The Newsweek poll — agenda “journalism” at its laziest
The Newsweek poll story at Newsweek (which we discussed yestrerday) did not provide information on the sample. The new Reuters story on the poll has this: “Of those sampled, 282 identified themselves as Republicans, 349 as Democrats and 330 as Independents.” This is very important information, as Oak Leaf has noted, and it would have been appropriate for Newsweek to include it with its original story. Essentially, as we suspected, the Newsweek poll is trash.
It is really hard to overstate how dishonest this poll is. For starters, a sample that has 24% Republicans and 42% Democrats is unprofessional. A CPA who cooked the books like that would wind up behind bars. As you know, the 2004 election was 37/37 Republicans and Democrats, so Newsweek has overweighted Democrats 5% and underweighted Republicans by 13%. Independents are overweighted by 10%. God only knows how Newsweek tortured the numbers when coming up with their “likely voter” estimates. Our conclusion: we certainly do not know what is going to happen in the real election in two weeks, but we can say one thing with certainty: if you rely on Newsweek, neither do you.
Our point in pointing out what we see as the dishonesty of these polls and the reporting on them is not to say “GOP great, Democrats bad!” Each side should make its appeals in the marketplace of ideas, emotions, and interests, and the chips fall where they may. Nor do we resent or object to the Democrats’ using the MSM as their megaphone; it’s a good tactic. However, the press, as the only industry mentioned in the Constitution, and provided with specific protections, ought to be taking itself far more seriously about being explicit regarding its biases, and not project its wishes onto its polls and report them as trends objectively observed.
And how does Reuters get this important information when it is unavailable to subscribers of Newsweek?
October 24th, 2006 at 1:48 am
We all agree with you – this must be your third or fourth post on false polls.
You have not once objectively defended the re-ele ction of the REPUBLOCRATS.
The current leadership Rumsfeld, Rice and KingGeorge are incompetent, inept and divorced from the rest of American society.
I have only ill to say about all three of them.
I enjoy your posts, especially about the faux-tography this summer but lately your website reads like those Bush-Bots that Michael Savage warns his listeners about.