Just listening to a VOCM report on the latest poll this one done by Environics - reportedly for the Canadian Press.
What was reported was that this was a poll done with a group of people selected from a panel and who were compensated for it.
Further they properly stated that these types of polls do not have a predictable level of accuracy - therefore they do not ascribe a + - percentage to it.
This is exactly what should have been done by MQO and their two polls. If one reads the standards for polling stated by the MRIA an association for pollsters - one should conclude that the MQO polls should not have stated an accuracy +-.
Now let's look at what the cost is to the people, our election, and the outcome.
In the case of many reputable media giants like the New York Times and others - simply do not report these polls because of the potential for significant inaccuracies and thereby possibility of improperly swaying opinions during an election campaign.
It's one thing to report these types of polls when talking about choosing between Crest and Colgate or Pepsi and Coke - it's quite another thing to upset election impartiality.
So why are the media stations in Newfoundland and Labrador even reporting these types of polls and what is the rolling impact of them?
Please remember this statement by Stanford University Researchers on these types of polls:
The inconsistency is a challenge because it means the accuracy of one measure from an opt-in panel survey can’t reliably be taken to mean that other measures are accurate, the researchers noted. And there are other problems: While results of one of the seven opt-in online panels was “strikingly and unusually inaccurate,” they said, “the rest were roughly equivalently inaccurate,”
This means that the polls by MQO and Environics can be equivalently strikingly and unusually inaccurate. So once again why is our media reporting them? Now that we have a CRA poll which may be based on random sampling meaning an accuracy percentage can be applied - have the other polls now interfered with peoples opinions prior to a "random sampling" poll being done?
Have they been lined up this way?
One thing we should all be - is very mad at companies conducting "innovative" polling in the middle of an election and also that our media has broadly reported it.
Although the Environics poll has fully explained that their poll cannot attach itself to an accuracy percentage - why has the Canadian Press released it and why is our media reporting it?
This should all be investigated after the election.
6 comments:
The polling of a panel comprising those who opt-in is troubling. Polling should be conducted on a sample from the entire population affected. The sample has to be random and the methodology used has to be in accordance with acceptable practices. I am concerned that releasing polls that are not, can skew opinion.
AHHHH, quit yer whinning. Polls have been helping the Liberal party for years.
Finally you guys get the back end, and I realy couldn'T care less.
You had your chances to reform the electoral system both in NL and in Ottawa. You didn't.
You had your chnces to ban polling during campaigns. You didn't.
Keep your fricking eyes on your own campaign and its shortcomings.
That's an intelligent response - further who are the "you guys"?
This is about potential manipulation of the electorate.
There have been interferances in every aspect of Newfoundland and Labrador politics for 62 years.
It is not hard to figure out the reason why the province of Newfoundland and Labrador failed thrive economically, given its vast natural resources base, which can be found, to this very day, providing indutry and jobs and big economies for the other regions of the Canada, while Newfoundland and Labrador languishes with the irony of having the highest GDP in the country but very little of the WEALTH GENERATED from its resource base remaining in the province to look after the infrastructure that is needed to provide the ease that other areas of the country live with from our resources.
It all happened because of a combination Federal and Provincial politicians, both Conservative and Liberal who were willing to toe the party line for what Ottawa wanted for a Centralized Canada, but what did they, the politicians, get for doing so?
I wonder would we get the answer from and Inquiry?
What I came away with when listening to the Media Reports on the Election Polls recently is that somebody wants to see the Conservatives back in power and is trying to produce the results through polls.
I wonder what does it have to do with the Muskrat Falls Project and other irons that might be in the Conservative fire pot, that those Poll people might want to skew things and thus throw off the electorate to create votes for the Conservatives through the yielding good numbers for the ruling pary?
It could very well be a smoke screen with no foundation in the truth. It is like the old adage that states 'there are lies, dammned lies and there are statistics". Well this could very well be dammned lies that could boost the Conservatives to a Win situation.
I would like to reply to the comment about your site not looking professional and that contributing to your skills as a blogger. Watching the public media and the campaigning of "New Energy" in this province for example, has got me a little tired of flashy and "professional" looking. After all my personal opinions of "New Energy" for example may look aesthetically pleasing, but I do not take them seriously, or for that matter believe a thing about what they promise/true motives. The fact that your site is basic as basic could be, and it is the CONTENT alone that drives your readers, shows that your knowledge is worth sharing. It shows that you are not out there to mislead, or misguide the public. You are just one person, with a wealth of knowledge and the drive to share it to anyone who chooses to listen. For that reason alone, don't change a thing
Post a Comment