "distractions from kids in the back seat" is a problem that young parents need to address.  But what is the benefit of stating that distractions from kids in the back seat is as bad a problem as DUI or texting?  What message does this carry to those who are inclined to text while driving or drive after drinking?  I expect: "I am not doing anything worse than those who drive with kids in the back seat."  How many lives is that going to save?  And the next time you see an article publicizing the "worst locations in the state," see if they considered crash severity or traffic volumes.  It could be that influencing local decision-makers to "fix" a relatively safe high volume location will divert money from locations that really need it, resulting in increased fatalities.  Such gimmicks do not promote progress, and it is up to responsible persons in the traffic safety community to insist on technical accuracy; if we don't, who will?