This snippet of analysis is from Flesh and Stone:
Gallup's "pro-life" poll deserves greater scrutiny.
The strategically timed release of a poll showing a sudden 10-point flip in American views on abortion should raise a few eyebrows.
Gallup’s press release claimed, "More Americans “Pro-Life” Than “Pro-Choice” for First Time."
While partisan mainstream editorial writers openly gloated about the “stunning” and “shocking” poll released in May, few traditional media looked critically and honestly at what the poll actually revealed, and reported the findings with the same slant as the news release. Rather than spending a minute exploring why it was stunning or shocking, the media simply reported it as fact.
First off, polls should be suspect. While they may have been reliable in a more innocent age, Gallup, like many other polling companies, is a for-profit corporation. They are commissioned to conduct polls. Unfortunately, polling companies are not required to disclose the name of the commissioning organization, even though it’s the ethically responsible thing to do.
The Gallup poll was released on the day anti-abortion groups planned protests against President Obama's commencement address at Notre Dame and just as there’s a new seat to fill on the U.S. Supreme Court. It certainly smells of partisan efforts to create a buzz and revitalize controversy.
Here’s what the watchdogs said about the Gallup poll as well as a Pew poll that also re-interpreted long-standing findings about America’s stand on abortion choice:
Read more...
The opinions, views, thoughts, and ramblings of editors of PoliticalAffairs.net – and other stuff worth reading or viewing.
Showing posts with label Gallup poll. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Gallup poll. Show all posts
Tuesday, June 2, 2009
Monday, March 2, 2009
Those Gallup people are sharp
by Joel Wendland
A recent Gallup poll astutely found that language and framing play a huge role in constructing
and reflecting public opinion. Focusing on the financial crisis late last month, Gallup asked people two questions: 1) "Do you favor or oppose the federal government temporarily taking over major U.S. banks in danger of failing in an attempt to stabilize them?" 2) "Do you favor or oppose the federal government nationalizing major U.S. banks in danger of failing in an attempt to stabilize them?"
54% of respondents to question 1 said yes. Only 37% of respondents to question 2 said yes.
Gallup's conclusion is that public support for the issue depends on what you call. Astute.
But Gallup's own method might be inherently flawed. Four additional questions, at least should have been asked in order to get at the truth of public opinion on this question: 1) Should major banks in danger of failing be allowed to fail? 2) Do you favor permanently taking over major US banks in an attempt to keep them from failing? 3) Do you favor permanently nationalization major banks in an attempt to keep them from failing? 4) Do you favor creating a permanent national bank to compete with private banks?
I might be inclined to say yes to all of these.
What's most amusing about the survey's results is the extent of support for "taking over" banks. Suggests may be that the new GOP mantra that President Obama is a socialist might not have much in the way of legs.
A recent Gallup poll astutely found that language and framing play a huge role in constructing
and reflecting public opinion. Focusing on the financial crisis late last month, Gallup asked people two questions: 1) "Do you favor or oppose the federal government temporarily taking over major U.S. banks in danger of failing in an attempt to stabilize them?" 2) "Do you favor or oppose the federal government nationalizing major U.S. banks in danger of failing in an attempt to stabilize them?"54% of respondents to question 1 said yes. Only 37% of respondents to question 2 said yes.
Gallup's conclusion is that public support for the issue depends on what you call. Astute.
But Gallup's own method might be inherently flawed. Four additional questions, at least should have been asked in order to get at the truth of public opinion on this question: 1) Should major banks in danger of failing be allowed to fail? 2) Do you favor permanently taking over major US banks in an attempt to keep them from failing? 3) Do you favor permanently nationalization major banks in an attempt to keep them from failing? 4) Do you favor creating a permanent national bank to compete with private banks?
I might be inclined to say yes to all of these.
What's most amusing about the survey's results is the extent of support for "taking over" banks. Suggests may be that the new GOP mantra that President Obama is a socialist might not have much in the way of legs.
Labels:
banks,
barack obama,
financial crisis,
Gallup poll,
nationalization,
socialist
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)