| May 2012 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S | M | T | W | T | F | S |
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | ||
| 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 |
| 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 |
| 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 |
| 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | ||
Widely reported today is the new Zogby Poll, the report for which states that 26% of Americans believe that "certain elements in the US government knew the attacks were coming but consciously let them proceed for various political, military and economic motives."
Here's the question asked in the poll:
402. There are three main schools of thought regarding the 9/11 attacks. The first theory is the official story, and maintains that 19 Arab fundamentalists executed a surprise attack which caught US intelligence and military forces off guard. The second theory known as Let It Happen argues that certain elements in the US government knew the attacks were coming but consciously let them proceed for various political, military and economic motives; and the third theory Made It Happen contends that certain US government elements actively planned or assisted some aspects of the attacks. Based upon your knowledge of 9/11 events and their aftermath, which theory are you more likely to agree with?
As a professional Market Researcher, I was immediately struck by the characterization of the majority view as "the official story." It seemed to me that this phrase had strong connotations of something which is not true. To characterize one of the views being surveyed in a manner that implies that it is not true, it appeared to me, could introduce bias into the survey.
I wondered whether it might be that the poll's sponsor, 911truth.org, might have written the question.
To find out, I called Zogby this morning, and spoke to Fritz Wenzel, Director of Communications. I introduced myself as a blogger and as a Market Researcher. Fritz really made an effort to provide useful feedback, and I appreciated the opportunity to speak to him.
I first asked, whether 911truth.org had written the questions included in this section of the survey. Mr. Wenzel was kind enough to give me time to take written notes during our conversation. He responded:
They came to us with the concepts, and we had final approval of the questions.
I pressed a bit for detail, since I couldn't quite tell from this how much input 911truth.org had had, in the writing of the questions. Mr. Wenzel responded further:
We're the experts on how questions should be worded properly. We signed off on, and approved the questions.
I then noted my concerns that the phrase "official story," had strong connotations of something that is not true. Mr. Wenzel responded:
That's your implication, perhaps - that's certainly not mine. I don't have the survey in front of me, but it certainly wasn't the assumption of the majority of respondents - a majority said, that's what they believe.
I said that the percentage of those saying "let it happen" seemed quite high, and might not have been so high, had it not been that some respondents viewed the phrase "official story" the way I did. Mr. Wenzel responded:
That's an appropriate question for you to ask; it's not an appropriate question for me to speculate on.
We concluded the conversation in a friendly manner.
I found Mr. Wenzel's point of view compelling. To investigate further, I Googled the phrase "official story" to see in what sort of context it is usually found.
The results appeared to confirm my point of view. While a number were innocuous (e.g. an article on the "retirement" of fictitious character Jeeves, from AskJeeves.com), quite a few used the phrase in a context that implied skepticism. From the first 30 entries found by the search, in the order reported by Google:
So of the first 30 links found by Google on a search for the text, "official story," over 12 of them - i.e. over 40% - use the phrase in a manner that implies that the view being expressed is not true.
Additionally, 7 of the 12 links are to sites belonging to, or expressing views similar to those expressed by, the study's sponsor, 911truth.org. This shows that the phrase "official story" is strongly associated with those views and with that organization. It appears likely that the question was drafted by 911truth.org, and approved by Zogby, which is consistent with what I learned from Mr. Wenzel, and with what I speculated might be the case, upon first reading the question.
Given the dictionary definition of the word "story," it would be difficult to imagine that the phrase "official story" does not imply that the view expressed is not true. From dictionary.com:
sto·ry [stawr-ee, stohr-ee] Pronunciation Key - noun, plural -ries, verb, -ried, -ry·ing. -noun
1. a narrative, either true or fictitious, in prose or verse, designed to interest, amuse, or instruct the hearer or reader; tale.
2. a fictitious tale, shorter and less elaborate than a novel.
3. such narratives or tales as a branch of literature: song and story.
4. the plot or succession of incidents of a novel, poem, drama, etc.: The characterizations were good, but the story was weak.
5. a narration of an incident or a series of events or an example of these that is or may be narrated, as an anecdote, joke, etc.
6. a narration of the events in the life of a person or the existence of a thing, or such events as a subject for narration: the story of medicine; the story of his life.
7. a report or account of a matter; statement or allegation: The story goes that he rejected the offer.
8. news story.
9. a lie or fabrication: What he said about himself turned out to be a story.
5 of the 9 definitions (1,2,3,4 & 9) are for cases in which the narrative referred to is, or may be, fictional, or is a lie or fabrication.
It appears that the phrase "official story" is not suitable for use in a poll of this nature.
#1Skewed results are to be expected when the 9/11 question is prefaced with “There are three main schools of thought regarding the 9/11 attacks.”
This is highly skewed, as it places two paranoid conspiracy theories on the same level as the well-vetted truth: 9/11 was, indeed, the work of Islamic terrorists. All of whom were Arabs; 15 of 19 from Saudi Arabia.
What is most disturbing isn't the obvious bias of Zogby. Rather, what is disturbing is the result that so many people, especially Democrats (close to 43%) actually believe the paranoid choices were true.
This episode sheds some light on the credibility of Zogby. It sheds no light on what thinking people believe about 9/11.
#3Boris,
The other two positions are identified by phrases that refer to their specific views - "Let it Happen" and "Made it Happen." Only the majority position is referred to in a way that does not do so - "Official Story." This is another way in which the question appears to be weighted against the majority position. To be consistent, the majority position could be referred to as, for example, "Surprise attack."
#4A poll is loaded with questions designed to ellicit certain responses. Well stop the presses!
This just in: Water is wet. Polling became a corrupt "science" at birth. The crowd would always wait and watch the Ceasar's thumb, no?
#5#4, I really can't agree with you on that. Almost every successful business uses market research to determine how to improve their products and services.
#6This post is getting a lot of hits, although my referrer logs don't show new links to it yet. Has it been written up somewhere? Or is it circulating in email?
It would be great if someone reading this could leave a brief comment saying where you heard about this post.
You make a good point, but how else would you phrase the "official story"?
Also, is it possible respondents focused on "certain elements in the US government knew the attacks were coming" and then thought about the daily briefing?
I too find the results hard to swallow.