Questionable 'Consumer' Group Releases Most Misleading Report Imaginable, Falsely Claiming People Support SOPA
from the how-to-lie-with-stats dept
The supporters of SOPA/PIPA practically shoved each other aside this week to hype up a "study" released by the "American Consumer Institute,*" which claims that Americans support things like SOPA and PIPA by a wide margin (basically 80%). Of course, the actual survey used suggests no such thing. If it were true, there wouldn't be so much grass roots opposition to the bills (and hardly any grassroots support).The details of ACI's study suggest why it got the responses it wanted -- it's basically because they asked ridiculous, leading questions where the answers are obvious, rather than asking anything about what people are really concerned about. You can see the full results here, and the questions have nothing to do with what SOPA/PIPA actually do. These are the three key ones:
3. Would you support or oppose legislation that would increase criminal penalties for anyone who knowingly sells counterfeit goods, equipment and parts to the U.S. military?Note, first of all, that nowhere does ACI ever actually say what the current criminal penalties are for such offenses. That right there makes the whole thing pointless. How can you ask someone if penalties should be worse or better when most respondents have no idea what the current penalties are. It's like me asking you "do you think I should walk my dog more or less each day." Since you have no clue how much I currently walk my dog, it's a totally meaningless question. You don't ask an "increase/decrease" question when people have no idea what the starting position is... unless your intent is to mislead.
A. Support (80%)
B. Oppose (14%)
C. DK/Refuse (6%)
4. Would you support or oppose legislation that would increase criminal penalties for anyone who knowingly sells counterfeit drugs and medicines to Americans online?
A. Support (81%)
B. Oppose (13%)
C. DK/Refuse (6%)
5. Would you support or oppose legislation that would help block foreign-based Internet websites from trafficking counterfeit goods, content or services to Americans?
A. Support (79%)
B. Oppose (14%)
C. DK/Refuse (7%)
And, of course, these questions are designed to get people to say "support." In fact, the only really surprising thing is that anyone said "oppose." Nobody wants counterfeits going to the military or for counterfeit drugs to be sold to people. But those are the very narrow and extreme cases that supporters of SOPA and PIPA rely on in trying to push this bill forward. If SOPA and PIPA focused solely on stopping people from knowingly selling actual counterfeit military products and drugs, I would support the bill. I don't think many people would oppose it. The problem is that the bill goes way, way, way beyond that, and targets a ton of stuff that have absolutely nothing to do with the military or drugs.
Finally, when you have a five question survey, and you kick it off with the first four questions all being about "horrors" associated with the absolute worst of the worst in counterfeiting -- the parts that everyone agrees should be dealt with -- and then you finish up with a broad question about supporting legislation that would "block foreign-based Internet websites from trafficking counterfeit goods, content or services to Americans?" of course people are going to say yes. You've led them down that path.
At no point did ACI actually explain what SOPA and PIPA really do or the much wider impact they would have. Nowhere does it explain that the mechanism behind the bill is to censor websites, using the same functional system as the Great Firewall of China. Nowhere does it mention that even the leading legal experts who support SOPA and PIPA admit that the bills will censor protected speech. In other words, nowhere does the study actually ask about SOPA and PIPA. Instead, it asks about some mythical version that the US Chamber of Commerce and the MPAA want you to believe SOPA and PIPA are about.
And, of course, we've actually seen what happens when a real academic does a study that asks people about the things really found in the bill: they don't support it.
* You should be quite wary of the "names" of various groups. There are multiple reports out there that suggest that the American Consumer Institute is purely an astroturfing group, with no actual consumer mandate or interest. It came on the scene a few years ago, started by a former big telco exec, and was almost exclusively focused on putting out research that (conveniently) claimed that everything the big telcos wanted was actually wonderful for consumers. Even Consumers Union -- the well-respected publisher of Consumer Reports -- and who really does have a reputation for looking out for consumers -- has called out the American Consumer Institute and questioned why its positions seem to contradict that of "nearly every other major consumer group." Make of that what you will.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: astroturf, consumers, copyright, pipa, protect ip, research, sopa
Companies: american consumer institute
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Corporations are people now, aren't they?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Must be funny...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Counterfeit often isn't
So there is absolutely no "risk" associated with them, and the whole issue should be dealt by the company affected itself; and not by customes (and surely not by internet censorship).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Goebbels would be proud
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
surveys
"the only really surprising thing is that anyone said 'oppose.'"
