My advice to pollsters in regard to the Gaza conflict
In all the polls where respondents have been asked to pin the blame on one party or the other for the most recent eruption of violence in Gaza, the blame-Hamas herd has outnumbered the few who find Israel at fault. See Pew, McClatchy/Ipsos and Rasmussen.
Indeed, in the latest McClatchy/Ipsos poll on the issue, not only did the above-mentioned blame-Hamas view prevail, but also most Americans (57%) endorsed the preposterous belief that Hamas has used excessive force in the conflict. In contrast, 36% consider Israel's actions excessive, with 44% seeing them as "appropriate."
I recommend that pollsters adopt the following course of action aimed at mitigating the fact that Americans often express their views about Gaza while being grossly misinformed about the issue.
1) Break down respondents by level of knowledge. What do people with the most knowledge about the Gaza situation think, as opposed to those who have little to no idea what the fighting is all about? This goal would be achieved as follows:
Include specific questions in the survey, such as, "Do you know how many people have died on each side?" "Do you know that the Red Cross accused Israel of blocking access to starving children and their dying parents for four straight days?"
Before addressing the appropriateness or excessiveness of each side, ask, "Did you know that Israel's attacks are in response to rockets launched by Hamas that resulted in very few casualties in a span of years?" Do you know that approximately 300 Palestinian children have been killed? Once the short questionnaire is completed, split respondents into two groups: the informed ones, and those who have no clue about these key details; or as an alternative, require that the ignorants visit the website www.gazabodycount.com with statistics on fatalities (1054 Palestinians vs. 13 Israelis as of today, most of the latter killed by friendly fire) prior to answering.
2) Ask respondents to list their main source of news (TV News, Talk Radio, Liberal Blogs, Newspapers, etc.) and take note of whom each subgroup blames, so we can have an idea as to who is telling what to the American people.
I strongly believe that if these steps are followed, a reader of this poll will no longer think "Americans blame Hamas" but rather "Misinformed Americans blame Hamas." This different approach would act as a deterrent to those who use poll numbers as a tool to legitimize popular-yet-unjustified abuses by Israel.
True, but unfortunately, misinformed Americans get an equal vote. (See 2000, 2004.)
January 15, 2009 11:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, when the Israeli government won't let reporters into Gaza to observe what is happening there, it's not surprising that Americans are ill-informed, no matter what their source for news.
January 16, 2009 2:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, only on matters pertaining to Israel does this alleged lack of information become a problem Shall we debate for weeks what questions should be asked of the respondents? Indeed.
Of course, respectfully, the lack of foreign press has not helped Israel; the world has accepted the "news", the statistics of the dead, etc. from those within Gaza, i.e. Hamas and its allies. The fact is that, to Israel's detriment and perhaps rightfully so in light of its decision on foreign journalists, there is no way to challenge what Hamas and its fellow travelers convey about what is going on. The notion that the entire world, including the United States, has not been told of the suffering of Palestinian civilians in Gaza day in and day out over the past three weeks is flatly untrue and disingenuously so from many.
I would posit that it is incredible that support for Israel has remained so high, despite the news coming out of Gaza, but that might be seen as being politically incorrect, and perhaps reflective of my desire to kill innocent children. Such is the discourse these days.
January 16, 2009 7:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
Seriously, Bruce, can you yourself provide more accurate counts of the civilian deaths in Gaza than the Palestinian health ministry can? Surely you know there must be a fair number of deaths of trapped, unarmed civilian bystanders.
Of course you can't provide more accurate "statistics of the dead." No one can. So try to keep your head and don't take truthseeker's post as anything but provocative. The bloodshed in Gaza is sadly indefensible. Countering violence with violence is no way to solve the problem. In your calmer moments, I think you know this is true.
January 16, 2009 10:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
Sorry, I replied to readytoblow by mistake. My reply was intended for bslev.
I'm confused though, readytoblow. Do you trust those statistics or not?
