Imagine you’re a voter, making your way through the bustling streets of the city when someone politely stops you and asks you questions. You realize she is an election surveyor searching for survey participants.
Smiling, she extends a clipboard towards you, adorned with a stack of neatly printed survey forms.
“Sorry to bother you,” she begins, “I’m conducting a survey on public opinion regarding the upcoming presidential election. Would you be interested in participating?”
You hesitate, a furrow forming on your brow. Memories of past election surveys flash through your mind – surveys that had promised accurate predictions but had ultimately fallen short, leaving voters, like you, disillusioned and distrustful. Reports of manipulations and bias had further fueled your skepticism, casting a shadow of doubt over the entire survey process.
Along with your distrust, you harbor suspicion about the timing of the survey. Four years before the actual election? It seems premature, almost like propaganda meant to sway public opinion long before the campaign season even begins.
With these concerns weighing heavily on your mind, you politely decline, offering a brief explanation for your reluctance.
“I appreciate your offer,” you say, “but I’ve lost faith in these surveys. They’ve failed us before, and conducting one so far in advance raises suspicions of propaganda”
The surveyor nods understandingly, her expression sympathetic.
“I understand your concern,” she replies, “but your voice matters. Your opinions shape the future of our country, especially in an election as crucial as this one.”
You sigh, torn between your desire to contribute to the democratic process and your reservations about the reliability of surveys and their potential for manipulations.
“I know,” you admit, “but it’s hard to trust something that let us down so many times before, especially when it feels like it’s being used to influence us unfairly.”
With a nod of gratitude, she bids you farewell. As she makes her way through the bustling street, she reflects on her encounter with you – the skeptical voter. Little does she know, such an encounter, a piece of a larger puzzle, has highlighted the complex interplay of premature surveys, non-response bias, and the erosion of public confidence in the electoral system.
Does the above scenario sound familiar and real?
Well, let’s get the picture from the Daily Tribune Editorial:
“More recently, Pulse Asia released the results of a poll on 2028 election prospects, which surprised many because it did not serve any purpose but to condition the minds of the public.
“The poll ranked the presidential chances of personalities and celebrities, asking: ‘Some say those who can run for the presidency in the 2028 elections are the following. Who would you vote for if the 2028 elections were held today?” Then a list was provided.
“Curiously, the pollster classified the results as part of its Ulat ng Bayan series to lend credibility in exchange for access
“These election surveys are never accurate. Pick any particular election poll and compare it with the actual results.
“Pollsters, however, earn huge sums from those who commission the surveys in exchange for access to the questions asked.
“The recent presidential survey featuring personalities and celebrities was also strangely branded as part of a quarterly survey to lend legitimacy.
“There are also suspicions of fudged figures in the surveys through the manipulation of the survey methodologies, notably when the two prominent pollsters simultaneously released the results of their surveys conducted almost during identical periods but with contrasting results.
“Many ask how the results of the two pollsters’ surveys could differ so widely when they supposedly take the pulse of the population using the same formula.
“The period before the regular elections is considered a dry spell for survey firms.
“Holding an election survey at this time is a financial boon for the polling firms, even though the actual presidential election is four years away.”
(Let me digress for a moment to briefly mention that after the 2022 presidential election, Ana Pamintuan cited in her Philstar column the OCTA Research “for being the new reliable player in the industry, its detailed pre-election polling… FRIGHTENINGLY accurate.” (emphasis mine) Why didn’t the media then heap praise, if not cast doubt, upon their polling collaborator's phenomenal feat? Could it be that the feat was so frighteningly accurate that it has crept up on the TNTrio’s claim of the alleged rigging of the 2022 presidential election?)
Now let’s go back to our topic.
The Phenomenon of Premature Surveys
In a country where democracy hangs in the balance, the influence of election surveys cannot be underestimated. Yet, in the Philippines, these surveys often serve as more than just a barometer of public opinion – they are a battleground for trust and legitimacy.
Just as a premature survey conducted years before the actual election becomes increasingly common, like faces on the tarpaulins along the roads across the country (you may read my ATABAY article Faces on Tarpaulins: The Rise Of Pre-campaign Tactics), so too does the skepticism and suspicion that surround them.
These surveys, conducted with seemingly benign intentions, often serve to shape public perception and influence political dynamics long before the campaign season officially begins. From building momentum for favored candidates to setting the agenda for political discourse, premature surveys wield significant influence over the electoral landscape.
Deciphering Non-Response Bias
At the core of premature surveys is the non-response bias. This occurs when critical thinking independent voters, disillusioned by past survey failures and perceived manipulations, choose not to participate in surveys. As a result, the sample of respondents becomes skewed, with eager beaver supporters of certain candidates overrepresented in the survey results. This bias distorts the accuracy of survey findings, creating a false sense of popularity and momentum around particular candidates.
The Potent Vicious Cycle
Imagine a scenario where critical thinking independent voters opt out of participating in a premature survey, while supporters of, say, Candidate S eagerly respond. The skewed sample leads to survey results showing Candidate S in a leading position, triggering a bandwagon effect among voters.
As Associate Justice of the Supreme Court Leonen asserted:
“[T]here is the bandwagon effect where ‘electors rally to support the candidate leading in the polls.’ This assumes that knowledge of a popular ‘tide’ will likely change voting intentions in [favor] of the frontrunner…”
Just as the perceptions of Candidate S’s popularity and electability grow, so too does the support base. This self-reinforcing cycle perpetuates itself, influencing voter behavior, media coverage, and campaign strategies.
Implications for Future Elections
The implications of this vicious cycle extend far beyond individual elections. By distorting public perception and influencing voter behavior, premature surveys and non-response bias undermine the integrity and fairness of the electoral process. They erode trust in democracy, disenfranchise critical thinking voters, and perpetuate a cycle of manipulation and bias.
To safeguard the future of Philippine democracy, policymakers, electoral authorities, and survey researchers must address these challenges head-on, promoting transparency, accountability, and public engagement in the electoral process.
Wrapping up, as we navigate the complex terrain of Philippine politics, it is essential to recognize the power and pitfalls of election surveys. The seemingly benign act of not participating in a survey due to distrust and perceived manipulations can have profound consequences, shaping the issue of who will be our next president.
By untangling the dynamics of premature surveys and non-response bias, we can work together towards a future where the voice of every voter is heard, and the integrity of our democracy is preserved. The stakes are high. The future of Philippine democracy is in our hands.
Content put together in collaboration with ChatGPT
Head collage photos courtesy of PxHere and Pixabay
Video clips courtesy of YouTube
No comments:
Post a Comment