Frank Luntz Says Using 'Poll-Driven Language' Is Wrong - When Democrats Do It, Of Course

[media id=9300] (h/t Heather.) Oh, the irony! Frank Freakin' Luntz, the man so amoral, he actually got censured by his trade association, lecturing

up

(h/t Heather.)

Oh, the irony! Frank Freakin' Luntz, the man so amoral, he actually got censured by his trade association, lecturing Democrats about right and wrong for using "misleading" poll-driven language? I think my heart's about to seize from me laughing so hard. Republicans are such flaming hypocrites, aren't they?

Wikipedia:

Luntz's specialty is “testing language and finding words that will help his clients sell their product or turn public opinion on an issue or a candidate.”

You mean poll-driven language, Frank? It couldn't be that you're angry that we're using your tactics against you, could it?

In 1997, he was reprimanded by the American Association for Public Opinion Research for refusing to release poll data to support his claimed results "because of client confidentiality". Diane Colasanto, who was president of the AAPOR when it reprimanded Luntz, said, "It is simply wanting to know, How many people did you question? What were the questions? We understand the need for confidentiality, but once a pollster makes results public, the information needs to be public. People need to be able to evaluate whether it was sound research."[12]

In 2000 he was censured by the National Council on Public Polls "for allegedly mischaracterizing on MSNBC the results of focus groups he conducted during the [2000] Republican Convention." In September 2004, MSNBC dropped Luntz from its planned coverage of that year's presidential debate, following a letter from Media Matters that outlined Luntz's GOP ties and questionable polling methodology.[13][14] In a video piece, entertainers and libertarians Penn & Teller lambasted Luntz for his comment that the key to survey polling is "to ask a question in the way that you get the right answer".[15] In the wake of the 2008 Presidential election, fellow Republican and prominent pollster Bill McInturff criticized Luntz before journalists at a National Journal Breakfast, insisting that Luntz is "a moron" and lambasting him for mocking Senator McCain's inability to use a Blackberry, which McInturff attributed to the injuries that McCain sustained while a prisoner of war in Vietnam.[16]

Nah, that can't be it. Because from what I read, you're now working for the Democrats, too:

Luntz simply says he's on fire, chalking up his expanded business and full calendar of speeches to his 2008 election dial-testing of voters for Fox News Channel. "Everyone saw my dial sessions, the debate analysis, the ad tests, and the accurate prognosis. Now, everyone wants to apply what they saw and figure out what they can learn from it," he says. "I see no reason not to provide the analyses for those who want it."

Democrats cheer. "Frank has been helpful as we continue to develop our broad-base strategy," says a House operative. Jim Manley, spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, adds: "To the extent that Senator Reid likes to hear from pollsters, which is rarely if ever, he always appreciates hearing what Frank has to say." And, he adds, "it has the added benefit of making Republicans mad."

And speaking of ethical dilemmas, Frank, that sort of creates a problem for you, doesn't it? Because while you're on Fox News lambasting Democrats (some of whom may be your clients) and praising Republicans (many of whom are your clients), shouldn't you disclose exactly who paid for your services?

Because if you didn't, that would be wrong.

About Susie Madrak

Comments

We welcome relevant, respectful comments. Please refer to our Terms of Service for information on our posting policy.