I always find myself wondering how phone polls can really be very representative of the average American, because almost everyone I know is in the habit of screening their calls pretty strictly. Two decades of constantly getting unwanted telemarketing calls, & some dodging debt collectors, means most reasonable people aren’t answering calls from numbers they don’t recognize.
The people still answering a random phone call might be desperately lonely and bored, and/or lack the basic reasoning skills that have EVERYONE ELSE screening their calls.
Crystal, or are expecting calls, e.g., from health care facilities that call from unknown numbers. Unfortunately that has become a regular occurrence for us. I don’t know how common that is, but I think more common as we age. I agree that telephone polls are not really valid, but maybe not for the reason you cite.
Ike: what good and authentic is a poll taken exclusively by telephone today which concludes that young voters have abandoned Biden? And with a MOE of 4.8?
So here's a question. How do we go about bending the media coverage so that this election is not covered like any other "normal" election? The participants are not equal - one is the president of the country and the other is under civil and criminal clouds the likes of which we have never seen. So given we Democrats don't have our own version of Fox to propogandise 24 hours a day we are at the mercy of NBC, CBS and ABC national outlets to draw the distinction between Biden and Trump and quite frankly that sure as hell is not being done. Any ideas on how to positively change this current situation would be appreciated.
For a more technical and detailed analysis of the Times’ polls, see the always excellent Michael Podhorzer, Weekend Reading, Mad Poll Disease Redux. Michael makes many points about the NYTimes poll I wish I had made. His central thesis is this: “All horse race polling is worse than useless. For one thing, polls simply aren’t accurate enough to predict close races.” Michael explains his thesis in detail. I highly recommend his article.
I was glad to see Michael take the media to task for normalizing Trump. He writes:
I’d like to ask members of the media this question directly: If Trump wins—and if he fulfills any of his long list of deranged promises, some of which involve breaking America beyond repair—how do you think history will judge how you covered this election? [¶¶]
The media needs to decide whether they are covering this election as if it’s an election like any other, or the election that will decide whether the MAGA movement succeeds in ending American democracy.
Pollsters' are giving their corporate news customers precisely what they want, i.e., the "four ways in which the regular drumbeat of horse race surveys from the most respected media institutions is changing the course of events by making news instead of reporting it."
Look. I don’t answer polls no matter what their source purports to be. The first time one phones me, long before I could see an id for the caller, I just didn’t trust it was legit in my terms. So I politely said no thank you. And when I first received snail mailed polls from organizations I donated to or the DNC which knew I was a registered Democrat and tried to be a “good citizen” by working my
(Continued) way through it I eventually came to some either or questions I couldn’t honestly decide on as they were false equivalecies for me or a master list to rank which I couldn’t figure out how to rank I always gave up and recycled it. So now I just trash anything that’s supsed to be a poll before reading it because I think it’s not worth my time. So if a significant number of people with my opinions or world view do the same we aren’t represented in polls even from organizations we suppport. When doing this I usually think I’m not being a “good” citizen. But since for me it’s virtually impossible to respond honestly to most polls because of what or how they ask it’s better to decline.
Can you tie the media's motivations here to commercial incentives? Does horse-race coverage -- or any type of political reporting that treats elections as sporting events -- drive higher ratings/readership and therefore revenues for these outlets?
I always find myself wondering how phone polls can really be very representative of the average American, because almost everyone I know is in the habit of screening their calls pretty strictly. Two decades of constantly getting unwanted telemarketing calls, & some dodging debt collectors, means most reasonable people aren’t answering calls from numbers they don’t recognize.
The people still answering a random phone call might be desperately lonely and bored, and/or lack the basic reasoning skills that have EVERYONE ELSE screening their calls.
Crystal, or are expecting calls, e.g., from health care facilities that call from unknown numbers. Unfortunately that has become a regular occurrence for us. I don’t know how common that is, but I think more common as we age. I agree that telephone polls are not really valid, but maybe not for the reason you cite.
Ike: what good and authentic is a poll taken exclusively by telephone today which concludes that young voters have abandoned Biden? And with a MOE of 4.8?
So here's a question. How do we go about bending the media coverage so that this election is not covered like any other "normal" election? The participants are not equal - one is the president of the country and the other is under civil and criminal clouds the likes of which we have never seen. So given we Democrats don't have our own version of Fox to propogandise 24 hours a day we are at the mercy of NBC, CBS and ABC national outlets to draw the distinction between Biden and Trump and quite frankly that sure as hell is not being done. Any ideas on how to positively change this current situation would be appreciated.
Thanks - I think part of it is all of us being clear about what we expect; not be passive consumers of the news
This is incredible piece! I will forward it on to as many people as possible. Thank you.
Thank you!
Superb! I am recommending in my newsletter this evening. Keep up the good work!
Thank you!
Here is what I wrote:
For a more technical and detailed analysis of the Times’ polls, see the always excellent Michael Podhorzer, Weekend Reading, Mad Poll Disease Redux. Michael makes many points about the NYTimes poll I wish I had made. His central thesis is this: “All horse race polling is worse than useless. For one thing, polls simply aren’t accurate enough to predict close races.” Michael explains his thesis in detail. I highly recommend his article.
I was glad to see Michael take the media to task for normalizing Trump. He writes:
I’d like to ask members of the media this question directly: If Trump wins—and if he fulfills any of his long list of deranged promises, some of which involve breaking America beyond repair—how do you think history will judge how you covered this election? [¶¶]
The media needs to decide whether they are covering this election as if it’s an election like any other, or the election that will decide whether the MAGA movement succeeds in ending American democracy.
Well said! Indeed, I wish I had said that!
Pollsters' are giving their corporate news customers precisely what they want, i.e., the "four ways in which the regular drumbeat of horse race surveys from the most respected media institutions is changing the course of events by making news instead of reporting it."
Feature, not bug.
Look. I don’t answer polls no matter what their source purports to be. The first time one phones me, long before I could see an id for the caller, I just didn’t trust it was legit in my terms. So I politely said no thank you. And when I first received snail mailed polls from organizations I donated to or the DNC which knew I was a registered Democrat and tried to be a “good citizen” by working my
(Continued) way through it I eventually came to some either or questions I couldn’t honestly decide on as they were false equivalecies for me or a master list to rank which I couldn’t figure out how to rank I always gave up and recycled it. So now I just trash anything that’s supsed to be a poll before reading it because I think it’s not worth my time. So if a significant number of people with my opinions or world view do the same we aren’t represented in polls even from organizations we suppport. When doing this I usually think I’m not being a “good” citizen. But since for me it’s virtually impossible to respond honestly to most polls because of what or how they ask it’s better to decline.
Can you tie the media's motivations here to commercial incentives? Does horse-race coverage -- or any type of political reporting that treats elections as sporting events -- drive higher ratings/readership and therefore revenues for these outlets?
Yes - that's part of the problem - those stories get the most clicks
Commentary on making v reporting news is spot on. People are parroting the click bait without considering the conditions we are facing.