Response to Gordon Hahn’s post [JRL#159; Re: Pew Poll on Russia, Putin, Global Image]

Mercator Projection Satellite Image of Earth

Subject: Response to Gordon Hahn’s post [JRL#159]
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2015 12:07:07 -0400
From: Steve Shabad <steve.shabad@verizon.net>

I find Gordon Hahn’s criticism of the WaPo report on the Pew poll about Russia and Vladimir Putin, while technically correct on some points, erroneous in its thrust and misguided. He makes a series of highly objectionable points, and misses the forest for the trees. In fact, I’m not sure what his overall point is, since he agrees that the poll is unfavorable to Russia and Putin.

First, a couple of stipulations. Like Mr. Hahn, I am not a fan of Putin – but I am not a knee-jerk critic of him, either. Second, I am often quick myself to criticize pollsters and the media for taking a wrong approach or misinterpreting data.

In this case, I think Mr. Hahn is the “misinterpreter.”

1) Mr. Hahn accuses the WaPo of a “whopper” by making the following statement: “Of the 39 countries polled, Pew found only three where the majority of people felt ‘a lot of confidence’ or ‘some confidence’ that Putin would do the right thing regarding world affairs.” A “whopper” is a big lie. As Mr. Hahn makes clear, he is not claiming the paper lied, just that the statement was misleading.

2) He quotes the Post as saying that the majority of respondents said they had confidence in Putin in only three out of 39 countries polled. But Mr. Hahn objects: “The problem is that in several more countries than just three, including the world’s two largest countries by population, more people trust than do not trust Putin. In China 54 percent trust Putin, 29 percent do not. In the world’s largest democracy, India, 35 percent – trust, 16 percent do not. That means that the countries making up 36 percent of the world’s population trust more than distrust Putin, and countries comprising a large majority of the population of the 39 countries survey do likewise.”

First of all, China is one of the three with the pro-Putin majority; it is not one of the “several more countries,” as Mr. Hahn’s wording implies. Second, I would argue that population is of little relevance in this context. Should a certain country, given its common political culture, media, opinion makers, etc., really be given extra weight in the poll just because it has a larger population? If we are talking about international popularity, what counts are the attitudes in each individual country.

Third, it makes no sense to argue that if 35 percent of India’s respondents express confidence in Putin’s (meaning 65 percent do not express that confidence), then India should be put in the pro-Putin column.

Mr. Hahn sums up his interpretation of the Putin poll this way: “Thus, 8 of the 39 surveyed countries trust more than distrust Putin – hardly a win but not the near unanimous distrust spun by WaPo. Moreover, when country population is considered, Putin does notch a win.” How is this a win? Even by Mr. Hahn’s own (misleading) calculations, “countries making up 36 percent of the world’s population trust more than distrust Putin.” I’m sorry, Mr. Hahn may not be a fan of Putin, but his admitted bias against “any U.S. or Russian mainstream media institutions” seems to have gotten the better of him.. This is a flagrant case of trying to fit the data to the hypothesis – and they don’t.

 

Comment