The American Spectator

home
ADVERTISEMENT
Print Email
Text Size

The Spectacle Blog

I continue to believe (as I’ve written before) that Gallup occasionally, whether by intention or through carelessness, analyzes its poll results and titles its press releases in a way designed to bias readers’ interpretations of the data against Republicans and for Barack Obama.

Another example came Thursday when I got an e-mail update from Gallup entitled “Republicans Less Enthusiastic About Voting in 2012.

Before you read the story, tell me what your initial reaction is…what you think that headline means or would mean to an ordinary American who read it.

To me, there are a few most likely things it could mean, in this order:

  • Republicans are less enthusiastic about voting in 2012 than Democrats are
  • Republicans are less enthusiastic about voting in 2012 than they were in 2010
  • Republicans are less enthusiastic about voting in 2012 than they were during the last presidential election

Of these, the first is the most likely implication of the e-mail and article’s title, but it is false. The third statement is also false. The second statement is true, but not what Gallup means.

In fact, none of the three is what Gallup means; these, especially the first, are just what they want you to think they mean if you only read the headline.

What Gallup is really saying, though nobody less than Carnac the Magnificent could divine it from the title of the article, is that Republicans are less enthusiastic about voting in 2012 than they were in Gallup’s last survey, just over two months ago. Big effin’ deal.

Here’s the lead paragraph from Gallup’s analysis of their own poll: “Republicans’ enthusiasm about voting in the election for president next year has decreased, with 49% of Republicans and independents who lean Republican now saying they are more enthusiastic than usual about voting, down from 58% in September. This narrows the gap between them and Democrats, 44% of whom are more enthusiastic than usual, essentially the same as in September.”

Having watched the way Gallup’s writers work for some time now, something jumped out at me here as well. Take a guess…

If you said “I wonder what they’re hiding by saying ‘essentially the same’” you get a gold star.

What “essentially the same” says to me is that I need to go look at the prior data because the change is likely a modest negative for Democrats that the Gallup writer is trying to avoid making plain.

And indeed that’s the case here: In the current survey, 44 percent of Democrats and Dem-leaning independent voters are more enthusiastic about voting than they were in the prior election while 47 percent are less enthusiastic. In the prior survey, done in September, 45 percent of Dem and Dem-leaning voters were more enthusiastic and 44 percent less enthusiastic. In other words, there was a four point swing away from voter enthusiasm by Democrats during the last two months. Yes, that’s much less than the swing among Republican and GOP-leaning voters, but it is still worth mentioning because it shows that at least some part of the GOP enthusiasm drop is part of a electorate-wide drop rather than particular to Republicans.

In the September article, Gallup mentioned that the data at that time was “nearly identical” to 2004 data…but they then included the 2004 data in parenthesis so readers wouldn’t have to go dig for it. Of course in that case the 2004 data was one point stronger for Republicans, so the comparison, even if old and statistically insignificant, was a change for the worse for GOP voters. Apparently “nearly identical” or “essentially the same” data is only worth specifying if it can be taken as bad news for Republicans. Otherwise, Gallup prefers that you don’t see the numbers, at least not easily.

In fact — and I realize this may sound a little tin-foil hat-inspired — the link from the current article to the prior article (that you’d have to check to see what “essentially the same” meant) did not work. It took copying and pasting the link, then taking out an erroneous part, to make it work. The average reader would therefore have not been able to read the prior article and see that Democrat enthusiasm has also dropped, albeit less than GOP enthusiasm, since Gallup’s prior polling of the same question.

It turns out that the writer of the misleading article this week was none other than Frank Newport, Gallup’s Editor-in-Chief. I suppose any note I write to Gallup about this apparent reporting bias will fall on deaf ears. To be fair, Mr. Newport has been the subject of criticism by Democrats, and often gives non-partisan responses to questions. Nevertheless, the poor work done by Newport and Gallup in this and other cases leaves me with no way to conclude anything but a pro-Democrat bias, even if a subtle one.

View all comments (7) |

around the track| 12.13.11 @ 9:23AM

These types of articles from conservatives(which I am a very)really annoy me. They're nonsense. Gallup is the gold standard of polling organizations. In fact, toward the end of 2008 and 2010 Gallup OVERESTIMATED the Republican vote, making it less accurate(and tarnishing its reputation for accuracy)than some of its competitors. Come on guys, there are better targets to aim at.

Ross Kaminsky | 12.13.11 @ 10:11AM

This is not the first time I've found this sort of thing from Gallup and it's not as if I'm combing every Gallup note to look for it. I think this one is a particularly egregious example.

Overestimating the Republican vote is irrelevant to this discussion. This about framing, not about guessing wrong.

DRed| 12.13.11 @ 11:42AM

Yes, but it's just one example. Do they do this when it comes to Democrats? You can certainly say that this is a misleading headline, but it doesn't prove any systematic bias. Perhaps Gallup just sensationalizes it's results.

Dai Alanye | 12.13.11 @ 11:23AM

I've written an article about Gallup's polling and one way in which they might -- consciously or not -- bias their results. It's too long to quote here, but the essential matter is, they dropped me as a subject in favor of my wife.

It would be interesting to know whether that occurred in order to obtain an appropriate sexual balance, or whether the more pacific (and more liberal) views of women are preferred to those of men.

hook| 12.13.11 @ 2:32PM

Republicans will never be MORE enthusiastic to vote than Democrats.

MikeN| 12.13.11 @ 6:12PM

One data point to reach a conclusion. You need to look at at the last 20 press releases to see if there is a pattern. Media Research Center doesn't just declare the media biased towards liberals, they actually review them.

Elizabeth| 3.21.12 @ 1:18AM

What is interesting is that Gary Johnson was polling higher than Huntsman and Santorum last year, then Gallup suddenly dropped Johnson from the polls, yet they kept Huntsman and Santorum in the polls despite polling lower.

More Blog Posts by Ross Kaminsky

http://spectator.org/blog/2011/12/13/gallups-subtle-anti-republican

ADVERTISEMENT

Most Popular Articles

Obama and the IRS: The Smoking Gun?

Jeffrey Lord | 5.20.13

The Liberal Union Behind the IRS

Jeffrey Lord | 5.16.13

My Generation’s Disease

Benjamin Brophy | 5.17.13

It's.The.Law

Ross Kaminsky | 5.20.13

Not Ready for Primetime Players

Daniel J. Flynn | 5.17.13

How Long Is This War?

Jed Babbin | 5.20.13

Downton's Class System -- and Ours

Tom Bethell | 5.20.13

ADVERTISEMENT