Public Opinion on the Use of Troops in Iraq
(Credit: Gallup Organization)
In an effort to build public opinion for an impending invasion of Iraq, President George W. Bush asked Secretary of State Colin Powell to speak to the United Nations on February 5, 2003. Powell’s presentation argued that Saddam Hussein had an active program for developing and stockpiling weapons of mass destruction. When the invasion began on March 19th, a Gallup poll found 75 percent of Americans approved. Less than three years later, 60 percent thought it was a mistake. The public opinion first shaped by government now turned against it. What is “public opinion”? How does it form? Should public opinion shape our opinions?
What is “Public Opinion?” Does It Matter?
Merriam-Webster defines “public opinion” as “the predominant attitude of a community.” Public opinion matters in all forms of government. Even autocratic governments can’t ignore it, as France’s King Louis XVI found out when he was beheaded in 1793. But in a democracy it has special meaning. As the Declaration of Independence said, governments derive their powers “from the consent of the governed.” Or, as James Madison put it in 1791, “[P]ublic opinion sets bounds to every government, and is the real sovereign in every free one.”
In eighteenth century America, voting was restricted mostly to free, white, male property holders and public opinion was thus shaped mostly by “gentlemen.” It is now shaped by all citizens 18 and older (and lots of younger ones who express themselves outside voting booths!). Yet, as Madison said when he contemplated the nation’s geographic expansion: “[T]he larger a country, the less easy for its real opinion to be ascertained.”
Public opinion, of course, is a sentiment. Hopefully, it rests on facts but may exist without or even against them. The oft-used argument “well, it’s public opinion” thus should never end a conversation but can launch responsible thinking.
How Do We Know What “Public Opinion” on an Issue Is?
In a population of 235 million adults, how do we know what public opinion is on an issue? It could be the sum of all individual opinions, but there’s no practical way to tabulate that. Journalist Walter Lippmann, in his 1921 book, Public Opinion, argued we shouldn’t even try since most issues are so complex that the average person lacks the knowledge to form a good opinion: “what each man does is based not on direct and certain knowledge, but on pictures made by himself or given to him.” That, he said, leaves people open to propaganda. His solution: leave the question of public opinion to expert administrators, acting on behalf of the public. Such an approach is unacceptable to Americans who want to do their own thinking. There’s also no guarantee that experts would put public interests above their own.
In a democracy, majorities rule. Thus, if experts are not to define public opinion, the majority opinion on an issue could be said to do so. Public opinion polls purport to tell us what the majority says. Yet, as we’ll see, polls are liable to errors. Even if they’re fairly accurate, responsible citizenship does not relieve us of deciding if the public opinion expressed in poll results is what we believe.
“In the United States, the majority takes upon itself the task of supplying to the individual a mass of ready-made opinions, thus relieving him of the necessity to take the proper responsibility of arriving at his own.” - French political philosopher Alexis de Tocqueville
Still another way to “find” public opinion is through a contest among differing views. Politicians, interest groups, professional associations, business leaders and others can weigh in, debate, and try to persuade Americans to accept their view. Yet there’s no assurance that what emerges from a contest usually waged by well-organized and amply funded interests is good for the nation.
In the end, any claim to represent public opinion leaves us with the responsibility to ask questions. Who’s behind that claim? Is there solid evidence for it? What do I think?
The Power and Pitfalls of Polls
Public opinion polls/surveys have been used in America ever since the presidential election of 1824 when a “straw poll” by the Harrisburg Pennsylvanian predicted (wrongly) that Andrew Jackson would beat John Quincy Adams. The science of public opinion polling has improved considerably since, but using polls conducted by more than 5,500 polling organizations in the United States requires understanding the major types and potential pitfalls.
Scientific polls use questions administered to a random sample of people chosen to allow statistically valid and reliable projections of what the larger population would say. You can more confidently use such polls when conducted by firms with a solid reputation and no political or issue “axe” to grind.
Quick polls have just 1-2 questions and often appear on the Internet. Sometimes called “straw polls,” they don’t use scientific sampling. Since only some (and not necessarily a representative group) respond, they lack credibility in accurately reflecting public opinion. A quick poll on a vaping products website asking: “Should the federal government ban vaping products?” is going to get responses almost exclusively from vaping advocates so can’t produce an objective view.
