In recent UK opinion polls, 73% of adults surveyed supported public funding for research into the effects of global warming on hippopotamus obesity in Zambia, 65% supported laws regulating the length of rasta dreadlocks in the UK, 87% agreed with the statement “Islam is a religion of peace and reason”, 67% supported DHSS funded holidays in Spain for pigs and goats forced to work at petting zoos, 97% supported NHS funded cosmetic surgery for Cherie Blair, 78% believes that Elvis and Spike Milligan are alive and well and living in Area 51 in the USA and 75% supported paying more for the tax-funded BBC.
|
|||||
|
We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people. Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house] Authors
Arts, Tech & CultureCivil LibertiesCommentary
EconomicsSamizdatistas |
Lies, damn lies and opinion pollsSeptember 14th, 2006 |
 11 comments to Lies, damn lies and opinion polls |
Who Are We?The Samizdata people are a bunch of sinister and heavily armed globalist illuminati who seek to infect the entire world with the values of personal liberty and several property. Amongst our many crimes is a sense of humour and the intermittent use of British spelling. We are also a varied group made up of social individualists, classical liberals, whigs, libertarians, extropians, futurists, ‘Porcupines’, Karl Popper fetishists, recovering neo-conservatives, crazed Ayn Rand worshipers, over-caffeinated Virginia Postrel devotees, witty Frédéric Bastiat wannabes, cypherpunks, minarchists, kritarchists and wild-eyed anarcho-capitalists from Britain, North America, Australia and Europe. CategoriesArchivesFeed This PageLink Icons   |
|||
All content on this website (including text, photographs, audio files, and any other original works), unless otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons License. |
|||||
Well, I for one would support NHS cosmetic surgery for our first lady. That letterbox gob always disturbs me (and frightens the cat) when on TV…
Either people in the UK realize that public opinion polls are one big joke and choose to treat them as such…
Or the majority of people in urban areas in the UK just don’t listen carefully when asked a polling question.
OK, let’s put the thing to the test:
Make BBC ‘subscription only’ for £160 a year. If so many are up for it, it shouldn’t be a problem then, should it?
Am sick of these polls – I much rather judge people on how they act (e.g. how they prefer to spend their time or money) rather than how they vote on a rather meaningless and probably loaded question in a poll.
Hey, what about all those lambs in the petting zoo?
Ha! All you racists are only interested in the pink piggys and the fluffy goats, all the animals with curly fleeces are left out.
Curlophobia
*seethe*
Seems we are being told we agree with a figure that the goverment want to give the BEEB. Kills two birds with one stone, the BEEB get what they are given and can crow that they are only cvhrging what people are willing to pay, and the Govt can tell us that they have kept the Beebs demands down to what we are willing to pay.
With a question where it is “altruistic” in the Randian sense to answer in the affirmative you alwys get a higher yes vote than when you expect people to hand over the cash makes us feel all cuddly and warm to be so caring
Glad I don’t live in the UK and have to pay for the BBC.
However, there was this message on the BBC comment web page about the license fee:-
‘The £131.50 that it already costs is excessive. I don’t know if there’s any point to having a TV anymore as there’s never anything decent on.’
Ben Dover
Can’t say that Ben is a real person, though the sentiment is probably accurate.
Opnion polls are not a method of gauging public opinion, they are are an instrument for manipulating public opinion.
I live in germany where there is also a compulsory TV licence (as well as a church tax, would you believe). I don’t belong to a church and don’t have a TV in the house so I don’t pay either. However as always any government says “ve haf vays und means of making you pay” and now a Computer and internet tax has been mooted.
I’ve checked the Work Foundation website, who carried out the “survey” and the press reports. The wording of the question which elicited the response that we would happily pay £162.66 is not mentioned anywhere.
I’d love to see how it was worded. The apparent secrecy makes me wonder if such a question even existed.
“Are you in favour of not being unable to not pay more than GBP162.66 for Aunty Beeb to continue her traditional role of broadcasting the Queen’s Christmas speech to starving orphans?”
Other things being equal people prefer to answer “yes” to questions.
The wording of the question which elicited the response that we would happily pay £162.66 is not mentioned anywhere.
I’d love to see how it was worded. The apparent secrecy makes me wonder if such a question even existed.
There’s surely a question, but you may have to strive hard to see the context.
If it were an ordinary opinion poll conducted by a commercial polling organisation, the methods and data would be published. Commercial pollsters insist that if you want to publicise the results, then they’ll show how you got them, because their business depends on their integrity and they are rightly wary of being charged wih misrepresentation.
The rules for a New Labour organisation working on behalf of the dcms are different. One clue is the word “survey” rather than “poll”, the latter, when used by people who know the difference, generally implies more quantitative reliability. The very large sample should also ring alarm bells. If they aren’t looking for fine demographic segmentation, then a big sample just isn’t justified if their sampling is any good. That makes it look like an attempt to impress by size.
It’s noticeable that government consistently chooses to rely on semi-secret surveys it can make tendentious annnoucements about – whereas the same ministers as parties use proper methods for their private polling. Government and departmental policy is frequently based not on real information but on seeking confirmation and ammunition for propaganda. The distinction between fact and value is completely lost – because there is never going to be a real life test (such as an election) for the department to be measured against, only another survey whose context it controls. No wonder their programmes are such a mess.