January 16, 2009 11:15 AM | Reply | Permalink
Unlike Bruce and Armchair, I really don't think it matters whether the numbers are inflated or not. That's an academic argument. Full disclosure, btw: I am not seeking to cast blame, nor do I secretly support Hamas, nor do I secretly hate Israel. I simply will not sanction violent means from Israel's government as proof of my support of Israel's right to exist! In my book, that's fucked-up. What I want is a ceasefire, STARTING NOW, goddammit!
In any case, Israel could have prevented this false debate over casualties by allowing the International Red Cross and reporters into Gaza in the first place. The true numbers (conveniently for the IDF, if they are high) cannot be known for certain, maybe ever.
The numbers reported, therefore, are the only ones we have. More than one source is providing tallies of the dead, and those tallies have been roughly equivalent. So, I doubt the numbers are "vastly inflated" (as Armchair suspects), considering the firepower-to-population-density ratio.
The concerning number I have read in several reliable sources is that more than half of the 1.5 million in Gaza are under 18. So, deaths of children will certainly be higher than "normal" under these circumstances. Right?
Enough already.
January 16, 2009 6:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
I never wrote that it mattered whether or not the numbers were inflated; I did state that numbers can be and are used for political purposes, and Israel probably hurt its own credibility by not letting foreign journalists in Gaza. But, honestly, I don't think that matters because I think most Americans supported Israel before the war and continue to do so, and most people around the rest of the world didn't support Israel before the war and haven't changed. I also stated that one dead child is too many and I stand by that, and I reiterate what I have written previously that I don't believe that anyone on this website cares more than anyone else about dead children.
I also find it interesting that so many folks seem so certain about what this means for Israel and Palestine in the months and years ahead, and in particular what it means for the prospects for peace. I submit that nobody knows what's going to happen.
For us, I submit that the key is to stand firmly behind the new Administration and to support aggressive peace efforts.
January 16, 2009 7:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm not accusing you of being callous, Bruce. I believe you when you say that while you support Israel, you do not support the killing of innocents, especially children. I accept that position, as anyone who interacts with you on these boards should.
However, when you don't believe the numbers that Hamas provides to be remotely accurate (quote: "I don't believe those statistics for a second"), it does imply you assume Hamas will have inflated them for propaganda purposes, because, after all, Hamas is not going to lowball the numbers, right? My point is simply that Hamas's numbers are the only numbers we have in this situation, a situation which the government of Israel set up in the first place by banning entry to Gaza.
For myself, I am not going to lowball the death tallies just because they come from Hamas-run entities. I'm not implying you are lowballing them, Bruce, I am just not going to quibble over the numbers because it's a useless academic exercise.
My own impression—which is admittedly handicapped by what I've seen on American TV—is different from yours. I noticed how there was much more outcry coming from regular citizens in the form of spontaneous protest than I can ever remember seeing. I also noticed how mainstream TV first reported on these protests (the biggest being on the West Coast), then suddenly stopped, dialing back after Israel invaded Gaza. Because reporters were kept out of Gaza during the invasion, such dialing back was inevitable: there were no facts to report.
American TV also featured Israeli government spokespeople to relay what was happening in Gaza, who of course outlined their own propagandistic talking points instead of providing any actual information. Since I personally do not trust any government to tell me the truth, I do not believe Israel's government to be any different. I do not single out Israel for this, however; I expect it as part and parcel of any government, including my own. As Howard Zinn often reminds us, the government does not have my interests at stake; it has its own interests at stake.
In any case, like Oregon Activist in this thread, I believe most Americans are poorly informed about everything (except American movie stars), although I do not think that is entirely the public's fault.
I can't, however, know definitively whether "most Americans" support Israel's actions in Gaza or whether "most people around the rest of the world" don't.
