Why Pew Research Polls Are Anything But Trustworthy

I was initially going to add this into one of the threads discussing the polls in the media supposedly showing that we're all fine with the NSA snooping on everyone. But after just a little digging I came to the conclusion that this deserves its own thread.

Obviously the polls provided are factually incorrect, we can see this from a cursory look at the response across the web from millions of people. You can go to any site where discussion is taking place and you will find that somewhere between 70 - 80% of the response is without question anti-NSA, anti-Obama and anti-US Gov.

I think we all know that the "polls" are BS.

But it concerned me that the ones responsible for these polls are trusted throughout the media world and quoted all the time. They are supposedly unbiased.

I think it might be time to look into the Pew and see just how reliable and trustworthy it is as a "charitable organization"...

All of these polls seem to have been conducted by "Pew Research Center", and this purports to be a "nonpartisan fact tank" as seen at the bottom of this page -

Pew Research.

If you then click through to the "Pew Charitable Trusts" site, and check out some of those involved in the work they do, you not only find that they operate a Venture Fund, but many of their people are interesting and have some very curious connections.

I only checked out a few, because there are so many fingers in so many pies there by the looks of things, but on my travels I found this page giving reviews of Pew as an employer.

It should be known that this is a massive "company" (claiming to be a charity of some kind) all around the world, and they hire and seemingly fire a hell of a lot of people, and a lot of people who still work there are very disillusioned...

Pew Charitabl Trust Reviews

Here are some of the most interesting things the people who work there (or did work there) have to say...

The biggest problem is that managers do not trust their staff to do their job and as a result micromanage everything, and every little document that gets churned out, even an internal document only meant for you and your teammates working on a project or campaign together is subjected to several layers of review.

Pew hires all kinds of experts supposedly for their counsel and their suggestions, but that is not what happens. You do what you are told, and you think what you are told to think.

So, in other words, their independent experts are nothing more than names, to boost credibility by association.

That was from just one person, there are others backing up this view too...

There's not even an opportunity to right a two-sentence email without five or more people editing it before it goes out....And this applies no matter how high up you are. If you come here, you will soon feel what everyone here feels: a burning desire to leave and fear or concern that you cannot go.

Another person claiming that all emails are checked by others, that all work is scrutinized and monitored, and even that they fear they cannot leave?!

They all seem to have some issues with the nature of senior staff, and particularly Rebecca Rimel too.

Rebecca Rimel pops up in some other places also, most notably in the story of the Barnes Foundation of Philadelphia where a school was basically robbed of the art collection created by the schools founder -

The Art of the Steal (film)

Critic's Notebook: 'The Art of the Steal: The Untold Story of the Barnes Foundation'

the film “The Art of the Steal: the Untold Story of the Barnes Foundation” shows that Pew Charitable Trusts Foundation President Rebecca Rimel gave false testimony in a court hearing.

But it gets even better than that!

According to the site "ForeignPolicy.com", which is a division of the Washington Post, Rebecca Rimel is on the list of the 500 most powerful people in the world!

500 Most Powerful People in the World

Yeah, you heard me, the head of this "unbiased" polling "fact tank" is one of the 500 most powerful people on the planet. She beats some interesting people too, including Supreme Court chief justice John Roberts and Carlisle Group CEO David Rubenstein.

I'm not kidding when I say that she is listed as more powerful than heads of state.

And perhaps the most revealing piece of all is this...

Philadelphia Magazine - August 2004 - Peeeeewww - PDF

Am I the only one thinking that this woman is an asset of some kind? Your thoughts, and possibly further research into Pew and this woman would be welcomed!

I think we might have stumbled onto one of the biggest tools of propaganda and it would be great if we could collectively expose it - considering Pew is cited around the world as an unbiased source.

reply to post by Rocker2013


You haven't even mentioned how they conduct their polls, how the data is collected, how the population is polled to give an accurate reading.

All you've done is prove the woman in charge is a hole. Sure, you could very well be onto something, I personally don't put much faith in polling at all anyways. But your thread title is:

Why Pew Research Polls Are Anything But Trustworthy

Yet you never talk about their research polls. You post comments from workers about having their emails and company memos scrutinized.

reply to post by phishyblankwaters


If you can find out how exactly they came to those results, then please share. Looking at the site itself, there seems to be a circle of nonsence, whereby they use the other branches of the organization to gather information and data, without actually saying how that data is gathered.

In addition, others in the previous threads about Pew and the poll results show that they ask loaded questions of just over 1000 people, but there is no information about how those people are selected or how the questions are put to them.

It seems to be a self-supporting system, "trust us, because we're unbiased and gather the truth" and then this is backed up with "you can trust us because we are the most quoted and utilized 'fact tank' for media".
Just because it is the most used does not make it without bias or corruption.

The title of the thread is what it is. The information is not trustworthy because of the content of the links supplied. The head of this secretive group of "pollsters" is herself an incredibly secretive and suspicious person. Her staff seem to agree that the organization is not exactly a free-thinking and ethical place to work.

The people who work(ed) there even state that their own internal communications are subject to monitoring and clearance before being allowed to progress.

The things mentioned in the OP are, in my opinion, enough of a reason not to trust the data released by this company/charity.

There is a saying: Lies, damned lies and Statistics!

Saying that the majority of a population agrees with a certain course, means NOTHING because the Majority have not been asked, just a few representatives.

There is also a much quoted 'fact' that the majority of statistics are pulled from the air whenever someone quotes a statistic.

But it is believed that most people have never had an independent thought in their own life and so we are 'doomed' since the majority appear to sheeplike to try to think things out for themselves anyway!

considering Pew is cited around the world as an unbiased source.

