Oh, what fun and games I have been unable to put up as comments today. You've been rumbled, opinion pollsters. You know what you are being paid to produce, and you produce it. Very effectively from the point of view of those paying you, it must be said. So you could at least come clean and admit it. After all, you are very good at your job. Which is not to measure public opinion, but to influence it.
You are also, it must be said, very good at protecting your cartel. And how might that be? Why, because you need inside knowledge of what the Political-Media Class wants to hear and read in order to do what you really do, rather than what you pretend that you do. Otherwise, anyone could do it. But, of course, they can't.
That Class wants all sorts of issues kept off the agenda. So those issues are simply never polled. Immigration, for example, was treated like that for two generations. In the same fashion, people who now say that they are not going to vote because no party represents their views are simply factored out for calculation purposes. So the huge numbers of people who now feel like that are left thinking that they are the only ones. And so one could go on.
Then you claim that the election results bear you out. Well, of course they do! As I said, you are very good at what you are paid to do.
But patience now appears to be wearing thin in even the most surprising of places. Neither the BBC, nor ITN, nor even Sky News bothered to report yesterday's "finding" that the Tories were on 52% support. Everyone knows perfectly well that this is not true, and no one is even bothering to pretend any more.
And even if it were true, those Tory votes would be piled up in the South East, where the Tories already hold most of the seats anyway. So who cares? Nobody ever reported breathlessly that miners in the North East were on course to vote Labour. This is just the same. And where are the miners now?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
"people who now say that they are not going to vote because no party represents their views are simply factored out for calculation purposes."
ReplyDeleteTo be fair to the pollsters, this reflects the way elections work. When people don't vote, their views are similarly factored out for calculation purposes, and ignored when it comes to working out who has won each seat.
Why were you unable to put them up? To put it another way, if you won't put them up, why should we believe you?
ReplyDeleteThat's not the only thing that opinion polls are (supposed to be) for. You need this figure for an accurate reading of public opinion, certainly at the moment, and really at any moment. Which is why we don't get it.
ReplyDeleteI don't think it is too much of a surprise that some of the comments attemptedly posted on yesterday's thread were, well, rather choice.
Yes, but some of them (including mine) were perfectly civil, but just rebutted some more of your fanciful claims. They didn't get up. And this won't either, I suppose. Ho hum.
ReplyDeleteDavid Lindsay - always up for an argument. So long as he can curtail it anytime he wants to by censoring the opposition. Rule Britannia.
I beg your pardon! I think you'll find that I am not an opinion pollster, nor do I pay their wages and expenses.
ReplyDeleteI think anonymous has a point, Davud. Quite often I'm reading threads and its difficult to see what's being said because of selective editing, and often people comment that some of their posts have been censored. This doesn't bode too well for a political model of free flowing discourse, does it?
ReplyDeleteI've always had a suspicion that David uses the "I get too much abuse" card far too easily, as a cover for when he prefers not to respond. Certainly I've had several perfectly polite and on topic comments not posted.
ReplyDeleteThis probably won't make it up either, you know.
If people are commenting on things that I haven't put up, then they reveal themselves as posting under multiple identities, and I must have accidentally let them through on those occasions.
ReplyDeleteThere are several Sams, or so at least one them says...
ReplyDeleteNo, but I post here fairly regularly, as do others, and they comment that things they have written on this or other posts don't get through in the past. I only ever comment on my own posts, obviously - I have no way of seeing what others write. How would I?
ReplyDeleteWell, yes. I'm called Sam, and so are some other people I know.
ReplyDeleteIncidentally, I found the thread on opinion polls last night between you and "anonymous" fascinating. Would you mind putting up his / her last comment(s), which assuming it's the same person who posted here at 1547appears to be complaining that the conversation was halted unduly?
ReplyDelete"And even if it were true, those Tory votes would be piled up in the South East, where the Tories already hold most of the seats anyway."
ReplyDeleteApologies David, but this isn't true. When pollsters such as MORI poll nationally, they weight people's votes depending on where they come from. So if they interview 100 people, say, and ten of those are from the SE and one from the NE, then the latter is weighted ten times as heavily as the former, so as to give an accurate national picture. Otherwise, as you rightly say, the poll would be worthless.
This is all explained very clearly on the British Polling Council website, which I recommend a visit to.
Regards
Glen
I see we're now back to blocking comments again, no matter how polite or on topic. Bravo David. Always up for a fight, so long as you control the terms of reference. I think Pravda used to do the same thing, didn't they?
ReplyDeleteThis won't make it up, of course. But it appears people have got wise to your comment blocking policy. You've been rumbled, as you post says.
I didn't say you, Ralph. I said the people whom you must have had in mind. And the last comment has already gone up from last night.
ReplyDelete"British Polling Council website"
The reliability of which can be guessed from the original post.
"Always up for a fight, so long as you control the terms of reference"
As I said before, you are confusing me with opinion pollsters and the people who employ them.
If the polls are so relaible, then how come the BBC, ITN and Sky News couldn't be bothered to report a Tory result above fifty per cent, which, if true as a reflection of public opinion, would be the biggest political news since 1997?
Well the BBC don't because their guidance specifically prohibits them from reporting on opinion polls as its a breach of broadcasting neutrality.
ReplyDeleteSorry- bit of a straight answer there, wasn't it?
David - it is on there, explicitly written. Are you saying that the British Polling Council and the organisations are outrightly lying? Not just not saying anything, not just dissembling, but publishing something which is flagrantly untrue and the exact opposite of their practice?
ReplyDeleteIf so, do you have any evidence for that?
If that's true, then the BBC never paid the slightest attention to it in the past.
ReplyDeleteOver on things like Coffee House, people are livid that this has been ignored by the BBC.
They had healthier views on polls back when the Tories weren't doing so well in them, aand used to be livid that the BBC *did* report them so prominently and uncritically.
Which it certainly did.
Glen, clearly the BBC, ITN and Sky News now agree with me on this one.
ReplyDeleteRead the Hitchens post: pollsters know who they are asking, and decide what is to be asked. Even then, they reserve the power to edit out answers that the people who have commissioned them do not want.
Immigration was kept off the agenda for donkey's years by simply never asking about it in opinion polls. As was public ownership until recent days.
Did all the polling companies decide these things spontaneously, and did the inevitable consequences of those decisions correspond to the pre-existing cross-party consensus by accident?
"If the polls are so relaible, then how come the BBC, ITN and Sky News couldn't be bothered to report a Tory result above fifty per cent, which, if true as a reflection of public opinion, would be the biggest political news since 1997?"
ReplyDeleteI know. For some reason they were going on and on and on about HBOS merging with Lloyds-TSB. As if anyone cares about THAT!
They managed to report the football all right. But not what, if true, would be the biggest political story in half a generation. Why might that be? Surely not because they know perfectly well that it isn't true?
ReplyDelete"the biggest political story in half a generation"
ReplyDeleteNot really. It's not massively out of line with recent trends, and didn't involve a significant shift. If it had been a real general election result, then obviously it would have been absolutely massive. But I'm sure it would have been reported in that case.
No, it is extremely unusual to get more than the magic fifty per cent in an opinion poll. But clearly the news media don't care about opinion polls any more.
ReplyDeleteOne might add that Labour's over fifty per cent showings in the dying days of the Major Government certainly didn't translate into over fifty per cent of the vote in 1997. Funny, that.