this post was submitted on 26 Jul 2024
328 points (96.9% liked)

politics

19170 readers
5248 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)
[–] Carrolade@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Interesting. How do you square in your mind that there are hundreds of different polling agencies? Each news org has its own, then there's countless independent ones as well. There's easily hundreds.

How does that all get coordinated and falsified with some orchestrated media plan without whistleblowers complaining?

[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Nothing’s usually falsified, per se, it’s more that pollsters have a range of questions and results and one of them is going to “suit” a news agency. Or a PR group, or whatever organization needs the “power of polling results” to move clicks.

For example, we’re in Prime Polling Season, with a huge election coming up, so the polling results are all going to be in the same neighborhood, question-wise, usually. It’s better for corporate news if the race is very close, so all the polls we’ll read about are going to say that.

If a poll came back heavily - lopsidedly - for one candidate over the other, we likely wouldn’t hear about it. Because that would be a problem. They can’t dig into the poll too much they just need a headline out of it.

This is all outside of the methodological problems with polls, it’s just specific to the “uses” that corporate news requires of polls.

[–] Carrolade@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I don't see much evidence of cherry picking polling results, they generally all report their own, or someone like Pew. CNN reports CNN polls, Fox reports Fox polls, 538 reports 538 polls, etc etc. Any person who wishes can check between them, it's very easy. They usually provide the specific questions asked as well.

[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago

I guess it’s ironic that this article doesn’t refer to any polling. No doubt it will come up again and again because corporate news has 24 hours to fill, and outside of gaffes and releases, all they’ve got are talking heads and polls.