Mainstream Media reports exit poll errors-some actually buy a look at data

[papau]

Thank God the Media was able to use "corrected - using counts of actual votes" data shortly after the polls closed!

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/20/politics/20exit.html?adxnnl=1&oref=login&adxnnlx=1106233521-KZN8UKrVAxbRJYILlC36OQ


Study Cites Human Failings in Election Day Poll System
By JACQUES STEINBERG

he research firms that designed the $10 million polling system used by news organizations during last year's presidential election have concluded that the system erroneously showed John Kerry to be leading the race not because of a technological breakdown but because of more human variables. These included the relative youth of the pollsters, who were more successful securing interviews with supporters of Mr. Kerry as they left polling places than with those of the actual winner, President Bush.

The findings by the two firms, Edison Media Research and Mitofsky International, were in a 77-page report released yesterday by the consortium of six news organizations - five television networks and The Associated Press - that had commissioned the new system.

The recommendations made by the research firms included the hiring of surveyors from a broader range of ages (half of those who worked on Election Day were 34 or younger) and doing a better job training those pollsters and working with individual communities to ensure that interviews could be conducted closer to voting sites.

While the consortium members generally praised the firms for the thoroughness of their analysis, representatives for the news organizations said they had not yet decided whether to retain Edison and Mitofsky for future elections. Such a decision is expected within the next month or so.

"We are all making up our minds as to what the next move is," said John Stack, vice president for newsgathering at Fox News, one of the consortium members. "We know it is an imprecise system. But we're providing an important service for the American public. We need to try to get the best product possible."<snip>

The researchers focused instead on the median age of the surveyors, 34, and they hypothesized that perhaps younger voters (pro-Kerry)felt more comfortable than older voters submitting questionnaires to younger surveyors.

[papau]

1. USAToday has paid for a look at the actual data!- Well - "some of the data

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-01-19-exitpolls_x.htm






Firms report flaws that threw off exit polls
By Mark Memmott, USA TODAY
The exit polls of voters on Election Day so overstated Sen. John Kerry's support that, going back to 1988, they rank as the most inaccurate in a presidential election, the firms that did the work concede.

One reason the surveys were skewed, they say, was because Kerry's supporters were more willing to participate than Bush's. Also, the people they hired to quiz voters were on average too young and too inexperienced and needed more training.
<snip>

Among the findings:

•They hired too many relatively young adults to conduct the interviews. Half of the 1,400 interviewers were younger than 35. That may explain in part why Kerry voters were more inclined to participate, since he drew more of the youth vote than did Bush. But Mitofsky and Lenski also found younger interviewers were more likely to make mistakes.

•Early results were skewed by a "programming error" that led to including too many female voters. Kerry outpolled Bush among women.

•Some local officials prevented interviewers from getting close to voters.

For future exit polls, Lenski and Mitofsky recommended hiring more experienced polltakers and giving them better training, and working with election officials to ensure access to polling places.


Many other news media, including USA TODAY, also paid to get some of the data.

[papau]

2. Got to love Wash Po - "Acknowledges Inaccuracies " -'cause fraud is not

possible.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A22188-2005Jan19.html


Report Acknowledges Inaccuracies in 2004 Exit Polls

By Richard Morin and Claudia Deane
Washington Post Staff Writers
Thursday, January 20, 2005; Page A06


Interviewing for the 2004 exit polls was the most inaccurate of any in the past five presidential elections as procedural problems compounded by the refusal of large numbers of Republican voters to be surveyed led to inflated estimates of support for John F. Kerry, according to a report released yesterday by the research firms responsible for the flawed surveys.

The exit pollsters emphasized that the flaws did not produce a single incorrect projection of the winner in a state on election night. But "there were 26 states in which the estimates produced by the exit poll data overstated the vote for John Kerry . . . and there were four states in which the exit poll estimates overstated the vote for George W. Bush," said Joe Lenski of Edison Media Research and Warren Mitofsky of Mitofsky International.<snip>


The analysis found no evidence of fraud resulting from the rigging of voting equipment, a contention made repeatedly by those who question the 2004 vote. NOT TRUE - NO SYSTEMIC - MEAMING FINDING THAT ALL VOTING MACHINES WERE RIGGED - WAS ONLY STATEMENT

BUT THE WASHINGTON POST LIE TO COVER UP FOR THE GOP - COULD NOT HAPPEN.

Lenski and Mitofsky compared the exit-polling results with the final vote tally in 1,460 precincts where interviews were conducted and vote returns were available.

"Our investigation of the differences between the exit poll estimates and the actual vote count point to one primary reason: in a number of precincts a higher than average within-precinct error most likely due to Kerry voters participating in the exit polls at a higher rate than Bush voters. . . . While the size of the average exit poll error has varied , it was higher in 2004 than in previous years for which we have data," Lenski and Mitofsky wrote.

But they acknowledged in the report that they remain at a loss to explain precisely why Bush supporters, or Republicans generally, were more likely to refuse to be interviewed than Kerry voters.<snip>