Surveys: Slick or Straight?

by Roger B Rueda

We cannot take too lightly the value of surveys or any doings projected to gather attitude, feedback, or information in relation to an individual, an occurrence, or any subject of rudimentary attentiveness to the public or any particular sector of the country. Accordingly, surveys are influential and can read out a wide-ranging pronouncement of the people though initially they want to go for another. The Filipino, of course, can’t just go and no-one else—save some who have values and position of their own.

On the whole—with respect to issues of national or universal significance and for which a decision or stand must be made—surveys are, on balance, helpful in creating unrestricted perception or responsiveness. Incidentally, surveys may be viewed as an appendage to devolving on. That surveys should not vituperate a decision maker’s own point of view or consideration of the problem close by must be noted down, nonetheless. At most, surveys are only intended to make a basis available but not a replacement for decision-making by the person concerned. It is still the person concerned who should make the required decision and be responsible for its consequences at twilight. An example of such is the survey that says that the Philippines is the uppermost corrupt country. Was it irrefutable? Well, it’s caustic. Politics is politics. But the country should not suffer from the warfare of our flesh pressers. As a particular one of several possibilities, who really know if our politicians are truly fighting for our country? It might be for their ascendancies only.

It is in this milieu that the dissimilar surveys on presidential or senatorial or gubernatorial or congressional or mayoral would-bes should be well thought-out. That the results of these surveys do not unavoidably and wholly equal each other’s catalog of ones to beat reveals to a great level the vigorous scenery of surveys. In other words, surveys cannot be diverted from time. In a lot of instances, hence, their results echo the outlooks of the respondents widespread at the time the surveys were conducted. These responses are, certainly, fastened in recent events or issues with which the respondents find a strong taking part or recognition. As a consequence, a respondent who is terribly concerned with the trade and industry development and progress of the country is likely to like better a runner with an extraordinary background in finances. A respondent—in contrast—who is apprehensive about a rising offense indicator is observably going to cast his/her lot with an entrant who plumps for a tougher deportment against criminals and their buddies.

An indication of the social statistics diversities of the respondents is the differences in the fallout of the surveys as well. Men may have opted for male candidates while women may have chosen to go with their own sexual category. The youth may have sided with the younger and non-traditional politicians and their elderly counterparts, with the older and traditional politicians. The preference of income classes is presumably different from another.

People who read survey results should be intelligent to see further than such results and do their own independent examination and valuation prior to jumping to any finale or making a decision on the issue taking into account of these construal and likely rationalizations comparative to the different electoral surveys. As often as not, survey results should not influence one’s assessment or craft a cultus effect as to debauch the planned impartiality and efficiency of any balloter’s exercise. To some extent, a starting point for most advantageous electoral choice should be provided by survey results.

I trust we will not snoop to surveys on May 10, but to our own scruples. And we must base it on what the reëlectionists have done: Have they promised something, yet they have forgotten it by now? Or do they have these snooty staff members? Well, Ilonggos, make use of your only clout. Don’t be won over by a Ninoy Aquino or because they have a stunning advertisement or because they have fresh images this time: altruistic, pro-poor, charitable, self-effacing, concerned, nationalistic, honorable…. I think it is the contrary!

Have your say at inkslinger215@live.com or at 09068541933.