Do They Think We’re Idiots?

[Admin]

In My Opinion by Trevor Bothwell

One of the most beneficial college classes I ever took was a summer graduate course at SUNY Geneseo called Educational Inquiry, Measurement and Statistics. It was taught, ironically enough, by one of the best professors I ever had: Dr. Phillip VanFossen, who has since moved on to Purdue University.

I actually think about (the original) Dr. Phil quite frequently, namely because nary a day goes by where I don't read about yet another biased college professor pushing his or her political views on unsuspecting students (Ward Churchill is simply an example of the extreme). So it's reassuring to recall those who don't make the headlines; the ones who show up to teach kids how to think not what to think. That's the Dr. Phil I remember.

But I thought of the good professor most recently upon reading the headline of a Sacred Heart University press release that was distributed on May 3rd via PRNewswire. It reads: 59.5% Nationwide Call for Tom Delay's (sic) Resignation According to Sacred Heart University Poll. Indeed, the first sentence of SHU’s press release states, “According to a national poll by the Sacred Heart University Polling Institute, a majority of Americans surveyed, 59.5%, suggest that Congressman Tom DeLay should resign from his position as House Majority Leader.”

Problem is, this headline is severely misleading; and it was Dr. Phil who encouraged me to be on the lookout for deceptive -- and sometimes downright fictitious -- surveys and studies. In fact, he began each lecture by leading our class through analysis of some new study he’d found reported in that morning's newspaper. You know, the kind claiming a linkage between fruit consumption and cancer because 75% of breast cancer patients participating in a research project happened to eat bananas every morning -- only you read on to discover that a grand total of four patients were surveyed for the study. Okay, I’m exaggerating, but you get the idea.

We examined plenty of perfectly sound studies with Dr. Phil that summer, too, but it was his insistence on inquiry and examination -- on never taking for granted what you’re initially fed by pollsters, researchers, and the media -- that has always stuck with me. Because you just never know.

Alas, it looks like things haven’t changed much since then. I've often been told that newspapers are written at a fourth grade reading level, but the public relations department at Sacred Heart must think only fourth graders read the news. Here's the excerpt of the university’s press release detailing the statistics collected on Rep. Tom DeLay:

Nearly half of those surveyed, 46.5%, indicated they are following the U.S. House Majority Leader Tom DeLay's ethics issues. Another 49.1% suggested either not following the issue very closely or not at all.

Among those with an opinion and following the issue closely, 59.5%, suggested that Congressman DeLay resign his leadership position. Another 40.5% said he should not give up his post.

As for resigning from the U.S. Congress, 45.3% with an opinion and following the issue closely suggested he should while 54.7% said he should not resign.

Instead of clarifying that the 59.5% of Americans who favor Rep. DeLay’s resignation as Majority Leader belong only to the group with an opinion and following the issue closely, Sacred Heart’s PR department claims dishonestly that this percentage reflects the opinion of all Americans. This, my friends, is what you call poll bias.

In reality, 59.5% of only 46.5% of the people surveyed, or 27.6% in all (.595 x .465), actually support DeLay's resignation as Majority Leader. Moreover, when we calculate the 40.5% among the 46.5% who actually have an opinion, we find that 18.8% of all people surveyed do not support DeLay's resignation. And if there's any doubt as to whether Sacred Heart blithely neglected the whopping 49.1% of the population virtually unconcerned with this issue when blaring its 59.5% “majority of Americans” indictment, 27.6% and 18.8% curiously add up to 46.4% -- which looks a heckuva lot like the 46.5% who indicated they're actually following DeLay's ethics issues.

To be fair, I should make clear that the Sacred Heart University Polling Institute likely conducted an unbiased and responsible survey; it was the university’s PR office that misrepresented the study, whether intentionally or not. When I spoke with polling institute director Jerry Lindsley about Sacred Heart’s misleading headline, he admitted that he “might have suggested it be a bit clearer” had he seen it before the press release was distributed, and admitted that such deceptive reporting risks compromising the ethical standing of polling institutes and universities.

In short, the Sacred Heart University poll is rendered meaningless, as the headline of its press release distorts poll data and misleads readers into believing that almost a full 60% of the country supports Rep. DeLay's resignation from his post as Majority Leader. This is almost 32% more than those who actually do.

Everyday Americans don’t necessarily need to take Dr. Phil’s statistics class to be able to identify blatant statistical perversions in the media. I just wish I had the same confidence in the people running some of our universities’ PR departments, who justify the existence of such courses in the first place.

© 2005 Trevor Bothwell

Trevor Bothwell is a freelance writer living in Maryland. He maintains a web log at www.therightreport.com, and he can be contacted at bothwelltj@yahoo.com.