Surely you don't include me in "so many folks," Bruce, because I haven't made any such predictions. I certainly worry about it, but I have no idea what is going to happen. Please do not lump me in with the anti-Israel trolls, and I promise I won't lump you in with the anti-Palestine trolls.
I couldn't agree with you more.
January 17, 2009 12:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
RTBG:
Excellent coment, rtbg. Thanks. I made a general comment about the predictors of doom and gloom and I was not referring to you. I appreciate your patient and careful and sensitive response, as well as most of your comments over the past few weeks on this issue and I read all of them. We should clone people like you around these parts. Better days.
Bruce
January 17, 2009 2:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Here's my take on the reporting - mostly based on public TV. To my surprise there seem to be more questions put to those who automatically support the Israeli position in the war. But I've noticed more questions - not simply taking Israel's side. And this is different from the past, I'd say. Though perhaps the 2006 Lebanon situation was also reported more evenly. I can't speak to the accuracy of film clips, of course, but I'm speaking of interviews.
I always take news with a grain of salt anyway.
January 17, 2009 3:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm not sure what you are asking, except that I do think that you are asking me if I have any better information on the number of dead that Gazan health authorities have, and I don't. Nor do I think for one second that innocent children haven't been killed, and as a strong and unwavering supporter of the State of Israel at the core that is something that I have to live with and accept because I can't justify that. Do I believe that Hamas-run agencies, particularly in wartime when their best weapon vis-a-vis world opinion is to emphasize the toll the incursion has taken on civilians, have been accurate on defining who has died, i.e. the number of children, the number of civilians, etc.? Not at all; I don't believe those statistics for a second, but that doesn't mean that I don't believe that innocent children have not been killed by the IDF. The death of child is too many. Do I think Israel, more than any other country in the world, is once again being singled out and held to a standard no other nation is being held to? You bet. Do I rest on that? No.
I was really addressing the educated poll respondent argument.
January 16, 2009 12:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
I gave you a hat tip for an article based on your link to that paper by Dawn Johnsen:
http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/blogs/therap/2009/01/we-the-people-and-olc---why-et.php
And I included kudos for your efforts to live and work in an ethical way. (even your words here are evidence that you wrestle with competing values and try to bridge the gaps between them - something which is exemplary, in my view, and fits well with the blog I just put up)
So thanks again for that link! And for your voice here at the Cafe.
January 16, 2009 12:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hat tip to you as well, Ms. Thera P. :)
January 16, 2009 1:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
You get an A in moral reasoning in my book! And thanks for your kind words as well. :)
January 16, 2009 1:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Like Bruce, I have little faith in the casualty figures being put out by the Hamas-controlled entities in Gaza. As precedent, I recall the vastly inflated numbers bandied about a number of years ago in the Jenin "massacre" that wasn't.
Like Bruce, I also acknowledge that many innocent children (as well as adults) have been killed by the IDF in Gaza, as well as by the US in Afghanistan and Iraq, in the many conflicts in Africa and in every war in human history. How the blame for the deaths of innocents is apportioned is the relevant question... unless one is opposed to all wars in all circumstances - a principled position, but one I don't believe is shared by most of those making judgments on the situation now.
January 16, 2009 4:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
AG:
I'm posting here because I don't want to give credibility to the conversation that has, for good reason, pissed you off over at MJ's place. I don't post there. Please, you're too good of a poster to engage the folks you've engaged, and MJ or some of his groupies will get you banned if you take their bait. Believe me, it's not worth it. MJ is just deleting all of his blogposts anyway. Check his recent archive out. It's unreal. That blogpost you called him on, in which he took that Orwell quote directly from Greenwald's post, remember? It's gone. So is every other post between mid-December through the first week in January. This is a game he's playing. Please don't get in trouble with management by getting into a scuffle over there. Let it spew; it's meaningless. There are many other places to post on both sides of the page. I know this may sound silly but I want you to stick around.