Push polls are not really polls at all but marketing tools for an issue or candidate. In the 2008 presidential campaign, voters got calls asking if they would be more or less likely to vote for Barack Obama if they knew that he had voted to let convicted child sex offenders out of prison early (which he had never done). Such “polls” are against the law in many states and should be ignored. Be wary as well of “fake polls” made up to look real but that surveyed no one.
Even scientific polls, the “gold standard,” are only as good as their questions. In a 1987 study by Howard Schuman and Jacqueline Scott, one sample was asked “Which of the following do you think is the most important problem facing this country today – the energy shortage, the quality of public schools, legalized abortion, or pollution – or, if you prefer, you may name a different problem as most important.” Sixty percent chose one of the four.
Another group was given no choices but was asked “What is the most important problem facing the country today? Only two percent named any of those four. So is “the quality of public schools” really what “public opinion” cares about? Or are we just seeing that because the first survey framed the problem with four choices?
Still another problem with polls is that people may respond with what they think is a socially acceptable answer but not what they really think. Populace, a private research group, has found double digit differences between what people say publicly on controversial issues and what they say when they don’t feel social pressure to respond in a particular way.
Polling is a more complex topic to cover than space allows here, but keep in mind that polls reflect opinions not “truth.” In a 2015 poll, 30 percent of Republicans and 19 percent of Democrats supported bombing Agrabah. No such place exists, except in the Disney film Aladdin. Public opinion should never be followed blindly.
Fact Finder
What are “double-barreled” questions? Why should polls avoid them?
Who Shapes Public Opinion?
"The voice of the people is but an echo . . . the people's verdict can be no more than a selective reflection from the alternatives and outlooks presented to them." – Political scientist V.O. Key
Lots of effort goes into shaping public opinion. There is nothing wrong with this – unless such efforts lie, misinform, ignore facts and/or serve narrow interests at the expense of the public good. In addition to unscientific polls with an ax to grind, we’re constantly subjected to methods used to shape public opinion. Being alert to these is important so they don’t unduly shape your opinions.
Framing
Framing means that how an issue is presented (“framed”) affects how we think about it, as we’ve already seen with poll questions. After the tragic loss of 17 lives due to a mass shooter at Marjorie Stoneman Douglas High School in February 2018, initial calls for banning bump stocks and other gun control measures mushroomed. Student-led marches sought to pressure politicians to act. Public opinion grew in favor of changes. Within a few weeks, however, opponents of gun controls sought to reframe the issue. The talked instead about “hardening schools,” including more armed security staff. This reframing successfully held off national legislation though some states did enact measures.
Anchoring is a type of framing. When you buy a house or car, the seller sets an asking price, hoping you’ll pay it or close to it. That price is the anchor around which negotiations take place. In 2021, Democrats in the House priced their “Build Back Better” social spending bill at $3.5 trillion. That’s the “anchor” they hoped would drive public opinion and guide negotiations.
Both frames and anchors try to guide public opinion not only by suggesting what ideas and solutions should be considered but by trying to rule certain ones out.
Availability Entrepreneur Greta Thunberg Addresses Climate Strikers,
Denver, 2019
(Credit: commons.wikimedia.org
Creating Availability Cascades
In 2014, just 48 percent of Americans believed human activity was causing global warming. By 2020, that figure rose to 57 percent. This shift has fueled legislative proposals previously hard to enact. It was shaped in part by an availability cascade. As climate change started to gain more prominence in public conversation, it made information about it more available. That led to increasing public acceptance and willingness to spread that information. For most Americans, that information altered the brain’s mental model that climate change was a natural phenomenon. People and groups called “availability entrepreneurs” fostered the spread of information that fit this view in an effort to mold public opinion. Note that this approach can be used for any issue, including fostering opinions with little or no evidence to support them. Those who believed the 2020 presidential election was “stolen” had their availability entrepreneurs as well.
Cherry Picking
If you launched a group called “Path to Citizenship,” you’d spot the piece below from The Hill and make sure it got attention on your Facebook page. If you ran a website “Strengthen Our Borders,” the New York Post article would grab your eye and be included in your news feed. In neither case would the opposing article be included. That’s cherry picking – the practice of selecting what buttresses an existing view and ignoring what doesn’t.
