Loading ...
Manipulate This
Riposte – By Sumner Burstyn.
How do you create public opinion? If you were in New Zealand the best person to turn to would have to be Pauline Colmar.
Over the last few weeks Ms. Colmar has been popping up at select corporate speaking engagements discussing her latest polling project, The Solid Energy Survey 2012 (click here for the survey). And certainly the results are startling. She’s even been invited to speak to the Ministry for Business, Innovation and Employment because it turns out almost two thirds [of New Zealanders] think we should make greater use of our coal resources.
In short so many of us are coal industry supporters that in Ms. Colmar’s own words, the industry needs to “stop being victims and get out there and shout about it.”
Chris Baker the chief executive of Straterra the mineral sector lobby group was reported in the ODT as saying the percentage is “high enough to be a game-changer.”
In fact Straterra is so hand clapping happy about the research that Mr. Baker says they will put education programs in place soon, enlarge their communications team in Wellington and will be briefing politicians.
Bernie Napp, Senior Policy Analyst for Straterra said the poll was heartening because much of the opposition (to mining) is based on misinformation, either inadvertent or malicious, and it is good to know that only a minority of New Zealander’s believes it.
So given it’s game-on for extractive industries in New Zealand you’d hope the coal industry jubilation was based on something sound.
Except it’s not. Even though Solid Energy who commissioned the poll has refused to release the actual data, the questionnaire alone raises serious ethical concerns.
Question one sets it all up. How concerned are you about New Zealand’s standard of living? If you answer ‘concerned’ or ‘very concerned’ the next question asks how important you think our natural resources are in improving our economic prosperity?
Without context, options or the bigger picture you sort of have to answer ‘very’ or you risk contradicting your previous answer.
Another question offers the possibility that coal reserves could be converted to diesel. But forgets to mention that the conversion plant idea is likely shelved. Another offers the idea that coal could be converted to fertilizer but ignores that any development in that area is based on international prices and would massively raise our agricultural emissions.
Some of the questions are framed very broadly in talking about all of New Zealand’s natural resources from gold to iron sands. But the options to agree or disagree are really focused on coal. The poll even asks how you would feel about impossible things.
So it goes on throughout the form, from positive statements about coal to unqualified and non-contextualized questions. Even the title Public Survey of New Zealand’s Natural Resources omits to mention it’s about mining and you’re more than halfway through the survey before the real focus – lignite in Southland is even mentioned.
So far two organizations, backed with expert market research opinions, have called out the poll as built upon misleading questions designed to induce a positive result.
Solid Energy says the poll was created and managed by Colmar Brunton. Pauline Colmar who left the company years ago is fronting the results and market research company ConsumerLink is claiming authorship, so the true creator is a little hazy.
But whoever is responsible, the polling industry is supposedly governed by a code of practice. It all makes one wonder about the credibility of other polls carrying Colmar Brunton’s name.
There is meant to be a massive difference between spin doctoring and polling. In my opinion, Ms Colmar’s position appears obvious. It’s up to the polling industry in general to state clearly where it sits.
When you break it down the poll is farcical. But that won’t stop Straterra spinning it as the best thing since kettle fries. Watch as that pro-coal, oil, gas, gold and iron sands PR blitz hits mainstream media soon. Mind you, given two-thirds of us are already in support of such extractive industry you wonder why they would bother.
Pauline Colmar is no longer associated in any way with Colmar Brunton Research, nor has she been for the last 23 years. This Solid Energy poll has nothing to do with Colmar Brunton, and nobody that is employed by our organisation has had anything to do with the design of the research or the analysis and reporting of its results. As New Zealand’s most trusted and respected market research company, we stand behind the quality and validity of our work, and operate all of our research within the code of practice and ethics of both AMRO and the New Zealand Market Research Society. To assert that this poll reflects on the quality of other research that “carries the Colmar Brunton name” is just ridiculous. The author would be well advised to get her facts right before making such naive and defamatory claims.
In response, the information in question was taken from Solid Energy’s annual reports for 2009, 2010, 2011 quoting research by Colmar Brunton. (http://www.solidenergy.co.nz/index.cfm/1,186,393,0/Annual-Report.html)
Hi Jacqueline
this is getting terribly confusing.
FACT 1: Colmar Brunton has been carrying out tracking polls for Solid Energy for some years now – and are referenced in Solid Energy’s Annual reports (as Sumner has stated above, with the link).
FACT 2: The Coal Action Network Aotearoa wrote to both Colmar Brunton and Solid Energy about this year’s research and asked for the questions and the results for this year and previous years. Solid Energy refused to release it, but told CANA it had released the questions to the research to the Commerce Select Committee (linked to from Coal Action Network’s website – here http://coalactionnetworkaotearoa.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/solid-energy-survey-20121.pdf ). Indeed the questions were very similar to a previous poll (2009) that I myself took part in, carried out by Colmar Brunton (and confirmed by Colmar Brunton, in writing, to me, that it had done the polling).
FACT 3: On October 11, Pauline Colmar made a presentation to Straterra, in which she said that she had been doing research for Solid Energy for some years. She then presented the answers to PRECISELY the same questions that Solid Energy released to the Commerce Select Committee.
At the Straterra briefing, Straterra said it was “taking over” this research on behalf of Solid Energy.
So many questions remain:
1. Has Colmar Brunton now STOPPED doing the tracking polling for Solid Energy?
2. If it has, why?
3. Did Colmar Brunton hand this year’s research over to Pauline Colmar?
4. How is it that the questions released by Solid to the Select Committee were exactly the same questions that Pauline Colmar presented the results for and that Straterra released?
4. Has Solid Energy been lying about Colmar Brunton doing research for it?
5. Who has been doing Solid’s tracking polling? Colmar Brunton or Pauline Colmar?
Lastly, I find it interesting that Colmar Brunton says it knows nothing about this research, given that Eric Brunton himself responded to CANA questions about the questions in April this year. If Colmar Brunton wasn’t conducting that research, why did Eric Brunton provide us with a detailed answer on the polling (how many people, how many calls, etc) that precisely matched Pauline Colmar’s presentation?
From the evidence we have of the questionnaire we know that the survey was done by Consumer Link NZ, which I can only know that it follows Pauline Colmar works with Consumer Link NZ?
I wrote about this topic originally on the 19th. After I emailed the MED with press releases on the matter from Generation Zero/CANA they decided it was inappropriate for their website.
Copy of the email, original questionnaire and other analysis here:
http://officialinformationact.blogspot.co.nz/2012/10/polls-spin-and-straterra.html
I was the person who actually did this poll and reported the questions to CANA, so I follow all of this with great interest. The poll is a blatant example of push-polling, engineered to steer people towards a desired result. It was apparent within minutes of starting the poll that this was the case. The fact that Solid Energy has to create a push-poll to try and sell lies about popular public backing speaks volumes about their integrity.
Hi Murray
can we talk offline? Perhaps Sumner can introduce us on email as she’ll have that information?
thanks
cindy
Oops, I see I wasn’t clear enough there. By “did the poll” I mean I was called up and asked if I would be a participant. Wrote down the questions afterwards and passed them on to CANA. Apologies if that was unclear.
Hi Jacqueline Ireland from Colmar Brunton
I am hoping you will be able to respond to the questions and confusion detailed in the response by Cindy Baxter. We welcome your input at this time.
Sumner
[...] release: * Claire Browning’s column in the Otago Daily Times * Summer Burstyn’s article on LiveNews, which provoked comments both from pollsters and from the person asked to fill in the survey who [...]