Lies, D*mned Lies, and the Washington Post

Special to FreeRepublic ^ | 6 May 2005 | John Armor (Congressman Billybob)

[Congressman Billybob]

Last week the Washington Post along with ABC News put out the results of a national poll on a wide variety of issues. I read the poll, and several articles about the poll. Clearly, Mark Twain’s famous quote, “lies, d*mned lies, and statistics” applies here.

This is not a matter of differences of opinion, nor of editorial judgments. This is bald-faced lying by the newspaper and network editors. They published statistics that any competent college graduate would have known were false. Many in the MSM republished the Post-ABC poll without an independent review to see if the poll’s results were false.

Thanks to those who brought this information to my attention. An article on 25 April on Ankle Biting Pundits under the screen name bulldogpundit, laid out the facts. Here’s the link: http://www.anklebitingpundits.com/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1490&mode=nested&order=1&thold=0

For those who’ve never heard of anklebitingpundits, and have no idea who bulldogpundit is, think of them like me – “a guy in his pajamas in front of his computer.” All of us are only as good as the verifiable facts we present. So I present the facts, which anyone including Dan Rather can easily verify, for your review:

The purpose of polls is to give a snapshot of public opinion as it relates to past or future elections. Yet the Post surveyed “adults,” the least accurate comparison. That skews the results about 10% in favor of Democrats, compared to “likely voters,” the most accurate comparison.

The next built-in error is the politics of the sample. In the last election, Republicans and Democrats tied at 37% each. The Post poll had 35% Democrat - 32% Independent - 28% Republican and 5% "Other.” A 7% pro-Democrat error.

In the last election, 34% said they were “conservative;” whereas in the Post poll that dropped to 30%. A 4% pro-Democrat error.

In the 2004 election, 17% of the voters were 18-29. The Post included 22% of this group, the only one that voted heavily for Kerry. A 2% pro-Democrat error.

Other skewed Post demographics in income, religion and marital status introduced pro-Democrat errors of 4 %, 5% and 3%, respectively, in favor of the Democrats.

From my work in the Ph.D. program at American University in political statistics, I know that all these points are accurate, and create bias in favor of the Democrats. Okay, what effects do the demographic falsehoods have on the results of the poll?

The errors overlap one another, so you cannot conclude that the Post-ABC poll was biased toward the Democrats by 38%. But every professional pollster and every competent college graduate would conclude that this poll misstates its results by at least 12% and as much as 15%. (Discuss among yourselves what fraction of college graduates ARE competent in statistics.)

Set aside the bias in the wording of the questions, which the article also discusses. Here’s what a conservative error rate of 12% does to the widely reported and dishonest results from this poll:

President Bush, Approve, 47%, Disapprove, 50%, becomes 53% to 44%, instead.

On approval/disapproval of how the President is handling social security, the Iraq War, the economy, terrorism and energy policy, all but two go in favor of the President when corrected, and the other two become close.

On support for or opposition to the President’s plan on Social Security, the corrected results change from 45% to 51% against, to 51% to 46% in favor.

These are my choices of issues in the poll. Look up the poll, choose your own questions, and get an honest result by reducing the Democrat side by 6% and increasing the Republican one by 6%. Here’s the link: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/polls/post-abcpoll_042505.pdf

The editors at the Washington Post and ABC News are flat-out, bald-faced liars. Anyone interested in the truth can check the facts and conclude whether I am right. And I will confront any of those editors in any place under any conditions to defend my conclusions. In the Sunday news programs and papers, the coprophagic press have already begun citing this false poll as if it were true.

A free press is essential to the American system of government. But a free press that lies through its teeth will only exacerbate, not solve, the critical problems facing America, from Social Security’s impending failure, to the problem of outlaw judges on the federal bench, among many, many others.

About the Author: John Armor is a First Amendment attorney and author who lives in the Blue Ridge Mountains of North Carolina. John_Armor@aya.yale.edu

[Congressman Billybob]

This is a minor story that's part of the larger story of the incompetence/dishonesty of the MSM. It's worth noting that before the Post could run a feature on Sunday, based on this poll, anklebitingpundits had already debunked the poll.

