This blog has over the years expended some energy on explaining that YouGov is anything but a disinterested seeker after evidence of public opinion, but rather a tool for creating a false impression of public opinion and pushing it in a direction. Needless to say, various legal threats I have received from YouGov and its directors have come to nothing.
Now take this YouGov question in their latest poll:
Would you approve or disapprove of the RAF taking part in air strike operations against Islamic State/ISIS in Syria?
There is no need to mention the RAF in this question – it is not their decision and the impression is subtly conveyed that the RAF want to do it. The question is carefully designed to tap in to the public’s well-documented inclination to support the armed forces in any conflict situation.
If you asked:
Do you approve of the government’s proposals for taking part in air strike operations against Islamic State/ISIS in Syria?
you would get a very different answer. Which of course is why the charlatans at YouGov asked the first question.
Nevertheless, there are two very interesting facts. Even on this biased question opinion is swinging very fast against airstrikes. Secondly, yet again there is a very real divergence of opinion between England and Scotland.
Since I joined the SNP, the comments section has been riddled with people claiming that the SNP is in fact no less neo-con than the other established parties. Today’s debate on Syria, in addition to the recent debate on Trident, make plain that is absolute nonsense.
Nevermind, it would only be Tornados taking part in the airstikes. I dont think Typhoon have ground attack capabilities.
Good question, for once, Anon. I still support co-ordinated, planned military action to suppress Daesh. That is not what is currently on offer. It requires closing the Turkish border, and getting as much value from the Iraquis as possible in the south, before proceeding to recivilise the occupied settlements on the Baghdad – Damascus line. With trained boots on the ground: I’d have to accept ours being there too. As with NI, the enemy is within civilian populations, which are effectively held hostage; it would be a long and dirty process, in which airstrikes would be used mainly for destroying any concentrations of Daesh we could persuade to leave the villages, and hitting supply lines. Bombing Raqqa achieves nothing. Diplomatic efforts to reconcile the Turks and Kurds would achieve more. Cameron’s playing to the gallery.
Frankly, I’d start from somewhere different if I could. It’s been allowed to get completely out of hand, and Mystic Ba’al has the distinct impression that another year will see the realisation that you can’t win a territorial war from a bunker in Yorkshire or Texas and there’ll have to be Western boots on the ground anyway.
“whataboutery” – Translation: “I’ve just been called out on my hypocrisy and I don’t like it!”
Amazing how someone can reach for a cheap term, and – voila! – a very valid point is magically waved away. How very convenient. Instead of the cowardly ducking of difficult points, it would be nice to see one addressed once in a while.
Nevermind
Weren’t you fantasising about Russian S-400 AA missiles taking out British warplanes the other day?
Typhoon deployment: Just in case. Of Russia. It will also give us the opportunity to try them out in the field and hopefully flog some more to those nice Gulf Arabs.
It is great that MPs have had access to carefully chosen Syrian refugees and coached ‘representatives’, united in their opposition to the majority supported government of Syria, speaking on behalf of themselves alone but purporting to represent all of Syrian opinion.
Do you approve of the RAF bombing the barbaric, headchopping scum (even though the RAF won’t be bombing anyone in Syria without Assad and Putin’s permission now the S400 system is in place), while supporting the barabaric, heart-eating scum of whom we approve for some reason, or are you one of the few who have kept their heads while all around are losing theirs?
Is how I would have framed the question.
Its not a misleading question though is it. The RAF would be the ones taking part in the airstrikes.
Phil- it may not be ‘misleading’ but You Gov’s question is clearly loaded. Kelner and his mates understand the basic laws of market research, namely, that you can tweak the results towards what your client wants to hear by the wording of the questions.
Excuse me while I stifle a retch- while writing this I’ve been listening to Liam Fox’s contribution to the debate; he’s just said the imminent Syrian campaign will be like the Libyan campaign, and ‘minimise’ civilian casulalties.
Excuse me while I stifle a retch- while writing this I’ve been listening to Liam Fox’s contribution to the debate; he’s just said the imminent Syrian campaign will be like the Libyan campaign, and ‘minimise’ civilian casulalties.
The retch was collective, I think. Is he hoping for the same spectacular success?
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/fox-adviser-is-involved-in-arms-deals-says-mod-source-2367848.html
Suits you, Sir…
Yougov just asks the questions it’s paid to ask,surely ? So you just ask who paid them. Or I imagine that Yougov could advise as to how to get the answer you want. Either way,it’s the financer who’s cooking it.
More of the state’s chiming with the ‘debate’ in which Cameron refused to apologize for alluding to Corbyn supporters as ‘terrorist supporters’.
Four Arrested In Luton Terrorism Raids
The four men, all aged in their 30s, have been taken into custody and are being questioned at a police station in London.
http://news.sky.com/story/1598353/four-arrested-in-luton-terrorism-raids
and to let us know that we are being kept ‘safe’,
Police To Confront Terrorists In New Tactic
A shift in strategy for British police is likely to mean less of a focus on negotiations when people’s lives are at risk.
http://news.sky.com/story/1598039/police-to-confront-terrorists-in-new-tactic
The photo is v scary
http://media.skynews.com/media/images/generated/2015/12/1/433335/default/v1/cegrab-20151201-211617-689-1-992×558.jpg
Best to stay indoors and stay ‘safe’. 🙂
It’s impossible to not load the question though, isn’t it? One way or another?
