Flawed Chron/Murray/Stein survey continues to draw attention (updated)
David Benzion posts that Dr. David Hill of Hill Research Consultants was interviewed yesterday by Fox News (national) about the flaws in that poll on Tom DeLay that the Chronicle rushed to the field following a spate of bad press for DeLay.
Benzion shares some of the points made by Dr. Hill in his blog post, and suggests that the interview may get some play on Special Report with Brit Hume today. Hill is a nationally respected pollster from The Woodlands.
Hill's critique comes after Chris Wilson of Wilson Research Strategies criticized elements of the survey and the Chronicle's characterization of the results on Edd Hendee's morning program on KSEV-700 yesterday.
As Chris Elam notes, some of the most useful, detailed criticism in print so far has come from Evan at DeLay vs World (with some further discussion here). Unfortunately, that's off the radar of some bigshot national bloggers. That's okay. We're more than happy to help with your hyperlocal blogging needs.
UPDATE: Benzion posts a sneering response by the Chronicle's main Editorial LiveJournalist, James Howard Gibbons, to a Jack Rains email to the Chronicle editorial page. As we've seen lately, emotions seem to be getting the best of some editors at the Chronicle lately.
UPDATE 2: Dr. Hill was not on the Brit Hume show. I don't know what happened.
Evan at DeLay vs World posts more thoughts on the flaws in the Chron/Murray/Stein survey. And make no mistake -- the combination of the poll's methodology and the subsequent interpretation is deeply flawed.
And the Chronicle reader representative completely ignores legitimate criticism of the survey that has been raised by two pollsters who actually make a living at doing political polling (instead of doing it as a hobby while teaching), as well as several blogs. Instead, the Chronicle reader representative posts DeLay campaign emails as indicative of the criticism of the flawed Chronicle/Murray/Stein survey, and posts a "rebuttal" from a Chronicle political editor that isn't a rebuttal at all (and actually makes the Chronicle look more clueless). That's deceptive.
Murray and Stein need either to admit their survey is flawed, or answer their critics. We're not their undergraduates. They can't just tell us to go away because they are (self-)important people with tenure. Both the Chronicle and these academics owe the critics of this flawed survey an explanation of why they think the critics are wrong, or an admission that the critics have a point.
Posted by Kevin Whited @ 01/18/06 01:50 PM | Print |
Previous Entry | Home | Next Entry
ADVERTISING
DISCLAIMER
All content © 2004-09, blogHOUSTON and the respective authors.
blogHOUSTON.net is powered by Nucleus.
Site design and Nucleus customization are by Kevin Whited.