By Attorney Ted Lagautan ESQ
Polls commissioned (read paid for) by politicians are about as credible as a straight - jacketed wacko who believes in purple unicorns. Politicians commission polls on the theory that if the results make them look good – the public’s sheep mentality kicks in. It’s an effective bandwagon effect tactic because there’s a lot of sheep out there.
In commissioned political surveys, the objective is to make the candidate look good. That’s why unfavorable survey results for commissioning politicians are as unlikely as snow in the Sahara. Pollsters can ensure a predetermined foreseeable result by simply custom designing the questions and selectively picking a target group of respondents to accomplish their purpose. Say – I ask 1200 Filipinos from General Santos: “Would you rather watch a Pacquiao fight or watch boring grandstanding senators on TV?” The answers are easily predictable. See? Thomas Mann of the highly respected independent Brookings Institute think tank: “When a group with an agenda releases a poll, you should not take it seriously. There’s ample opportunity in the design of questions to provide findings that are consistent with a group’s general orientation.”
Pollsters have perfected the art and science of manipulating outcomes. “Tell us what you want – we’ll deliver.” says one pollster. Yes they can - if the price is right.
Buying desired poll results is not quite as easy as buying a loaf of bread. In third world countries, there are few established polling companies. Politicos compete to get their services. The guy with the fat wallet usually wins.
A candidate commissioned survey is simply a more sophisticated form of marketing gimmickry - a con game on the public if you will. One pollster demystifies it: “We provide something better than advertising agencies - very effective advertising that does not look like advertising.”
But polling companies can also provide valuable data. They often engage in legitimate objective surveys which are commissioned or paid for – but where no hidden agendas are involved. For example, gov’t agencies might commission them to do demographic studies or to determine the incidence of certain diseases in particular areas. These objective surveys add to pollsters’ credibility and respectability. The more respectable, the higher price they command for politically instigated commissioned surveys.
Commissioning politicians should also not be faulted. Since polling companies are not regulated and commissioned polls are legal – they simply utilize this open opportunity. Given that commissioned polls or surveys mislead the public – should they be outlawed?
Here’s my take on the issue.
I don’t think commissioned polls should be outlawed. If conducted honestly with no cloaked agendas and the true purpose is fact finding – they can provide valuable data. Outlawing speech – whether written or oral – tends to create a prior restraint or inhibition on other kinds of constitutionally protected speech. Polls are a form of speech. In a free society, the expression and competition for all kinds of ideas should be given full encouragement and free rein so that the best ideas emerge to be absorbed by the citizenry - increasing the probability of implementation. Good for all.
However certain rules should be instituted - so that the use of commissioned surveys are not abused and used to mislead the citizenry. These rules relate to methodology, to changing realities and the interpretation of results. Aside from the results, polling companies should provide additional information as to: 1. Who commissioned or paid for the survey? 2. Which persons did the poll? 3. How they went about it? 4. What questions were asked, and in what order? 5. How large was the sample? (the larger, the more accurate) 6. How random was the sample? 7. When was the date of the sampling? 8. Were the questions conducted on the phone, the internet, by mail or in person?
This information should be made available online.
Polling companies have public responsibilities and ethical standards should apply. They should also advise the public that today’s voting preferences do not necessarily predict the future. They only reflect the respondents’ minds on the polling date. Preferences change. While these rules are not yet in place and enforceable – the best guideline for voters regarding commissioned surveys is to view these with skepticism. Instead, carefully study the issues and the candidates’ qualifications to be a responsible voter.
Two recent Philippine presidential polls were commissioned by the second leading candidate who was down by over 30 points. His commissioned poll results showed the gap closed to 13 points and then to only 8 points. Hmm….really?
Instead of spending millions to counter said candidates’ poll presentations – I respectfully suggest to the other poll-challenged candidates to simply reprint this article. Distribute as many as possible. It will inform and educate voters – help them to choose good leaders. You have my permission to do so – without charge. It’s a more effective counter strategy than costly commissioned polls. Donate some of your savings to hungry children maybe. Thanks.
----------o----------
The California State Bar officially certifies Ted Laguatan as an expert/specialist lawyer. He does immigration law, personal injury, complex litigation, medical malpractice and other cases. A magazine for lawyers rates him as being among the top 5 percent best lawyers in America. For communications: 455 Hickey Blvd., Ste.516, Daly City, CA 94015, Tel. (650) 991-1154, Fax (650)991-1186, 101 California St. Ste. 2450, SF, CA 94111 E-mail: laguatanlaw@gmail.com
Polls commissioned (read paid for) by politicians are about as credible as a straight - jacketed wacko who believes in purple unicorns. Politicians commission polls on the theory that if the results make them look good – the public’s sheep mentality kicks in. It’s an effective bandwagon effect tactic because there’s a lot of sheep out there.
