3 PUBLIC OPINION POLLING AND ELECTION RESULTS

BOX 8.3 PUBLIC OPINION POLLING AND ELECTION RESULTS

Started by newspapers in the 1800s but greatly refined recently, public opinion polls are an integral part of modern political life most everywhere. The famed Gallup Poll began in the 1930s and held a margin of error of 4% in the period of 1936–1950, but this had fallen to .3% by 1984. It is larger if there are three, instead of two, candidates, as in 1980 when the Carter-Reagan-Anderson contest produced a margin of error of 4.7%.

One of the most notable errors in polling history occurred in the Literary Digest presidential poll in 1936. Mailed to auto and phone owners in the heart of the Great Depression, the poll came back favoring Republican Alf Landon, who in fact lost to incumbent Franklin Roosevelt by a huge landslide. The poll, so inaccurate due to a skewed sample of more affluent than average voters, was such a point of disgrace that it helped lead to the demise of the magazine.

One particularly controversial issue concerns the broadcasting of election results and projection of winners before the polls have closed in all states. In the days of paper ballots, no substantive results could be obtained for several hours anyway, but that is no longer the case. Four studies done many years ago assessed West Coast voters’ exposure to election results and projections before they voted (Fuchs, 1966; Lang & Lang, 1968; Mendelsohn, 1966; Tuchman & Coffin, 1971). These studies show only modest exposure to the projections and very small proportions indicating changing their vote or deciding not to vote (1%–3%). Still, these studies were done before the widespread use of exit polls and, in any case, many elections are decided by very close margins.

Since these studies were done, sampling techniques have improved and networks today take exit polls by asking voters as they leave the polling places which candidate they voted for Assuming appropriate

237 A Cognitive Psychology of Mass Communication

sampling and truthful responses, exit poll results can highly accurately project winners before the polls close. Networks, in a race to scoop the competition, routinely have declared projected winners in races with only

a tiny percentage of the votes counted (less than 10%). Although this may be scientifically sound, based on the statistics of representative sampling, it may convey a troubling message to viewers. If results can be obtained with only 5% of the votes in, it may not seem to an individual voter that a single ballot can make much difference. The United States has consistently had one of the lowest voter turnout rates in the world, not infrequently less than half of the qualified voters. There is not much incentive to go and vote after you have already heard the results on television.

Interpretation by the Press

When issues such as economic ones are covered, they tend to be seriously distorted. For example, early in the 1992 Democratic presidential primary campaign, major rivals Bill Clinton and Paul Tsongas had both written extensive, detailed, and well thought out economic programs for the country. What one heard about these from the media was that Clinton favored a modest income tax reduction for middle income Americans, whereas Tsongas did not, calling Clinton’s proposal a “gimmick.” What we did not hear, however, was that almost the entire economic programs of Tsongas and Clinton, except that relatively minor point, were very similar and each offered a reasoned viable alternative to the programs of Republican incumbent George H.W.Bush. Because of the media’s highlighting of differences (remember, conflict is more newsworthy), the truth suffered.

Sometimes the political and general culture of a society will affect how certain aspects of a campaign and other political news are covered. Perhaps the most striking example of this is the response to sex scandals of high officials (see Box 8.4 for a historical view). When reports of dalliances of President Bill Clinton with several women began to surface in early 1998, the domestic and international press did not quite know what to make of it. On the one hand, allegations and rumors were reported in great detail, along with rampant speculation of how the President may have lied about these affairs, possibly to the point of a legally impeachable offense. Even as the public soaked in this saturation, tabloid-like reporting, a curious thing happened. The President’s popularity in the polls actually increased to some of his highest levels. Many constituencies were in a quandary. Opposition Republicans were presented with an opportunity for political gain but one with definite risks. If they succeeded in impeaching and removing the Democratic President Clinton, they would have an incumbent President Al

Politics: Using News and Advertising to Win Elections 238

next election, instead of an inexperienced challenger. Likewise, more liberal constituencies were embarrassed by the apparently sexist, insensitive behavior by the President who had done more to show professional respect personally and advance the cause of women legislatively than had any of his predecessors.

BOX 8.4