Bruce
January 16, 2009 11:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well here's one he can't remove because it's a comment on someone else's blog, where he basically admits some past blogs of his were intentional political hackery. As DanK points out in reply there, it's pretty dumb to admit in public to lying for political gain. Which sort of sums up what anyone disagreeing is up against: shamelessness.
Armchair, I agree with bslev's advice. Sophisticated troll games are encouraged by MJ's m.o., and the some of the people in the past who have tried to inject some sanity by responding in clever ways just end up getting banned because they are baited into defending and then labeled the troublemakers. It is best to comment very sparingly on his threads, those who do so are the only challengers who have survived; "amen chorus" is basically the rule there, he asks for amens in the way he writes most posts, they are not about inviting discussion, it's for amens, everyone else is set up as an adversary/enemy from the getgo.
January 17, 2009 12:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks AA. I felt a bit odd writing the comment you replied to, but I also noticed that AG was making the same mistake that I had made in the pretend serious forum that MJ provides. At least you don't think I'm nuts. :)
I continue to be baffled by MJ Rosenberg's decision to delete blogposts on here. You have more experience than I do on the net. Do you know any other blogger who, in the ordinary course, deletes his or her blogposts? Does the New York Times delete articles? Does the New York Post delete editorials? Does the government? (oops maybe:))I can see why some of the showroom dummy nanny nanny poo poo commenters enjoy the venom in those threads, but what shocks me is that there are so many serious posters on this website who tolerate the fact that MJ is essentially deleting an historical record. He's a public figure, he's quoted in the media (and in those instances the truth is you can't recognize the person being quoted as being the same guy who plays silly session on here), and he deletes not only his own stuff but the comments, many carefully crafted, by members of this community. I submit that were he a right-wing hack, more people would be outraged. AA, how many folks were outraged with TPM when they made the switch last year and they couldn't find their own comment and blog archives for a time? MJ is doing it deliberately.
I say that if a person can't stand by what he or she writes then he or she is a coward or a phoney or a liar or one or more of these. I will go out on a limb and say this--unless I am wrong that MJ Rosenberg is deliberately deleting his blogposts, then anyone who chooses to engage with him knowing that this is what MJ is doing is at best facilitating something that is far less than honest and decent discourse. Anyone who knows that MJ is doing this and lauds him for his "courage" for writing what he writes is a fool or facially and indisputably dishonest. Anyone who would justify what MJ Rosenberg is doing would be, with all due respect, an ass.
And in the meantime I don't want to see decent posters like AG, who doesn't always ride with the herd, to get swept up and possibly banned for challenging MJ Rosenberg and/or a certain segment constituting his merry band of gallery-based legumes.
January 17, 2009 9:00 AM | Reply | Permalink
We need an Ethics of blogging. You are pointing the way. Thanks. :)
January 17, 2009 10:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
Maybe if Israel allowed journalists in Gaza they would conduct their own tally.
Why the secrecy?
January 16, 2009 10:52 AM | Reply | Permalink
You make a very good point. The whole reason for a free press. And the importance, I might add, of ethics for journalists. On every side. It's hard to know what is really happening in so many circumstances. Especially in a war. God help us all!
January 17, 2009 10:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
The following adds credibility to the numbers coming from Gaza's health ministry:
http://www.boston.com/news/world/middleeast/articles/2009/01/09/un_one_third_of_gaza_dead_injured_are_children/
January 16, 2009 11:27 AM | Reply | Permalink
The Red Cross also spoke out in a rare comment. I don't have the link.
The Gaza situation is like so many times when the world has watched - in horror. When civilians have nowhere to flee or seek assistance or are harmed in the process of trying to do that, it is a crime - whether or not anyone is every prosecuted. I grieve for all wars. It is heart-breaking.
January 17, 2009 11:00 AM | Reply | Permalink
That is not a poll, it is education.
January 16, 2009 8:48 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'm not sure your results would be any more accurate if you were to preclude them with this information.
You may end up biasing the results in the opposite direction.
