Petition Filed Against Channel 14 Over Allegedly Biased Polls
Translated & summarized from Israel Hayom by baba
The Academia for a Democratic Israel has petitioned Israel's Central Elections Committee against Channel 14 and Next Data, alleging biased election polls. The petition claims survey questions were framed to manipulate respondents and that poll reporting lacked transparency and contained discrepancies. Experts warn that such practices can influence voters and undermine election legitimacy. The organization seeks corrected reports and the removal of disputed poll publications from Channel 14.
The story in 6 lines · by baba
- An Israeli organization petitioned the Central Elections Committee against Channel 14 and Next Data over allegedly biased election polls.
- The petition claims survey questions were framed to manipulate respondents' answers and skew poll results.
- It cites examples of questions that favored Benjamin Netanyahu over Gadi Eisenkot.
- The organization alleges that poll reporting lacked transparency and contained methodological discrepancies.
- Experts warn that manipulated polls can influence voters and undermine election legitimacy.
- The petitioners seek corrected reports and the removal of disputed poll publications from Channel 14.
An Israeli organization, the Academia for a Democratic Israel, has filed a petition with the Central Elections Committee, chaired by Judge Noam Sohlberg, against Channel 14 and the polling firm Next Data. The petition alleges that Next Data's election polls, broadcast and analyzed by Shlomo Filber on Channel 14, lack essential information, making their reliability impossible to verify and potentially misleading the public.
The core of the complaint centers on the framing of survey questions, which the petition argues can manipulate respondents' answers and skew results. One example cited involves a questionnaire where participants were asked, "What do you like most about Benjamin Netanyahu?" followed by, "What do you like least about Gadi Eisenkot?" The petition claims the inverse questions, "What do you like least about Netanyahu?" and "What do you like about Eisenkot?", were not asked.
Furthermore, the questionnaire presented a series of negative statements about Eisenkot, such as his alleged inability to form a government without certain Arab party leaders or his willingness to allow Iran to obtain nuclear weapons. After respondents were asked to confirm these statements, they were then asked who they would prefer as prime minister if all the preceding statements about Eisenkot were true, with options including Netanyahu and Eisenkot. The petition argues this sequence of questions is designed to lead respondents to a predetermined outcome, creating a false impression of a statistically sound poll.
The petition also points to discrepancies in sample sizes and weighting methods in two polls conducted for Channel 14 in August and September. The organization highlights that it has not received a response from Next Data or Channel 14 regarding these concerns. Experts cited in the petition warn that manipulated polls can influence voter decisions, potentially fueling claims of stolen elections and undermining the legitimacy of results.
The Academia for a Democratic Israel is requesting that Sohlberg order Next Data to submit full, corrected reports and make the information public. Pending this, they seek an order for Channel 14 to remove publications related to the two disputed polls. Professor Lior Sheffer of Tel Aviv University emphasized the critical importance of poll credibility during elections, stating that the public needs tools to distinguish between professional polls and those designed to shape public opinion. Professor Michael Gilead also noted that such polls can create an artificial gap between reality and expectations, paving the way for conspiracy theories.
Mentioned
The same event, reported separately by each outlet. Open a few to compare what different newsrooms emphasize — and what they leave out.
Right 2
