sclm

Anyway, Roger's old friend* Frank Luntz is back, and PBS has got him

According to an April 4 press release, Republican pollster Frank Luntz will participate in the Public Broadcasting Service's coverage of the June 28 Democratic presidential forum, which will be televised live and moderated by PBS host Tavis Smiley: "Immediate public feedback on the performance of the candidates will be conducted by noted pollster Frank Luntz, who will also appear on 'Tavis Smiley' on PBS the following evening to discuss his findings." Fellow pollsters have criticized Luntz, a longtime Republican strategist, for mischaracterizing the results of his research, as Media Matters for America has noted. The PBS press release does not mention Luntz's Republican ties, repeating a pattern in the media identified by Media Matters.

Media Matters also points out that Luntz has professional issues of his own

As Media Matters has documented, Luntz's credibility has been a recurring issue. In 1997, the American Association for Public Opinion Research reprimanded Luntz for comments he made to the media regarding his polling work on the Contract with America, according to a 2000 Salon.com article. Similarly, Washington Post polling director Richard Morin reported in 2000 that the National Council on Public Polls "censured pollster Frank Luntz for allegedly mischaracterizing on MSNBC the results of focus groups he conducted during the [2000] Republican Convention."

Which is bad enough as far as it goes, but there's something else interesting about Mr. Luntz' "allegedly" non-representative focus groups which Mr. Morin for some reason chose not to mention in his story**

In a two-pronged assault on its own credibility NBC is reporting results of focus groups conducted by Republican pollster and consultant, Frank Luntz. On opening night of the convention he called the focus group’s utterances "representative" opinion...

While focus groups are useful for supplying context and nuance about a variety of issues or topics they are not a reliable gauge of public opinion on these subjects. Conclusions about what percentage of the general public holds a particular view, or any generalizations about the public, cannot be made from a focus group. Luntz talks about Republicans’, Democrats’ and independents’ opinions as though they applied to all members of those groups in the general public. In fact, those are only the opinions of those in his focus group. There is nothing scientific about these focus groups. They are more akin to a parlor game than to a public opinion poll.

While many news organizations have their news polling conducted by non-partisan pollsters (or a bi- partisan pairing) Luntz is widely known for his work in behalf of Republicans. YROCK.com, a Web site and Internet service run by the National Young Republicans, sponsors the Luntz focus group.

Hint:

PBS
PBS/Public Broadcasting Service
2100 Crystal Drive
Arlington, VA 22202
703-739-5000
Email PBS

And remember, be polite. Mr. Luntz, helpfully advising us on effective political communications strategy in the Huffington Post, shared with us that Obama is childish and unserious, Boxer is crude, Pelosi is callous, Kennedy is flippant, Democrats are knife-wielding sound bite addicts who are vindictive and don't care about saving lives, and partisan rudeness is counterproductive***

julia

*xposted to (the good) Roger Ailes, is why

**shorter Mr. Morin: That's a nice professional organization you people got there. Shame if something happened to it.

***He also promises no lines at the Nancy Pelosi kissing booth

she's baaaaack

the hard right's favorite wraithlike miniskirted shock pundette has returned for another triumphal tour of the mainstream liberal media, and she's thought better of calling him a "faggot"

“...if I’m going to say anything about John Edwards in the future, I’ll just wish he had been killed in a terrorist assassination plot.”

Yesterday, she called Obama a terrorist on Hannity and Colmes.

Shock, horror, more invitations by the not-uncivil media to appear because she's "good tv". Blogger ethics panel, stat.

Her proximate purpose for this round of calculated outrages was to pimp the paperback version of her most recent book (already heavily discounted at Amazon), which purports to explain why she's a better christian than anyone who disagrees with her politically. No-one who isn't actually a right-wing think tank bulk buyer or a mouthbreather haunting the remainder table at Townhall is going to buy it, but the inevitable revulsion will give her lots of lovely publicity and help the wingnut welfare system justify her next <strike>handout</strike> "advance"

I have a much better idea.

Glenn Greenwald has a new book out, explaining (conveniently) how the culture of demonization and polarization that Our Fearless Leader and his ideological true believers (which, by the way, is not the same thing as Republicans) has been responsible for the abject failure of the current administration to effectively use the powers of government to solve the problems we as a nation are faced with.

What will be the legacy of President George Walker Bush? In this fascinating, timely book, Glenn Greenwald examines the Bush presidency and its long-term effect on the nation. What began on shaky, uncertain ground and was bolstered and propelled by tragedy, has ultimately faltered and failed on the back of the dichotomous worldview—good versus evil—that once served it so well. In A Tragic Legacy, Greenwald charts the rise and steep fall of the current administration, dissecting the rhetoric and revealing the faulty ideals upon which George W. Bush built his policies.

On September 12, 2001, President Bush addressed the nation and presented a very clear view of what was to come—a view that can be said to define his entire presidency: “This will be a monumental struggle of good versus evil.” Based on his own Christian faith and backed by biblical allusions, Bush’s worldview was basic and binary—and everyone was forced to choose a side. Riding high on public support, Bush sailed through the early “War on Terror,” easily defining our enemies and clearly setting an agenda for defeating them.

But once the war became murkier—its target unclear, its combatants no longer seen in black-and-white—support for Bush and his policies dropped precipitously. Glenn Greenwald brilliantly reveals the reasons behind the collapse of Bush’s power and approval, and argues that his greatest weakness is the same rhetoric that once propelled him so far forward. Facing issues that could not be turned into simple good versus evil choices—the disaster of Hurricane Katrina, his plans for Social Security “reform,” and, most ironic, the failed Dubai ports deal—Bush faltered and fell. Now, Greenwald argues, Bush is trapped by his own choices, unable to break out of the mold that once served him so well, and indifferent to the consequences.

A Tragic Legacy is the first true character study of one of the most controversial men ever to hold the office of president. Enlightening, powerful, and eye-opening, this is an in-depth look at the man whose incapability and cowboy logic have left America at risk.

Miss Annie's book is at 5,755. Mr. Greenwald's is at 22.

Wouldn't one be a much nicer number? Man does write good books, and we got the last one to number one without a scrap of help from the Respectable news outlets that promote death threats as acceptible discourse.

Punish Ann Coulter. You know you want to.

--

While you're at it, our own Tank, the space for progressive events in New York, is holding a fundraiser. A donor is going to triple-match any dollars raised up to their goal.

It's important that we as a community have this space (and sooner or later you'll meet pretty much everyone there). It's even deductible.