A User's View of the Polls

The treatment of polls and surveys by the New York Times haschanged from casual to extensive use, both in its internal decision-makingand its political and social reporting, with many obvious benefits.But some implications of poll proliferation, especially theirdistorting effects on the political process, raise troublingthoughts.     

The Presidents and the Polls

Since Franklin Delano Roosevelt, presidents have used opinionpolls to aid them in being elected and as input to policy formulation.Several examples of such effective use are presented. Pollsmay also be misused by presidents simply to enhance presidentialpopularity. Such actions are generally ineffective either forincreasing presidential popularity or for making wise policydecisions.     

Polls as Journalism

Public opinion polling has always had close financial and institutionalties to journalism. Many of its strengths and weaknesses derivefrom these ties.     

Predicting No Opinion in the Polls

On poll questions, levels of expressed public ignorance or indifference—NoOpinion or Don't Know—can be explained in some part bycertain properties of the questions pollsters ask, althoughthe educational level of respondents is the single best predictor.No Opinion levels are analyzed in two large sets of recent pollquestions published by Gallup and Harris. A measure of the languagecomplexity of the questions shows no relationship to DK. Ofthe three other question predictors assessed, it is questioncontent which best illuminates levels of No Opinion in bothpolls and points to some unique characteristics of each. Theimportance of question content is demonstrated in two additionalsets of Gallup and Harris data. The more difficult kind of questioncontent dominates in all four sets of poll questions examined.     

Lyndon Johnson and the Public Polls

This article examines the relationship between President LyndonJohnson and those who take published polls. As his poll ratingsdeclined, Johnson used a number of methods to convince thosewith influence that he was more popular than the polls indicated.These methods included direct and indirect attacks on the polls,leaks of private polls, attempts to influence the results, andcourting the pollsters. The article argues that the last ofthese poses a danger to the objectivity of the pollsters. Secretlygiving advice to and taking private polls for a president areincompatible with the role of objective measurer of public opinion.