But the writers of that "think" piece just assumed the Post poll was accurate, and didn't bother to Google the poll to know it had already been taken apart.

John / Billybob

[dinasour]

I've always preferred ankle biting pundits to toe sucking pundits.

[anniegetyourgun]

Sigh.....some days it seems we are just piling on with respect to the MSM. But most days, I just say - pile away. This, because they continue to behave like the Wizard of Oz.

[Robert A Cook PE]

And, being blind by liberal hatred of conservatives/Christians,whites/males/republicans/capitalists/war-mongering-American-loyalists, ambition, and greed (plus conditioned by the responses of their like-minded "friends" in the national press corpse "sphere of friends" .....

Will any liberal actual even read something that would reveal this bias and these lies.

The liberals are cocooned in their inner-city blue counties, sheltered by the media from any other "false" realities of the real world.

[PGalt]

Great post. Truth/Freedom bump! Thanks for your work.

[Sisku Hanne]

"coprophagic press" ROFL!!!
Always a pleasure to read, CB!

[river rat]

A bump for my favorite "Congress Critter"....

Thanks, partner..... I suspect the death grip MSM has had on the nation for decades is finally broken....

Semper Fi

[concentric circles]

As daily newspaper circulation in the U.S. continues it's free fall one must conclude that the publishers' adherence to leftist principles is religious in nature; founded on belief; unassailable by reason; and destined to be carried to the grave in spite of all entreaties to the contrary.

[pillbox_girl]

So what?

Let the MSM continue cooking polls and feeding a manufactured worldview they know their ever shrinking liberal nutball audience living in la-la-land is so eager to consume. Why shouldn't we let them delude themselves.

This is exactly how they allowed themselves to be "blindsided" by the gay marriage issue last November. I see no reason why we should help them avoid a repeat performance.

We, who live in the real world, will continue to pay attention to (and participate in) the only poll that matters: elections.

[Cicero]

anklebitingpundits has been around for quite a while and has a good reputation.

You let them off easy by not examining the bias in the questions, which probably skews the results by another 10%. Hard to say exactly, of course. It would be better to start with an honest poll in the first place instead of a lying push poll whose only purpose is political propaganda.

Sorry about the excessive alliteration.

[dvwjr]

I'm not sure about the time-line, but here was my Free Republic response to the Washington Post/ABC News poll just after it hit the wires that afternoon...

See the FR post here.

A lot of folks noticed the same things about the Washington Post/ABC News poll and its questions/sample structure...

dvwjr

[Lancey Howard]

Good post. Thanks for your careful analysis.
The only part I take issue with is:

"The purpose of polls is to give a snapshot of public opinion as it relates to past or future elections. Yet the Post surveyed “adults,” the least accurate comparison. That skews the results about 10% in favor of Democrats, compared to “likely voters,” the most accurate comparison.

If the poll is simply a "snapshot of public opinion", then the likelihood that those who are polled will vote is irrelevant. Yet you contend that "the purpose of polls is to give a snapshot of public opinion as it relates to past or future elections". Who added the limiting condition?

I thank God every day that the socialist old "mainstream" news media is dying.
I only wish it would hurry up and be dead.
I am doing my part to hurry its death along by NEVER: buying one of its newspapers, watching its newscasts, or clicking on its web sites. I also take every reasonable opportunity to demean, belittle, and laugh at the dying, socialist old "mainstream" news media among family and friends.

Regards,
LH

[mo]

IMHO these liberal/progressive columnists are as out of touch with reality as jihadists themselves...what we have is an elite upper crust in the US, educated beyond utility and reason by an Ivy League whose educational objectives are essentially described by UNESCO- http://www.crossroad.to/articles2/IBO.htm When this elite sees and experiences a wholesale rejection by society (Red/Blue state conflict) of the cultural and academic paradigm they've paid to buy into -both financially and personally-the rejection acquires apocalyptic overtones.

[Alia]

NC *Ping*

Please FRmail Constitution Day OR TaxRelief OR Alia if you want to be added to or removed from this North Carolina ping list.

