THE HILL
 

National polling firm battling back amid controversy over fraud allegations

By Aaron Blake - 09/26/09 04:32 PM ET

A national polling firm is fighting back after a week that included an industry censure and accusations of potential fraud.

Atlanta-based Strategic Vision, LLC, has become an increasing presence in public polling, releasing widely distributed polls on statewide races, national issues and the 2008 presidential race.

But because the GOP firm has refused to share its methodology in a couple of 2008 primary states, the American Association for Public Opinion Research (AAPOR) on Wednesday formally censured the firm. That led well-known political polling blogger Nate Silver to look into the company’s data, and he unleashed a bombshell Friday morning by suggesting that Strategic Vision has cooked the books and made up its polling data.

Strategic Vision CEO David Johnson said Silver’s suggestion isn’t true.

“He’s got a good reputation, but I stand by our work,” Johnson said. “We’ve done the work, and we can prove that we’ve done it. The other thing is – if you look at our results, we’ve been accurate.”

Johnson told the The Hill he is considering legal action against both AAPOR and Silver, though it’s too early to tell what form that would take.

But he said that, even if he proves his case in court, much harm has already been done.

“At some point, even if we prove it and refute Nate Silver, where do we get back our reputation from what they’ve already posted?” Johnson said. “Who reads a retraction?”

Silver was careful in his wording to make clear that he wasn’t saying Strategic Vision definitely committed fraud. But he strongly hints that is the case.

At the heart of Silver’s case is the statistical rule that random sets of numbers, in large data sets, should be distributed in a uniform way.

Silver tested the last digit in every percentage polled in all of Strategic Vision’s surveys, which he suggested should be evenly distributed among all 10 digits.

But he found that, for instance, ‘8’ appeared at the end of a number in 60 percent more numbers than ‘1.’ He said it was “an incredible fluke – millions to one against.”

The suggestion, made patently but couched as to avoid legal trouble, is that someone invented the numbers and, for whatever reason, used ‘8’ as a last digit in an inordinate amount of numbers.

Silver compared the data to numbers from all 2008 presidential and Senate pollsters in his database, and those numbers show a much more even distribution of digits.

Silver followed up his initial analysis with an examination of Quinnipiac's University's polling data, which found that no digit occurred more than about 20 percent of the time more than another digit.

In an interview, Silver stresses that the data isn’t definitive, but it is overwhelming.

“My Spidey Sense says that there really is something foul going on here, but I’ve hedged that bet,” he said. “I might be wrong. … But there are a lot of circumstances there that would not necessarily lead one to give them the benefit of the doubt.”

One of those circumstances is the AAPOR rebuke, which is a rare occurrence.

Johnson said he received the initial request from the group and forgot to follow up on it. AAPOR then began to talk about pursuing the matter, and Johnson suggested that his competitors were behind the move.

AAPOR President Peter Miller said Johnson only gave the group partial information and bluntly refused to disclose certain things. Johnson said he complied with their requests, albeit after their deadline.

Miller said legal action on Johnson’s part would be “useless.”

“We basically disagreed with their view that they don’t have to disclose information about how they do their work,” Miller said. “That’s pretty much all we’ve done.”

Silver said Johnson’s threat was “cowardly” and accused Strategic Vision of being overly litigious.

Johnson said the series of events has caused a panic at his firm and that employees are fearful for their safety. He said they’ve been getting harassing text messages, and that their receptionist was verbally accosted in their parking lot by someone who referenced Silver’s blog.
 
“They’re very concerned – more so for their security,” Johnson said. “I don’t think Nate or AAPOR wants anyone to get hurt, but in this day and age, you don’t know what’s going to happen with some of these people who are on the blogs.”

Source:
http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/60443-national-polling-firm-battling-back-amid-controversy

Comments (19)

I hope Johnson sues. Discovery would give Silver and AAPOR access to all SV's methods.p.s. For a PR firm, Strategic has handled this pretty poorly. I also doubt anyone is threatening them. The only people paying attention to this debate are numbers geeks.BY Mark Hengel on 09/26/2009 at 18:22
This was great detective work by Nate Silver. It gives a new meaning to their slogan,"We craft winning results" Strategic Vision LLC is in deep deep trouble.BY B. Mull on 09/26/2009 at 19:25
I sense a prison term coming on for Mr. Johnson…BY B. Davis on 09/27/2009 at 05:30
There has been a lot of discussion in the comments section of fivethirtyeight .com about where the offices of Strategic Visions LLC are located. All the published addresses seem to be mailbox stores, and last I checked, nobody seemed to have been able to find a real office location.Given this, I find it difficult to believe that any readers of that blog showed in in his parking lot and harrassed his receptionist.BY J. Wolter on 09/27/2009 at 11:07
I wonder if her accoster carved a backwards % on her cheek…BY B. Urell on 09/27/2009 at 12:00
@B. Davis"I find it difficult to believe that any readers of that blog showed in in his parking lot and harrassed his receptionist."Nope. We did it all by Google Maps using street view. I live in Oregon but was able to out the Tallahasse 'office' all by internet. The other locations were quickly discovered as sockpuppet storefronts. Turns out the only actual physical address is a home office in Blairsville, Goergia. Not necessarily the place you'd want to run a national company.BY Davy on 09/27/2009 at 18:28
Sorry, that last comment was directed at J. WolterBY Davy on 09/27/2009 at 18:32
Focusing on whether or not someone will sue someone is a smokescreen. Only TRANSPARENCY will "vindicate" Strategic Vision, and it's clear that transparency is the last thing on their minds.Thus their attempt to make the story about legality and lawsuits.Show your work, Strategic Vision.BY Michael on 09/27/2009 at 18:33
Since the time of Socrates, the "burden of proof rests with the accusor". — While destroying companies and individuals by reckless allegations and inuendoes is the norm for the trash media, the Rule of Law demands PROOF.BY cme on 09/27/2009 at 22:43
What a joke. It seems pretty obvious this guy has been shown to be a fraud, and overcompensated by immediately throwing out the sue threat. No definitive smoking gun as of yet, but pretty overwhelming circumstantial evidence. What possible reason does a polling company have for not divulging their methodology? Just one, that their methodology is BS.BY Corey Schmitz on 09/27/2009 at 22:53

Add Comment

Name (required)

E-Mail (will not be published) (required)

Your Comments

You need Flash Player 8 (or higher) and JavaScript enabled to view this content

Get latest news from The Hill direct to your inbox, RSS reader and mobile devices.