[Railroad (Premo)]

Nice piece, Trevor.

The invention of "facts" and figures by academia or their students should be considered a worse crime than plagiarism. It's bad enough that the press do it every day.

[Mikeinsmd]

Originally Posted by Railroad

Nice piece, Trevor. The invention of "facts" and figures by academia or their students should be considered a worse crime than plagiarism. It's bad enough that the press do it every day.

I sure hope they don't do this on my conservative right.

I wouldn't fault the polling in this case. While the press release was obviously misleading, the poll is, I feel, a valid one. Discounting the people who have no clue who Tom Delay is, yet alone what the alledged abuses are, should be done.

I also think that this poll is very useful in spotting misleading reporting. I've followed this case closely, and I've yet to hear anyone provide any substantial evidence that DeLay did anything wrong. There are lots of allegations, rumors, etc., but nothing that's really there. The closest thing I've heard to evidence was the charging of trip expenses to a lobbyist's credit card, but further examination of the facts revealed that the lobbyist was a member of the board for the non-profit group, and it was 100% acceptable for him to charge expenses for the non-profit on his card.

So the question that I think the poll generates is why do 59% of the people who have followed this issue closely feel that there is a need for DeLay to resign? If they genuinely feel that way there must be a reason (absent any anti-Republican bias). Could it be the biased, unsubstantiated, and inflamatory reporting of the media? If I could change the poll, I would have asked one additional question: Why do you feel he should resign?

[Railroad (Premo)]

Originally Posted by Bruzilla

So the question that I think the poll generates is why do 59% of the people who have followed this issue closely feel that there is a need for DeLay to resign? If they genuinely feel that way there must be a reason (absent any anti-Republican bias). Could it be the biased, unsubstantiated, and inflamatory reporting of the media? If I could change the poll, I would have asked one additional question: Why do you feel he should resign?

I like how you think!

But I still say many polls are flawed or skewed or made up.

Either way, a lie is a lie, either directly or by inference.

[Larry Gude (Premo)]

"In a recent poll, GudeMedia Enterprises, LTD, ask every registered Democrat at Sacred Heart the following:


Q: If you support Tom Delay resigning, why do you feel he should resign?

A. Because he HAD to break some law. He's an evil Republican

B. Because the girl in Journalism I'm trying get in the sack says so

C. Because it's HIS fault we don't have the House, Senate or the White House.

D. Because that's what all my friends think.

E. All of the above

After double counting the results and verifying address and voter registration of all particpants, GudeMedia published these results:

21% responded A
64% said B
83% chose C
38% selected D
and 91% went for E.

Early analysis of what all this means has so far has revealed that the girl in journalism is quite the becoming young lady. We also found there are only 3 actual registered Democrats on campus and that our art department did the mathematical averaging. Their stated goal was to make the poll more...'real-ish sounding'.

More at 11...

[rraley]

I have no problem with a "misleading" headline if the body of the article provides full facts. Those misleading headlines may attract more readers...

Think about it which is better...
"MAJORITY SUPPORT TOM DELAY'S RESIGNATION"

or...

"MAJORITY OF THOSE SURVEYED WHO INDICATED THAT THEY FOLLOW THE DELAY PROCEEDINGS SUPPORT HIS RESIGNATION"

I mean, come on...headlines are supposed to be short, snappy, and easy to print...the second option doesn't have any of that.

[vraiblonde]

Originally Posted by rraley

I have no problem with a "misleading" headline if the body of the article provides full facts.

I would have no problem with the misleading headline if people would actually READ the article. But you and I both know that's not what people do. They see "Fritz Guilty of Rape" and go no further. News paper people aren't stupid - they know this as well. That's why they do the misleading front page headline, then print the retraction at the bottom of page 6 in the Business section.

Good Lord! Somebody forgot to lock the back door and the leader of the Fritz booster club found her way inside!

Just one question: Was Fritz found guilty of committing rape?

[vraiblonde]

Originally Posted by Bruzilla

Just one question: Was Fritz found guilty of committing rape?

That's where the misleading part comes in. When I saw the headline, my first impression was that Fritz was found guilty of forcible rape recently. Then the light came on and I thought, "Wait a minute - I just saw him the other day. " So I read the story and found that it was a statutory rape when he was a kid.


And I can't possibly be the only person who got the wrong idea from that headline. Rossignol did it to purposely mislead people who would see the headline before they went out to vote. He's a big Dorsey guy and he can deny it all he wants but I know damn good and well that he set out to intentionally torpedo Fritz's chances in that election.