This sounds reminiscent of a 'push-poll'.
January 16, 2009 11:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
And let me cite the example of bailout polls. We often see polls asking "as you know, a 350 billion dollar bailout, etc etc. Do you support or oppose the bailout"?
In that case, I wouldn't see this as a push poll because respondents need the dollar figure in order to reach a conclusion.
The same goes for the question of excessive force. How can someone respond without being aware of the damage caused by this force?
January 16, 2009 12:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
jsn, your input is always welcome, and you have given me a great idea: include also in this questionnaire the number of Israeli children killed by Hamas (good luck finding those), the instances in which Palestinians have interfered with the Red Cross' attempts to rescue victims, etc.
pollster can also choose to simply ask about awareness of fatalities without disclosing the real figures, just so we know the difference between the ignorants and the well-informed.
January 16, 2009 12:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
truthseeker77: I would suggest that you dispense with questions altogether. Just tell people what you expect them to say. If they disagree, you can then label them ignorant and ill informed.
January 16, 2009 4:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Unlike Bruce I don't dismiss the Gazan casualty figures as the inflated estimates of Hamas supporters. Certainly each side and its supporters will have routinely lied .As always occur in wars (leaving aside the question of of the accuracy of peace time govenmental statistics.)
But given the information available from the BBC, the media's Gazan stringers and other Web sources it's unlikely that somehow spoon-feeding the polled sample absolutely unbiased numbers would much affect those Pew poll numbers.
If the dead children numbered only 250 instead of 500 there's no logical reasaon why that would much sway the overall polls or result in any change at all in those segments committed to a particular side , such as the born- again Christians rooting for the Rapture or leftists who skipped our election because Obama seemed too moderate. For those committed segments rather than conclusions being drawn from statistics, instead statistics are employed to support previously adopted conclusions.
Personally I'm disappointed that Israel didn't end earlier. As it turned out , Israel's net incremental gains since David Grossman recommended a cease fire don't appear to me to justify the incremental Gazan deaths. If the Gazans had overthrown Hamas , for example, or soon do that I'd feel differently. But as it actually turned out I think Barak and Olmert were overly influenced by Sharon's mantra
. Which I think is only true if hard enough looks something like our treatment of the Native Americans. Short of that I don't see how any one can confidently predict that the weakening of Hamas produced by the war won't be more than balanced by its increased recruitment of suicide bombers among the relatives and friends of the casualties.January 16, 2009 5:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
They have prolonged this to their detriment.
January 16, 2009 6:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
If only it were so. However, being misinformed is actually a bonus in this country, it's the hallmark of authenticity. That's why Bush and Palin are such authentic, real Americans. They are ignorant and nothing is more American than ignorance. That's why Joe the Plumber gets to spew on national television, because he's a real american, as ignorant as the day he was born and proud of it.
January 16, 2009 7:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Exactly!
January 17, 2009 11:00 AM | Reply | Permalink
statistics are not important; one must look at the big picture:
if Hamas laid down their arms, there'd be peace.
if the Israelis laid down their arms, they'd all be dead.
think about it. it's not just a Q of who killed more people, or how many children were injured, etc., see the "Gestalt" the entire configuration.
January 16, 2009 8:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes. So are they acting in such a way that some day that will no longer be true ?
Yes.And would at least some part of Jerusalem be their capital?
January 16, 2009 9:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
P.S. Truthseeker:
Please forgive me for going off-topic upthread but I did want to preserve a record that would not be deleted. I probably should have done my own blog entry, but then again I'm torn about raising the temperature too much. Doing it this way reaches an important and key constituency at the Cafe.
Let me add that, while I wasn't in agreement with the original premise of your blog, you succeeded in generating an open and candid and, most of all, genuine discussion about some sensitive issues, and I have come to believe you to be an incredibly valued contributor to this community.
Bruce
January 17, 2009 9:21 AM | Reply | Permalink