In commissioned political surveys, the objective is to make the candidate look good. That’s why unfavorable survey results for commissioning politicians are as unlikely as snow in the Sahara. Pollsters can ensure a predetermined foreseeable result by simply custom designing the questions and selectively picking a target group of respondents to accomplish their purpose. Say – I ask 1200 Filipinos from General Santos: “Would you rather watch a Pacquiao fight or watch boring grandstanding senators on TV?” The answers are easily predictable. See? Thomas Mann of the highly respected independent Brookings Institute think tank: “When a group with an agenda releases a poll, you should not take it seriously. There’s ample opportunity in the design of questions to provide findings that are consistent with a group’s general orientation.”
Pollsters have perfected the art and science of manipulating outcomes. “Tell us what you want – we’ll deliver.” says one pollster. Yes they can - if the price is right.
Buying desired poll results is not quite as easy as buying a loaf of bread. In third world countries, there are few established polling companies. Politicos compete to get their services. The guy with the fat wallet usually wins.
A candidate commissioned survey is simply a more sophisticated form of marketing gimmickry - a con game on the public if you will. One pollster demystifies it: “We provide something better than advertising agencies - very effective advertising that does not look like advertising.”
But polling companies can also provide valuable data. They often engage in legitimate objective surveys which are commissioned or paid for – but where no hidden agendas are involved. For example, gov’t agencies might commission them to do demographic studies or to determine the incidence of certain diseases in particular areas. These objective surveys add to pollsters’ credibility and respectability. The more respectable, the higher price they command for politically instigated commissioned surveys.
Commissioning politicians should also not be faulted. Since polling companies are not regulated and commissioned polls are legal – they simply utilize this open opportunity. Given that commissioned polls or surveys mislead the public – should they be outlawed?
Here’s my take on the issue.
I don’t think commissioned polls should be outlawed. If conducted honestly with no cloaked agendas and the true purpose is fact finding – they can provide valuable data. Outlawing speech – whether written or oral – tends to create a prior restraint or inhibition on other kinds of constitutionally protected speech. Polls are a form of speech. In a free society, the expression and competition for all kinds of ideas should be given full encouragement and free rein so that the best ideas emerge to be absorbed by the citizenry - increasing the probability of implementation. Good for all.
However certain rules should be instituted - so that the use of commissioned surveys are not abused and used to mislead the citizenry. These rules relate to methodology, to changing realities and the interpretation of results. Aside from the results, polling companies should provide additional information as to: 1. Who commissioned or paid for the survey? 2. Which persons did the poll? 3. How they went about it? 4. What questions were asked, and in what order? 5. How large was the sample? (the larger, the more accurate) 6. How random was the sample? 7. When was the date of the sampling? 8. Were the questions conducted on the phone, the internet, by mail or in person?
This information should be made available online.
Polling companies have public responsibilities and ethical standards should apply. They should also advise the public that today’s voting preferences do not necessarily predict the future. They only reflect the respondents’ minds on the polling date. Preferences change. While these rules are not yet in place and enforceable – the best guideline for voters regarding commissioned surveys is to view these with skepticism. Instead, carefully study the issues and the candidates’ qualifications to be a responsible voter.
Two recent Philippine presidential polls were commissioned by the second leading candidate who was down by over 30 points. His commissioned poll results showed the gap closed to 13 points and then to only 8 points. Hmm….really?
Instead of spending millions to counter said candidates’ poll presentations – I respectfully suggest to the other poll-challenged candidates to simply reprint this article. Distribute as many as possible. It will inform and educate voters – help them to choose good leaders. You have my permission to do so – without charge. It’s a more effective counter strategy than costly commissioned polls. Donate some of your savings to hungry children maybe. Thanks.
----------o----------
The California State Bar officially certifies Ted Laguatan as an expert/specialist lawyer. He does immigration law, personal injury, complex litigation, medical malpractice and other cases. A magazine for lawyers rates him as being among the top 5 percent best lawyers in America. For communications: 455 Hickey Blvd., Ste.516, Daly City, CA 94015, Tel. (650) 991-1154, Fax (650)991-1186, 101 California St. Ste. 2450, SF, CA 94111 E-mail: laguatanlaw@gmail.com
No comments:
Post a Comment