This foundation is another case of a foundations board of directors taking the foundation in a direction away from the founders wishes and to the boards more radical views.

The founders were themselves politically conservative. but the board has become liberal treehuggers that have supported ecoterrorist and Peta. .
Pew trust> Nature Conservancy/Sierra Club >David Foreman/Earth First.
prfamerica.org...
prfamerica.org...

But there research does get it right once in a while.
now.msn.com...

Have you ever been polled by them? I have a few years ago during the primaries for the 2008 presidential election. They only ask yes or no questions. And the questions are so skewed, loaded, and presumptuous that it is obvious the conclusion they are trying to reach has been predetermined.

I started answering the first few questions but then it became obvious what they were doing as the questions became more and more like I previously stated; I stopped the woman and said something like, wait a minute these poll questions are making assumptions that I don't adhere to. I told the poller that I felt the questions were posed in a way to get a certain desired response and I ended my participation.

That being said, the media uses these polls to get the public to go along. All the outlets use them. They are garbage.

reply to post by Rocker2013


Rebecca Rimel, the CEO of Pew Research, also sits on the board of Beckton, Dickson and Co along with Edward Ludwig (Aetna), Cathy Minehan (Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance and Visa), and Basil Anderson (Staples).

www.bd.com...

That page leads you to her prior work experience at Glenmede Trust as president. Glenmede Trust was also founded by the Pew family.
www.glenmede.com...
www.joesdata.com...

Who is the Pew family? Pew was founded by the heirs of John Pew of Sun Oil, Co (now known as Sunoco):
articles.philly.com...
en.wikipedia.org...

reply to post by Rocker2013


Glad to see attention brought to this. It's too bad the larger general public doesn't know these facts. When people hear such results on the news it's easy to see how people give up - think "maybe I'm wrong"; "maybe I need to rethink my feelings on this". People tend to go with the flow; want to fit in and belong. It's a game. Wish there was a way to educate the public - have a voice over when news casters spew out these numbers.

reply to post by Rocker2013

You're comparing apples to escalators.

The reviews you've posted from employees and others relate to the Pew Charitable Trust, not the Pew Research Center. Had you looked for employee reviews for the Center on the same site you looked for reviews on the Trust, you would have found this:

Anonymous Employee (Current Employee) Washington, DC (US)

I have been working at Pew Research Center

Pros – Good benefits, good pay, great 401k and health plans. Compensation is great for comparable jobs elsewhere. Very casual work environment.

Cons – No bonuses. No tuition reimbursement plans. Feels understaffed at times. Not much room for advancement within the company or better titles.

Yes, I would recommend this company to a friend

www.glassdoor.co.uk...

They do have different managers and management styles, you know.

Inaccuracy? Hiding their results?

Pew Research Center makes its data available to the public for secondary analysis. See below for more information and contact us at [email protected] with any questions.

Pew Research Center for the People & the Press offers free access (with registration) to its data archive. Datasets are currently available dating back to January 1997. The Center’s survey data are released six months after the reports are issued and are posted on the web as quickly as possible.

Download datasets

www.pewresearch.org...

If you want to see the data, just click "Download datsets."

Sure, sometimes I don't like Pew, but I don't like every poll sometimes. But they're not part of the conspiracy you seem to see. They're not the problem you think they are.

It's funny, I'm from the other side of the political spectrum and I saw some polls by this group that I'm doubting myself. I think that the stronger you feel about your opinion the more skeptical you are when the polls show a position you're not comfortable with. Both the right and the left are quick to shout conspiracy. And while I think that polls and statistics are flawed in large degree by the lack of other factors that aren't provided by simple answers, and of course by polls by political agenda, I do think it's curious that you're not happy with the polls you've seen from this group, and I'm not happy with the polls I've seen from this group, and yet our politics couldn't be further apart.

A couple of points. Samples of people voicing their opinion online is not an accurate way of measuring public opinion. First off, I don't know how you came to the conclusion that 70 to 80% of what is voiced in online discussion is anti-Obama and anti-US Government, but from the way you word it is anecdotal and conjecture. But even if that were to be true, it still wouldn't be a good measurement of personal opinion as most people do not participate in online discussions about politics and many of the opinions expressed are from the same people either entrenched in making a point. I tend to avoid it because of the barrage of hostility that comes out of it. And I think that's not just the case for politics, the majority of the opinions people voice online come from a place of criticism. In other words, the internet is a place to bitch or let off steam and I think that's how many in the public view it. You're editorial was written only six months after Obama started his second elected term. So either the conjecture that 70 to 80% of the opinions voiced on the internet being anti-Obama isn't accurate or it is accurate but it's not an accurate representation of the broader population. Living in Madison, Wisconsin, my antidotal evidence would be that 70 to 80% of people are liberal. But this is a liberal and progressive city. It's not an accurate or scientific sampling either. I have a hard time believing that 70 to 80% view any one point.

And if you poll the people about whether they trust the government, the reasons for the answers that people give might be polar from each other. Someone who is concerned about those that govern or hold power might not be opposed to programs for people who are poor to get food and non authoritative civil service. Some might feel that progressive taxation isn't fair. Others might be upset about corporate tax loopholes. Some might feel that the government is has too many regulations towards business. Others might mistrust the government because they feel that corporate business has too much influence in the government. So I don't trust polls either but I don't trust anecdotal evidence either. I think it's worth thinking about that we're both skeptical of the Pew polls for almost opposite reasons. That doesn't necessarily validate the polls, but it does draw question to the reasons we are doubting them.

Why polls are not trustworthy? Because they're polls.

The way I see it is this. Anyone who wants me to know what everyone else thinks about a controversial subject is obviously trying to influence me. Peer pressure. The oldest trick in the book.