There’s a lot I have to learn writing about survey results.
By Mahar Mangahas
Philippine Daily Inquirer
The June 3-6, 2011 Social Weather Survey, reported through (but not commissioned by) BusinessWorld last Tuesday, has 64 percent satisfied and 18 percent dissatisfied with President Aquino, implying a 64 – 18 = +46 net satisfaction rating. SWS classifies net ratings in the range of +30 to +49 as Good.
The previous SWS survey of March 4-7, 2011 had found 69 percent satisfied and 18 percent dissatisfied, for a 69 – 18 = +51 net satisfaction rating, which SWS calls Very Good (from +50 to +69).
Between March and June, therefore, gross satisfaction fell by 5 points. Since dissatisfaction was unchanged, net satisfaction fell by 5 points also, by simple arithmetic.
Evaluating a presidential rating is a matter of taste. Personally, I go by the historical record (www.sws.org.ph).
I see P-Noy’s popularity as comparable to his mother’s. President Cory Aquino had only two survey ratings in 1987, a +69 in March, and a +36 in October, as the people acclaimed her suppression of the August 1987 military coup attempt. She ended her term with a +7.
President Fidel Ramos had the longest honeymoon, with Very Good scores for virtually 10 consecutive quarters, before getting +24 on the 11th; he ended at +19. President Joseph Estrada scored Very Good for four quarters before getting a +28 on the fifth; he ended at +9. President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo’s highest score was a +30, or borderline “Good”; she ended at -17.
The description of the SWS report by Amando Doronila, in his June 22 column, as “a wake-up call for the President to jazz up his lackluster performance before the slump develops into a free fall,” is to me Ka Doro’s evaluation (to which a journalist is entitled) of the President, not his reading of the survey. Equating SWS’ Good to “lackluster,” and a change from Very Good to Good to a “slump,” is what tiger moms do, but I don’t.
Similarly, I consider Ellen Tordesillas’ June 22 blog “Hindi pwedeng i-ignore ni PNoy ang pagka-dismaya ng taumbayan” as her evaluation of the President, not her reading of the SWS survey, since she should have seen that there was no change in the “pagka-dismaya” rate from March to June.
Seeing Inquirer reporter Norman Bordadora’s June 22 article about the SWS rating as slipping “to plus-46 in June from plus-51 in March and plus-64 in November 2010,” I must lament the continued resistance of journalists to using the simple + sign for an SWS net rating. (Or is this the fault of a copy-editor?)
The + sign is an important reminder that a net rating results from subtracting the unfavorable element from the favorable one. It shows that the current balance of opinion leans towards the positive side. When a balance leans towards the negative, then the – sign will appear instead.
Unlike in algebra, the + sign for a positive net rating is not optional. Omitting the + sign and simply stating “46” as SWS’ new rating for P-Noy, as done in a June 21 dzMM Teleradyo running head, and in the June 22 Star report by Helen Flores, is a grievous mistake. It is the only reason I can imagine for the grossly mistaken reaction of Senior Deputy Minority Leader Danilo Suarez, a very intelligent man, that “half the population doesn’t like him [P-Noy] anymore,” as quoted by both Cynthia D. Balana of the Inquirer and Helen Flores of the Star.
May I also correct a few exaggerations by P-Noy partisans. One was by presidential spokesman Edwin Lacierda, cited by Bordadora as saying, “the figure remains in the very good range” – no sir, we call it just Good – and “for ABC and Mindanao the rating is excellent” – no sir, we call it just Very Good. Another was by Rep. Rex Gatchalian, cited by Flores as saying, “remember that past administrations received negative ratings” – actually, sir, there was only one past president, namely President Arroyo, who was ever negatively rated.
The purpose of an opinion poll about public satisfaction with President Aquino is not to tell you, dear reader, how you yourself should regard him – you know your rating of him already – but to tell you how the Filipino people in general regard him, which is useful to know.
I’m sure that the opinion poll won’t change your mind about the performance of the President, anymore than an election survey will tell you for whom you yourself should vote. An election survey only tells you how the people in general intend to vote, which is useful to know.
* * *
“The new precision journalism” (Indiana University Press, 1991) is a textbook I highly recommend for journalists, having chapters on “Surveys,” “How to do an election survey,” and “The politics of precision journalism.”
Its author, Philip Meyer, is both journalist and pollster – a distinguished professor of journalism at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, and a former president of the World Association for Public Opinion Research.
Professor Meyer’s book is for students of mass communication. Precision in writing for the print and broadcast media enhances communication to the general public. Opinion polling, on the other hand, is the science and art of listening to what the general public has to say. Mass communication goes both ways.
Competent reporting on opinion polls completes the circle of correctly informing the general public of their own collective opinion. It is one of the essential tools of mass empowerment in a modern democracy.
The seduction of these surveys is that they have a veneer of mathematical precision to them; they seem to inform with their numbers. But they are actually quantifying a very subjective assessment – “Are you satisfied with the President (or the President’s performance), and “Do you trust the President?”
That is about as precise as asking someone “Are you satisfied with your sex-life?” You are satisfied, because, considering na ang pangit mo, you get to score once in a while because you pay some hooker. Or, you are satisfied, because, as a rich old man of 70, once in two months, the Doctor gives you a sample tablet of Viagra, and you get to bang the labandera. Or, as a young boyfriend of a very rare Maria Clara type, you just got to kiss her on the lips the first time.
See the difference in the term “satisfaction”?
So what conclusions do you make if you wanted to further optimize the sex life of the male population? Give them more money, by generalizing that all of them go to hookers? Give them more Viagra samples? Or subvert the female population to be less faithful to Maria Clara’s example?
How about, “Are you satisfied with your diet?” I do not mean weight reduction, but “Are you satisfied with what you eat?”
The destitute will say yes, because from being hungry, he eats two times a day now, from the pagpag store. The ultra rich will say no, because although I have the money, Kobe beef is difficult to import considering all the import restrictions. The harried average housewife will say, yes, at least kaya pa naming bumili ng tuyo.
Walang katuturan yang mga survey na yan. They inform the policy maker of nothing consequential. They inform the average reader of nothing consequential as well. The stated purpose is:
Why is it useful to know what the perception of others is?
This is about as useful as “Noranian ka ba, or Vilmanian? Or in an earlier era, “Kay Amalia (Fuentes) ka ba, or Susan (Roces)? Sorry gurang na tayo. I only know the young once.
Of course, it helps the investor; whom do I support in the elections? But that is useful only in a reelection type country like the US, especially this year. Do you support the Reps or the Dems next year? The shrewd will do a Macoy, giving money to both Reagan and Carter.
This survey will make the pros squeal with delight, and will make the cons gloat over the drop. In the meantime, yung mahirap “Kumain ka na ba?” Yung magnanakaw, nakulong na ba? Yung walang sala, nakapiit pa ba?
Congratulations Mr. President. You seem to be doing a good job. But I am not informed in what areas do the people perceive that sterling performance.