Do polls displace more thorough
reports on issues? Critics answer yes
by Burney Simpson

It's flattering to be asked for an opinion.

While it may be rare for a friend, relative or colleague to inquire, "What do you think?" businesses that ask us questions and gather information on our tastes have been sprouting like strip malls in suburbia over the last 20 years. Pollsters monitor what we buy, what we do for entertainment and what we think about social issues.

Polls that solicit our political opinions have been multiplying, too. And the media have been covering those numbers thoroughly through-out what has come to seem like a never-ending campaign season.

But during the past few elections, there has been a growing scholarly backlash to the attention political polls get from the media. An increasing number of critics contend they displace more thorough reports on the issues. And that politicians, fearful of negative numbers, have lost the ability to lead.

"We've gone overboard," says former U.S. Sen. Paul Simon, who now heads the Public Policy Institute at Southern Illinois University. "Candidates do polls to decide their positions. That's anything but leadership."

In recent years, legitimate surveyors have gotten a black eye from "push polling," a campaign strategy of pretending to conduct an unbiased survey. The push pollster is hired by a candidate to manipulate voters into suspicions about the opposition. By the time the "survey" is over, a candidate's reputation has been trashed.

Professional pollsters acknowledge the complaints about their business. Indeed, there are several trade organizations that watch for and condemn questionable practices. But political surveyors insist news consumers take polls for what they are — a snapshot of opinion on the days they were conducted. And representatives of the media argue poll stories are a legitimate part of campaign cover-age. (If the daily news is the first draft of history and polls are snapshots, can we call a story about a poll a draft of a snapshot?)

As this election heats up, it may be that candidates, news directors and the public will maintain that perspective. Some observers have suggested steps to ensure policy questions get plenty of coverage.

But for politicians, the polls are essential. "Polling is expensive, but it's an important tool to hone the campaign message and track the impact of the campaign," says John McGovern, campaign manager for Republican Mark Steven Kirk, who is running for Congress in Illinois' 10th District.

For political junkies, and citizens who just intend to vote, polls can be fascinating because they track the competition in a race.

And for all the complaints, polls are nothing new in American politics.

Thomas B. Littlewood, journalism professor emeritus of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, says so-called straw polls began as far back as Andrew Jackson's run for the presidency in 1824. In his 1998 book Calling Elections: The History of Horse-Race Journalism, Littlewood writes that as early as the 1880s some Boston reporters spent election night monitoring key precincts for returns. This early form of what we now know as exit polling helped them spot the winners and scoop the competition.

Still, Littlewood recognizes reporting on the horse-race aspects of politics is on the rise. "The true ratio of poll reporting to issue news has gone up dramatically," he tells Illinois Issues. "The New York Times does a good job of reporting both, but you have to consider the whole media scene. Smaller organizations don't have the staff or space." And the drumbeat of who's up and who's down can thump the underdog when they least need it.

Glenn Poshard contends sorry poll numbers helped doom his run for governor of Illinois in 1998. "Polls devastated us during the campaign. The [Chicago] Tribune had us 25 to 30

www.uis.edu/~ilissues Illinois Issues October 2000 . 6

In two polls conducted in August and October of that year, the Tribune reported Poshard was 21 points behind the eventual winner, Republican Gov. George Ryan.

Things appeared to turn around just before election day, when a poll in the Chicago Sun-Times found Poshard was down by less than 3 percentage points, a statistical tie. “We got more money in the last week. It was too late to even spend it,” recalls Poshard.

Ryan ended up winning by less than 4 percentage points.

The Tribune reported Poshard’s surge may have been due to voters rallying around Democratic candidates as President Bill Clinton faced Republican-led impeachment hearings.

But pollsters can’t predict a last-minute turnaround. And the voters who usually throw a monkey-wrench into the works are the undecideds.

One well-known mistake in predicting election results was the Tribune’s embarrassing headline in 1948 that Thomas Dewey had defeated Harry Truman for president. Polls taken several weeks before the election had indicated Dewey would win, and the newspaper had to go to press before the final returns were in on election night.

But that race highlights another problem for those who rely too heavily on polls. Thomas Patterson, Bradlee professor at Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government, found that Dewey’s apparent lead influenced how journalists covered the contest.

Prior to Truman’s upset win, most stories portrayed him as abrasive and out of control. But in post-election reports, Truman was painted with the tough “Give ’em Hell, Harry,” image, according to Patterson. “The daily reporter has to come up with stories that fit the polls. The main narrative is who is ahead and who is behind,” says Patterson.

And that dynamic continues today. “When [Democratic presidential candidate Al] Gore was falling behind, he was portrayed as wooden, that he couldn’t get out of Clinton’s shadow,” says Patterson. “If a candidate is behind, then reporters start to write ‘What’s wrong with this guy?’ stories.”

Still, while pollsters have no control over how news outlets choose to approach their stories, the competitive aspect of an election does deserve extensive analysis because it is often dynamic and changing, argues Warren Mitofsky, a pollster for CBS news for 27 years. In contrast, it’s rare for politicians to change their stands during a campaign. “The horse race is a significant part of the story.”

Mitofksy believes pollsters can’t win with the media analysts anyway. He recalls the election of 1976 when CBS teamed up with The New York Times for polling. Though the two organizations wanted to learn who was leading, their coverage focused only on the issues. The result? “We were criticized by the press for not doing horse-race stories. And academics criticized us for not putting our numbers in plain view. People who pay attention are schizophrenic about what they want.”

Littlewood and others have some thoughts on increasing or improving issue coverage. He suggests papers try a team approach, with one reporter following the campaign trail. Other reporters would specialize in writing stories about such issues as health care, comparing the positions of the major candidates.

He recognizes many news outlets would balk at highlighting the issues. “Reader studies suggest people are not interested. But coverage has to be made more interesting. [Reporters] have to show how issues touch each reader. A lot of the issue stories are just plain dull, and they don’t have to be,” Littlewood says.

The media owe it to their readers to explain the issues, says Simon, who began his career as a journalist. “It’s easier to write a story about a 3-point drop in the polls than on health care or defense programs. But that’s what a campaign should be about.”

A 1998 presidential commission asked television stations to devote at least five minutes every night in the 30 days preceding the election to candidate debate and discussion. Yet, a study by the Annenberg Public Policy Center and Alliance for Better Campaigns reported that the three major networks spent an average of 36 seconds a night on the presidential candidates leading up to the Super Tuesday primary last March.

In Illinois, only WGEM-TV of Quincy had agreed to the 5/30 proposal by mid-September.

The station’s general manager Leo Henning believes that many broad-casters, especially those in smaller markets, already live up to the standard. “Downstate we can do this [for candidates running] at the federal and state level,” says Henning. “We a re a public trustee. It’s good business, it’s good politics, it’s the responsible thing to do.”

And the station will control the format so that candidate statements aren’t glorified advertisements. “They aren’t going to get five minutes with a wonderful backdrop and their hair perfectly coifed to tell us their vision of the world,” says Henning.

Efforts like these could help to swing coverage away from poll-driven reporting. But it probably won’t happen unless the public demands that news directors make the precious space or air time available.

What do you think? .

Thomas Patterson, Bradlee professor at Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government, believes polls affect the way reporters cover the candidates.

7 . October 2000 Illinois Issues www.uis.edu/~ilissues