[Gritty]

Nice "outing" of PRAVDA the Washington Post, John.

I think few of us will live long enough to see their apology, but hopefully most of us will live long enough to see their demise.

[Lee'sGhost]

You know, John, when I read your stuff I feel like we are getting this close ]-[ to turning the corner on media bias and truth in reporting. We've come a long way but if we can just get to the point where 50 percent plus one media outlet is reporting honestly -- or where 50 plus percent of the people are getting their info from legit sources we will be on the way total victory.

Understand, I'm not looking for a media bias toward the right (thought it isn't bad to have some of those too), I'm talking about truly unbiased or balanced or objective journalism. If we can get that we will win in the arena of ideas almost every time.

[Robert A Cook PE]

Why not let the media continue the liberal slide, their bias and inaccurate reporting?

Answer: Because 22% of the electorate is completely biased and hate-filled. Nothing, frankly, will ever get this bias until death.

But Another 10% of the electorate THINKS its getting accurate and unbiased reporting FROM the liberal elite. This group THINKS (it IS deciding things events based on its effort to analyze and study: It's just that they are studying from a contaminated source (the MSM and their teachers in government schools and universities.

It is these 10% (who vote democratic "out of habit" (from the 30's and 40's, and out of lessons learned in the 50's and 60's from St Walter Cronkite) that "might" be convinced if they are exposed to a new source.

There is another 8-10% that are slowly GETTING convinced of media bias, but can be persuaded wither way = These are ones the media portrays as "undecided" or swing votes. They too, are slowly turning against their masters and slaveowners in the media/democrat elite - but the wheel could turn faster if more media bias is exposed - and if an alternate, accurate unbiased source is found.

[alrea]

The editors at the Washington Post and ABC News are flat-out, bald-faced liars

by ignoring they push things like Clinton Administration related deaths deep in the headlines and voters minds

[pillbox_girl]

Point somewhat taken. It would have been far more true twenty or even ten years ago, though. These days (and more and more as time goes on) the MSM has lost their stranglehold on information. People are ever more capable of putting the MSM's assertions to a reality check (like examining the typeface on "authentic" documents). So the MSM responds by catering ever more to your 22% biased and hate filled audience. To do this, their reporting will have to diverge ever further from reality. This, of course, makes the above mentioned reality checks simpler to perform, and makes it ever more likely that people from your other mentioned subsets will be able to perform their own reality checks.

With that in mind, I think it is best for us to not correct the liberal MSM. Let them continue down their current path. We just need to make sure the actual truth is out there, is easy to access, and presented in a rational, easy to understand, and easy to verify format.

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

A free press is essential to the American system of government. But a free press that lies through its teeth will only exacerbate, not solve, the critical problems facing America, from Social Security’s impending failure, to the problem of outlaw judges on the federal bench, among many, many others.

I have a problem with the grammar of that expression, "a free press." The number seems all wrong; we need multiple, independent presses - but we indeed seem to have multiple presses only in name, and in fact we have a single press which one is almost tempted to style an appropriate target of a RICO suit.

CBS can promote patent forgeries, and the rest of the Corrupt Organization which is the MSM declines to point out the obvious truth that CBS was perpetrating a fraud. The reason is that there is a conspiracy among the members of the MSM for the purpose of promoting the individual members of MSM by promoting the Corrupt MSM itself. It is all one enormous go-along-and-get-along scam.

It's nonsense, of course, for the press - protected as it is by the First Amendment - to be subject to a RICO suit because its members agree too much. Yet the truth is that broadcast journalism is not actually part of the press. Yes, the fact that it is not mentioned in the First Amendment is inevitably related to the fact that radio transmission was not invented in 1789 - but that is not the whole story.

The First Amendment is exclusively about freedom - but the truth is that broadcast journalism is more about censorship than it is about freedom of speech or press. Broadcasting as we know it could not exist without the censorship of the people which alone allows the radio transmissions of the government's favorites known as "FCC licensees" to be preferentially received over a wide area. Broadcasting is not merely radio transmission, but centralized radio transmission over public government airwaves.