Polls take toll on readers

Re “The truth about us” and “Confessions of an ex-pollster,” Current, Feb. 11

Editors and historians who believe in “scientific” polls should ask themselves (and perhaps 20 friends) if in the last 20 years they chose to “only stay on the phone 15, 20, maybe 25 minutes” for a pollster. Most people we know have never participated in a Gallup, Roper or any other poll, nor have their TV watching habits been monitored.

What the Op-Ed page needs is an honest account of how small-sample statistics theory and deliberately skewed sampling have undermined the usefulness of proper polling practice. By eliminating the sophisticated citizen who evades long and poorly structured questionnaires, the polls have become devices for manipulating the public. The touted 3% to 5% error is merely theoretical -- not a measurement -- and the defective sampling says it all: a failure, betraying the public trust.

LAWRENCE KRUGER

West Los Angeles

The writer is an emeritus professor of neurobiology at the UCLA School of Medicine.

*

Nicholas Goldberg confessed that in a previous life he was a pollster and “helped [politicians] plot a strategy, marshal their best arguments and target the audience they needed to reach to win the race.” Now that Goldberg is the editor of the Op-Ed page and Current section of The Times, it is completely understandable that the newspaper is being used to skew reality and advance the politics and social initiatives favored by the liberal left. My complaint is not primarily with the opinion pages but rather the infestation of opinion into what should be the hard news sections of the paper. Thank goodness for columnists Patt Morrison, Steve Lopez and T.J. Simers for their entertaining features. Otherwise, this paper would not be good for much more than lining a bird cage.

THOMAS OATWAY

Valencia