Glenn
It is whataboutery because, although Saudi Arabia does execute a large number of people through its backward system of Sharia law, it is not a country where there is an ongoing civil war in which hundreds of thousands have died and involving an army of fanatics bombing civilian targets as far away as Paris.
Whatever your view on Saudi Arabia, and I would certainly agree that we should be distancing ourselves from them, we can’t just call off the operation, or start bombing Saudi as well as IS, because some twits think we are being hypocritical.
I would also suggest that were we not allied with Saudi Arabia then it would quickly become one of the blog’s commenteriat’s favourite regimes. That is the real hypocrisy here.
Saudi support for IS is also highly exaggerated before you try that line.
Do you approve of the government’s proposals for taking part in air strike operations against Islamic State/ISIS in Syria?
You’d be sampling a smaller range of opinion with that. Given that the man on the Clapham omnibus – and the one in the M-series BMW* – may well not have a clue what the government’s proposals are. It’s rather difficult not to be tendentious when writing surveys. Even more so as the individual reponse to the question depends on whether it reads the Sun or Marxism Today. Never overestimate the intelligence of the man in the street…
*Yes, you, you thick ***t.
It’s impossible to not load the question though, isn’t it? One way or another?
No- Craig’s alternative wording- ‘Do you approve of the government’s proposals for taking part in air strike operations against Islamic State/ISIS in Syria?’ doesn’t seek to lead the respondent by an appeal to simple patriotism, as the insertion of ‘RAF’ does.
People often revert to history to answer difficult questions, and how to deal with Islam is the best of the lot, having centuries of experience to show that crusades solve nothing, only result in endless deaths, and mayhem.
When all the special expeditionary forces have been exhausted, we still will have to make some kind of settlement with those billion still remaining.
Expect Assad to declare a no fly zone over Syria within hrs./days and we must not forget that nobody in the UK has asked for permission to use Syrias airspace for their Intensive Spring cleaning, nor have we got any understanding with the Russians regards to their defence engagement measures.
If the PM wants to ignore the safety of UK airspace in favor of creating widows and orphans, then he is on the right path to be remembered as the one who failed thrice.
Anon1: Specifically in this instance, we were talking about the barbaric practice of head-lopping, rather than wider issues – such as religious tolerance, gross subordination of females, sadistic practices according to Holy Writ, mass imprisonment, torture, widespread corruption, suppression of free speech, brutal repression on any form of political dissent and waging wars of aggression (just off the top of my head, doubtless that’s just the start of it). All of which are favoured practices of the Saudis by way of official government policy.
These people also threatened us, saying they’d withhold “intelligence” about terrorism (wink, wink) if we had the temerity to investigate our own involvement in international corruption when dealing with them. They are no strangers to terrorism either, if you believe the official account of “9/11”, for instance, most of the hijackers were Saudi citizens.
They are promoters of fundamentalist Wahhabism, and as anti-Semitic as anyone on Earth.
Now these are our good friends, favoured partners, and honoured guests when they show up – both here and the US – our allies, as you said. Our feigning outrage, and making a moral case against other murderers and head-loppers, opens us to ridicule and charges of utter hypocrisy while they remain so.
You cannot legitimately wave all that away with the term “whataboutary”, as if that were some magic incantation.
Anon1 must be joking when he/she said:
‘I would also suggest that were we not allied with Saudi Arabia then it would quickly become one of the blog’s commenteriat’s favourite regimes. That is the real hypocrisy here.’
Better send for reinforcements.
The co-founder of YouGov is now the most right wing Blue Tory imaginable, and a trougher to boot although mega rich.
‘Co-Founder of YouGov
Following a career as European Marketing Director for Smith & Brooks Ltd, Nadhim Zahawi co-founded YouGov with Stephan Shakespeare, a former spokesperson for Jeffrey Archer. Zahawi was YouGov’s CEO from 2005 to 2010.’
‘Zahawi claimed for 2012/13 a total of £170,234 in expenses, ranking him the 130th highest out of 650 MPs. He explained in his local newspaper Stratford Herald that the “vast bulk” of his expenses was on staffing costs.
In November 2013 Zahawi “apologised unreservedly” after The Sunday Mirror reported that he had claimed £5,822 expenses for electricity for his horse riding school stables and a yard manager’s mobile home. Zahawi said the mistake arose because he received a single bill covering both a meter in the stables and one in his house. He would repay the money though the actual overcharge was £4,000. An article in The Independent also drew attention to the number of legitimate but “trivial” items on Zahawi’s expenses.’
See also Registered interests and Constituency home
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nadhim_Zahawi
Leading question and sham polls are stock in trade of any sham democracy intent on creating a good impression of inclusiveness and common good!
Our dear leaders have been trying their best for a bombing campaign of any sorts for a while now, and their impatience is quite palpable from their shrill tones; any poopy pants who disagrees with bombing Syria is a rotter and a terrorist sympathiser!
