“Key issues concern Memphians in election” is today’s CA front page headline. The subhead says “Views on city’s direction divided in conversations.”
Kind of “well, duh” statements.
The story starts off with “Memphians are concerned with the intertwined web of crime, poverty and educational attainment.” That is probably correct and obvious if you’ve lived here more than two weeks.
What data or information led them to these conclusions?
They say, “The CA interviewed more than 15 voters while they sat on park benches, mowed their lawns, stood on doorsteps or attended campaign rallies.”
Yes, more than 15. What – 16? How can that be considered a cross section of voters in any way? The randomness of it is off putting, too. Sat on park benches, mowed their lawns where? Wouldn’t that have a bearing on what information they gathered? Asking someone in Cordova will be vastly different from Orange Mound as well as East Memphis or Wolfchase area.
We don’t know much about these people either. Are they retired? Black, white, Hispanic? Holding a job? Educated with a high school or college diploma? Man or woman? We know nothing.
That makes this poll as worthless as all others. The reporter and editors assigned the story with a viewpoint already held and just searched for validation. That’s what happens in most polls now. They are used to push candidates or theories, not to find out what people think in a scientific manner.
That the CA admits to the poor quality of the poll astounds me.
It shouldn’t. Their daily publishing tells us that facts and information are not the point of the CA.