Let’s Talk
How have you seen examples of cherry-picking used to change your opinion on something?
Political Consultants and Parties
In early 1993, President Bill Clinton launched a task force, headed by Hillary Clinton, to prepare a universal health care proposal. The plan was laid before Congress the following fall but ran into fierce opposition from conservatives and the health insurance industry. By the following fall, the Democratic-controlled Congress declared the bill dead. The Clintons had lost the battle for public opinion.
Political consultants played a powerful role in shaping public opinion via TV ads crafted for the Health Insurance Association of America. “Harry and Louise,” a middle class couple shown sitting across the kitchen table, expressed their confusion and worries about the Clinton proposal. Those dramatically portrayed worries emotionally hijacked the brain’s capacity for factual thinking about the proposal.
In their book about the plan’s failure, The System, journalists Haynes Johnson and David Broder explained how successfully shaping public opinion played a role. In the spring of 1994, the Wall Street Journal ran a focus group to discuss the plan. It’s reporter, Hillary Stout, said “P]eople were totally ignorant of the plan, but they knew they hated it.” As Johnson and Broder recounted, “[W]hen Peter D. Hart, the pollster employed to run the focus group, asked them what they wanted, they responded that they wanted everyone covered, with a choice of doctors and hospitals, protection on quality and cost, and a sharing of insurance premiums between employers and workers.” “This is amazing,” Stout said, “because it’s what Clinton is proposing, and they didn’t know it.” Johnson and Broder concluded that “the people were woefully uninformed. The manufactured, and manipulated, ‘public opinion’ prevailed.”
Political consultants have shaped public opinion since Campaigns Inc., the first such firm, began in 1933. Its simple rules are still used and can now be applied more craftily because we know how the brain works: keep it simple, never explain anything, repeat the message, make it personal, pretend you speak for the people, put on a show, create a good fight.
Political parties, often using consultants, also shape public opinion. There have been large partisan differences of opinion on many issues (e.g. abortion, gun laws, immigration). Indeed, research conducted by Northwestern University’s James Druckman and colleagues shows the power of increasing party polarization:
“Polarization intensifies the impact of party endorsements on opinions, decreases the impact of substantive information and, perhaps ironically, stimulates confidence in those - less substantively grounded – opinions.”
Let’s Talk
How did political parties become so polarized on major public issues?
Mass Media
Mass media are powerful shapers of public opinion. Martin Luther King, Jr. understood this in the Birmingham, Alabama desegregation campaign he led in the spring of 1963. A Gallup Poll released on April 3, the start of the civil rights protests there, showed just 4 percent of Americans considered “racial problems” one of the nation’s “most important problems.” King’s marches were focused on getting people arrested for peacefully protesting in order to draw national media attention to segregation. The city’s Police Commissioner, Bull Connor, turned high-pressure hoses and police dogs on child marchers to stop the effort. Captured in newspapers and on the major TV networks, public outrage grew. By October 2, 52 percent of those polled ranked “racial problems” as a “most important problem” and put it first on the list. By King’s “I Have a Dream” speech at the Lincoln Memorial in late August, public opinion moved solidly behind legislative changes to end segregation.
High Pressure Hoses Turned on Demonstrators in Birmingham, 1963
(Credit: www.sutori.com)
So What? Now What?
Deciding what attention to give “public opinion” requires being alert to the methods used to shape it and the thinking traps that lie in wait:
Framing: how an issue is presented (framed) can affect how we think about it
Anchoring: decisions may be biased by the initial reference point (anchor) used
Availability cascade: a self-reinforcing process allows an idea to gain public prominence, thus becoming ever more available and likely to be believed and spread
Cherry picking: selecting what buttresses an existing view and ignoring what doesn’t
Some tips on how to address these thinking traps include:
Critically Evaluate Public Opinion Polls.
Scientific polls can be useful, but “caveat emptor” (buyer beware) still applies. Ask questions such as those listed below. You can also:
o Consult trusted polling organizations such as Pew Research. They post information on how polls work and when they can be trusted.
o Use websites that discuss frequent problems in constructing good polls.
A Few Ways to Judge a Poll
Does the poll name the pollster, survey dates, sample size and details of who was sampled?
