The poll -- which was conducted by the Democratic research firm Public Policy Polling (PPP) -- surveyed 928 people and found that 52 percent of Americans approved of God's overall dealings, while only 9 percent disapproved.
The interesting thing about the reporting of this story is that the website from which I pulled the above sentence, HuffingtonPost.com, had a headline above the story that read "God's Approval Rating Barely Breaks 50 Percent". That word "barely" makes it sound like Huffington Post is down on God, and pretty pleased that he is only squeaking by in the eyes of the American public. However, when the article breaks the data down, we see that although only 52 percent of people polled had a favorable view of God and his work, a measly nine percent actually disapproved. Don't reflect that little tidbit of information in your headline, do you, Huffington Post? Maybe the headline should read "Way More People Actively Approve of God Than Disapprove". That might be a little less misleading, huh? But that still wouldn't reflect what I think is one of the biggest points to take away from this poll. It's something that the Huffington Post didn't even comment on in their article, probably because it takes all the teeth away from their position: the remainder of people polled responded that they were "not sure" about God's performance.
Here's how "not sure" translates in this context: "Really? That's really a question? We have a Congress that is more than happy to let the country die just to score political points, Europe is experiencing unprecedented financial turmoil, people are dying by the millions across Africa and the Middle East at the hands of disease, famine and militaristic dictators, and you're focusing your energy on a phony-baloney God poll? How will the results of this poll change anything at all? You think God cares if a thousand-person sample approves of his "performance" or not? Come on!" Public Policy Polling couldn't fit that response onto a ballot, so they substituted it with the option of "Not Sure". But the media doesn't want you to know that, because then their story would be even more fluff than it is already.
Also, on a related note, please review the arithmetic of the "In The Arena" team at CNN. Those are some straight up number-crunchers they have there. That extra one percent must be a very special group of people:
I think CNN misunderstood what "sampling error" means. It's a provision for the inaccuracy of surveying a sample of the population instead of the whole population, not an out for people in the newsroom who don't know how to add.
No comments:
Post a Comment