Most political observers know to stop reading when they see the phrase, “According to a poll from Zogby Interactive…” and yet, yesterday, I coul
Most political observers know to stop reading when they see the phrase, “According to a poll from Zogby Interactive…” and yet, yesterday, I couldn’t believe the commotion caused by a poll that obviously didn’t make any sense.
About 24 hours ago, two polls came out -- a Zogby Interactive poll (with questionable methodology) showing Hillary Clinton struggling against the top GOP candidates, and a Gallup poll (with more reliable methodology) showing the opposite. Guess which one got too much attention?
While the Zogby poll was mentioned by multiple reporters and pundits, the only mentions the Gallup poll got on TV were from Hillary advisers who had to bring it up themselves on the air in order to inject it into the conversation.
Of course, every political reporter, editor, and producer in the country knew that Zogby Interactive results were unreliable, but they trumpeted the results anyway.
Wouldn’t responsible journalism require news outlets to a) note why professional pollsters discount Zogby Interactive data; and b) also highlight the Gallup numbers with equal enthusiasm?