Is the sample sufficiently large and representative of the population it wants to represent?
Does the pollster have a good reputation and no political/ideological position that compromises objectivity?
Does the poll avoid framing biases and poorly worded questions?
Does the poll use suspect methods (e.g. a push or quick poll)?
Is there independent evidence from factual sources that is consistent with poll results?
Watch Out for the Use of Frames and Anchors to Sway Your Opinion.
o Find Out How a Variety of Sources Have Framed the Same Issue so you are not stuck with only one frame to look at it. Opponents of spending increases often frame the issue as “running up the debt.” Supporters frame it as “investments in our future.” Still others frame it as “inflationary pressure.” Each point of view adds something to forming a reasoned opinion.
o Flip the Frame. Take an opposite view of the one presented as public opinion. As evidence of the dangers of smoking grew, tobacco companies defended against lawsuits by framing smoking as the individual’s choice and thus the smoker assumed liability. Anti-smoking groups flipped the frame to push the view that deceptive research and advertising by tobacco firms was the culprit.
o Have Someone Challenge the Existing Frame. If public opinion holds that poor people are the source of most crime, ask someone (or yourself!) to challenge that frame with questions and contrary evidence.
o Pick Other Starting Points (Anchors). What do they suggest? If locking down schools in a future pandemic is the current “public opinion” of how to respond, consider starting with the anchor of keeping all schools open. How could that be accomplished safely?
Don’t Get Caught in an Availability Cascade.
The website effectivology.com suggests several warning signs to watch out for on a topic that jumps into awareness due to an availability cascade. Are one or more of these things happening?
o It suddenly becomes more prominent
o It is hotly debated even by those not usually interested
o A recent event triggered discussions of it
o Discussion is more emotional than factual
o Discussion is framed so that opposite views are denigrated
o Calls for immediate action fail to consider the consequences
Be Wary of Cherry Picking. When you encounter a news report, statistic or presumed “fact” that heightens your emotions and seems to be driving public opinion (and yours), ask questions:
o Who’s reporting this? Do they have a political, issue or ideological bias?
o Is this evidence representative of a fuller range of information or a likely outlier?
o Might there be information that makes this report less striking than it appears?
o Have others reported on this and what do they say?
o Do fact-checking sites (e.g. politifact.com; factcheck.org) verify the cherry-picked “fact” is actually true?
Form Your Opinions Using Multiple Sources. Public opinion is one tool for thinking about a public issue. “Public opinion” for many is what they hear from news sources they trust. Yet many Americans use a very limited and politically skewed selection of them. In a 2019 PEW Research poll, Democrats reported they rely very heavily on CNN, NPR, the New York Times and MSNBC (79-95 percent rely on one or more of these as their primary news source). Only 6 percent rely on FOX News. Republicans rely most heavily on FOX News (93 percent). In a 2019 RAND study, a third of Americans rely on news platforms they admit are less reliable and only 54 percent seek out alternative views for the news they hear. So, use a variety of print, radio, TV, cable and online sources and avoid those that are heavily biased in their reporting.
Fact Finder
What news sources are considered the most credible and why?
Communicate YOUR Opinion. Don’t assume that elected leaders accurately know what public opinion on an issue is. They hear only some voices, so add yours whether through email, letter, phone, text, petitions and/or meetings with them and/or their staff. A 2018 study by Alexander Hertel-Fernandez and colleagues found that congressional aides, who Members of Congress rely on heavily, “are wildly inaccurate in their perceptions of their constituents’ opinions and preferences.” For example, Republican staffers believed their constituents were 49 points less likely to support gun background checks than they really were.
“[P]olitical consultants tell voters what to think; pollsters ask them what they think. But neither credits the idea that voters ought to make independent judgments, or that they can.” – Jill Lepore, These Truths
The best tool in forming your opinions is, of course, your inquisitive mind. As Jill Lepore notes, what others tell you to think and what polls ask you about often ignore the power of the individual, thinking citizen.
How our brains work in other questions we have discussed also applies here, such as how we make political decisions, how to consider expert advice, and how to explore a public issue (Questions #4, 6, and 7). Further questions will increase your ability, including how to deal with conspiracy theories, social media and disinformation, group pressure, political ads and political lying (Questions #11, 12, 13, 14 and 15).