Watching the HoC and a troop of out of control chimps in the wilds of jungle bent on causing havoc is frighteningly similar.
May Corbyn and his sanity and humanity win the day!
Zahawi’s long winded observations in the HoC
30 November 2015 MIDDLE EAST
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201516/cmhansrd/cm151130/debtext/151130-0002.htm#15113013000216
and yesterday a good put down by Bercow in Topical Questions to Gideon.
T3. [902435] Nadhim Zahawi (Stratford-on-Avon) (Con): I recently attended the skills show in Birmingham, which was an incredible example of the opportunities on offer in Britain for young people, including jobs, training and apprenticeships. Does my right hon. Friend agree that the levy he announced in the autumn statement is an excellent further step to ensure that young people in the UK are earning and learning— or preferably both—as that is the route towards a more productive workforce that is ready for jobs in the 21st century?
Mr Speaker: The hon. Gentleman is a celebrated denizen of the House and he should provide a better example to his new colleagues. Questions from both sides of the House are just too long — good, but too long.
Mr Osborne: I was very excited, Mr Speaker, to hear about the skills show in Birmingham. My hon. Friend is right: by investing in apprenticeships and creating 3 million apprentices we address one of the great weaknesses of the British economy that has emerged over many decades, which is the low skill base.
Mr Speaker: Unfortunately, the Chancellor’s excitement is of no interest to the Chair. What is of interest is pithiness and progress, and everybody ought to be able to grasp that point.
LOL
“Do you approve of the underfunded, overstretched RAF bombing the barbaric, headchopping scum, who are firmly embedded in innocent civilian populations,”
______________________
At least Ba’al Zevul is not claiming that the West has forced ISIL to embed itself in civilian populations.
We must be glad for small mercies 🙂
Classic clip from Yes Prime Minister that explains leading questions:
https://youtu.be/G0ZZJXw4MTA
STWC
http://stopwar.org.uk/index.php/news/why-does-hilary-benn-want-to-bomb-syria-the-most-bombed-country-on-the-planet
and
DEC
02
TONIGHT – Protest and Die in: Don’t vote for war
https://www.facebook.com/events/998145346924699/
Loony
“Another day, another provocation. This time NATO invites Montenegro to join its not so exclusive club.”
______________________
Why a provocation, Loony?
You can’t use the usual hackneyed argument that Montenegro borders on Russia, can you.
Or perhaps you think it does….?
+++++++++++++++++++
Habbabkuk says: loony by name, loony in thought. Keep it up!
2.47pm
Cavalry come to the rescue of Anon1. On horseback not unicorn.
http://sealionpress.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/The-Team.png
Mary
“Yes Fwl (who are you btw)”
______________
As you once said to me when I asked you where you live in leafy Surrey: mind your own business.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
“Israel is good at short, sharp destructive wars. They have had a lot of practice on Gaza, several times”
_________________________
They were hardly wars, were they. I should call them “operations” – police operations Middle East style* if you like.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
“and Lebanon where they didn’t do so wel”
_______________________
Because Hizbollah embedded itself in the civilian population and therefore restricted what could have been a more robust response. As you are aware, the IDF is the most moral army in the world.
Against Arab armies the Israelis didn’t do too badly, I think you’ll agree (1948/9, 1956, 1967, 1973….
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
* just like President Assad Junior policing his fellow countrymen by dropping barrel bombs and poison gas on them.
Craig has raised a topic of vital importance, and extreme relevance to the times we live in.
That is the deliberate (and extremely scientifically engineered) manipulation of people’s responses to questions in surveys, by taking advantage of certain, very well-understood (by psychologists and others in the field) ‘idiosyncracies’ of how the human mind works.
In particular, there is a highly evolved understanding of (and method for) precisely how to go about ‘fine-tuning’ people’s subconscious emotional reactions to a question, by paying close (microscopic, even) attention to the WORDING of the question.
Craig alludes to this in his example of what happens when you put the idea of the “RAF” in people’s minds, rather than “government”.
“RAF” (ROYAL Air Force) evokes feelings of Queen and country, those fine young men in blue who fought in the Battle of Britain etc. – feelings associated with loyalty, bravery, heroism.
“Government” evokes quite different emotional responses (as should be strikingly evident to even the most casual reader of this blog!) – feelings of distrust, suspicion, even fear.
Anyone interested in learning more about the subject should most certainly read “Thinking, Fast and Slow” by Daniel Kahneman. (There is an Audiobook version, narrated in a very lively fashion by Patrick Egan).
I would go as far as to say, EVERYONE should read it! (It is very readable, by the way – not ‘dry’ and ‘academic’). (Ok, it IS a bit dry and academic in places (!) but the first third of the book, at the very least, most people should find REALLY fascinating).
If for no other reason, read it just to be astonished to discover just how IRRATIONAL you are! (We ALL are, it’s a fact!).
It’s a valuable tool to have in your personal toolkit of “anti-propaganda awareness aids”.
Mary
“2.47pm
Cavalry come to the rescue of Anon1”
__________________
Yes, Mary, sorry I was a little late today but I had other matters to attend to.
You should try it some time. 🙂