"There's Lot More to Polls Than Just Numbers"

An occasional correspondent has an article in the Chicago Tribune, yesterday:

In early October 2004, Newsweek released a poll immediately after the first presidential debate, which showed a dramatic shift in public opinion in favor of John Kerry.

Did Kerry narrow the gap with his debate performance? Was he really the closer that many in the media had suggested he was? Newsweek was basing its headline "The Race is On" and accompanying story on a comparison between its two most recent polls. The problem, though, was that the polling data was inconsistent.

The October Newsweek poll sampled more Democrats than it did Republicans....

One could say that I give the media more credit than it deserves for its knowledge of polls, but a claim of ignorance is not a valid defense. One could make the argument that the media rely on their polling firms to conduct fair polls, and therefore do not feel compelled to delve into the background data.

But a lack of diligence is a cop-out and hypocritical because the media don't allow the same excuse for those they investigate.

Transparency is crucial if the media plan to market polls as truth.

To give credit to the pollsters, many are now releasing their data as links to companion articles on the Internet. It's a step forward.

However, none of the demographic breakdowns or shifts in these polls were mentioned in the news reports, and I suspect the reason for that is because the media never questioned the data to begin with.

As a result, the opportunity for honest debate was lost.

As a result, the opportunity for honest debate was lost? Gee. You don't suppose that was the whole purpose, do you, Faithful Reader?

Lane Core Jr. CIW P — Mon. 05/23/05 08:03:02 AM
Categorized as Media.