‘Surveys may be used as campaign tool’

A political analyst warned the public yesterday against surveys being used as direct campaign tools during the election season.

Ray Orosa, a banker and financial analyst, said there are known methods that could be utilized to make survey results favorable to those who commissioned it.

"One Social Weather Stations survey was apparently slanted to put President Arroyo and the administration’s senatorial candidates in a bad light during the election season," he said.

"Both the administration and the opposition could be guilty of commissioning surveys for their own respective advantage."

Orosa said one of the SWS surveys they managed to secure showed how the opponents of the administration used it to become a direct campaign tool.

An SWS survey titled "Project Rostov" conducted from March 18 to 23 used common methods to "slant" or "veil" surveys, he added. Orosa said these methods were enumerated in an article written by veteran US political analyst Matthew Region.

The questions asked in the survey showed all three techniques —subject-verb attribution, cornered questions, and biased headings —described by Region were used by SWS, he added.

Orosa said page 49 of the document, for instance, contained the test statement: "President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo steals from the coffers of the country."

By directly attributing a verb (steals) to a subject (Mrs. Arroyo), these statements are phrased to suggest right away that she is a thief, he added.

On the other hand, Orosa said notably absent in the questionnaire are statements indicating the opposite _- if the respondents believe that Mrs. Arroyo is honest.

Without qualifiers, it would be difficult to get the accurate perception of the public being surveyed, especially if the respondents would just choose from only two answers – agree or disagree, he added.

Orosa said the subject-verb attribution formula is likewise applied in many other statements, including one that expresses a blatant suggestion of cheating in the May 14 elections for Mrs. Arroyo’s candidates to win.

Cornered or "No-Win" questions, conversely, refer to a type of inquiry wherein the respondent ends up implicitly agreeing with a phrase, no matter what he or she answers, he added.

Orosa said in "Project Rostov," an example would be "President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo often lies about things that she says to the public."

"These are leading questions," he said.

"It’s like asking, are you still being beaten up by your husband? Even if you reply no, it still suggests that you were being beaten up before.

"Through clever phrasing, even those who disagree with the statement are somehow conceding that Mrs. Arroyo does indeed lie, albeit not often."

Another example would be: "Whatever the economic gains this current administration is saying, personally I do not feel it," he added.

Orosa said no matter how a respondent answered this question, it had already been implied that the administration was merely "saying" that there were economic gains.

"Perhaps the most effective way that a political survey can promote an agenda is through the use of biased headings," he said. – With James Mananghaya