Not really surprising at all. The first question would have set of my bullshit alarm and I would have started looking for the deeper meaning behind the rest.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: surveys
Of course this whole thing could have been completely made up too.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I love how you throw that censor word around, you're comments are just as polarizing as theirs. You complain earlier in your post about then using extreme cases, and then you procede to use the same tactic. Pot, meet Kettle.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
This isn't the pot calling the kettle black. It's calling a spade a spade.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
"Removing content because it is objectionable to a specific party is the definition of censorship..."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
This is an insult to anyone who fought for the first amendment.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Those people are content with any mistreatment that they receive. Others aren't so content.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Piracy isn't a crime unless you count all of the rappers that "stole" samples of music along with all of the DJs that freely expressed themselves by mixing music without permission.
Or how about the fact that the copyright industries continue to make money despite piracy? Maybe since the old content industry has plenty of money in their distribution channels they can use a few extra dollars to provide legal alternatives.
Obviously, if you want to talk about bad laws, perhaps a look at the civil rights movement is pertinent to this conversation. So tell me, where do you stand on Brown v. The Board of Education? Jim Crow? Obviously since it was the law of the land, Jim Crow should stay on the record books even though it's a violation of the 1st Amendment to use the state to suppress someone's speech.
Or maybe you believe the governmental pressure on Wikileaks was a good thing, given they took away their power to publish.
I never understood why people think piracy is some crime that can be eliminated by just making more laws. Sad.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I guess reality would seem like an extreme view to someone who lives in IP land.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
2. Even the people supporting the bill have said that it would censor "Protected Speech", so why is it so extreme to make that same claim?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: It is extreme to CLAIM that the bill will cause the loss of Free Speach.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
censorship: 1 a : the institution, system, or practice of censoring b : the actions or practices of censors ... 3 : exclusion from consciousness by the psychic censor
You want to know what's really polarizing? Fuckers postulating that their business takes precedence over my communication and somehow their stance subjects my communication to their approval, filter, law or other means of oversight.
This twisted, ugly and perverted form of aggression that capitalism is manifesting itself into does not serve us well.. imho.
Your, seeming, position will be subverted.
War on this. Government is failing its intended mission and will continue its downward spiral as it continues to insert itself into (and for) the economic solution. I'm fairly certain that's not why you exist.
War on that. Choose death.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
What's even worse, the folks on this blog may not realize that that's why Big Hardware and Big Search advertise here.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
There is no conspiracy. It is simple economics.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
"Big Hardware, Big Search, and Big Piracy"
Big Insurance, Big Military Industrial Complex, Big Pharmaceuticals, Big Media, Big Drug War, Big Prison, Big Government, Big Banks.
Small schools, small health, small security, small pay, small future.
How about some fucking perspective. Fuck all you Big Whores.
Big Piracy. Please. Go make yourself a cocktail.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
FTFY
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
(Thanks)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
In the end you can't have a discussion with these people who are so set in their ways and can't think independently. As the saying goes you can lead a horse to water but you can't make them drink.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Home Sweet Home ARRRRR!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
However a lot of people who are in support of SOPA generally are saying the same thing and to use your term seem like "SOPA-BOTS".
All I want is generally a good discussion. If it turns out that they are convincing enough or in the worse case scenario if I am wrong I will admit it and hopefully would have learned something new from the entire discussion.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Right, that's why we need a clueless moron like you (of all people!) to enlighten us. Give me a break.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
So says Big Bob, the Big Idiot.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Questions 3 and 4 are, of course, mom and apple pie questions, the answers to which are entirely predictable.
Question 5, however, does raise a valid point, and once again demonstates in a broad sense a consensus that people do not in general like it when others engage in the type of conduct that gives rise to bills like SOPA and Protect-IP. This is not a defense of the bills, but only an observation that what is right and what is wrong to them does not track what many here believe to be the case.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
For example, I'm pretty sure that even without surveys we could assert that the majority people are in favor of safer intersections and safer roadways. That assertion can in no way be used to support a conclusion that the majority would then want red light cameras.
In other words, the survey covers people's view of the behaviors, but does nothing to illuminate people's view of the methods employed to change, influence, or address those behaviors.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mike uses "study" or "survey" when he /agrees/ with the results.
Then I recalled as in the title, that Mike LIKES some results of /polling/ -- ones that I impeach as he's done here, term them "push-polls":
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111116/11583416793/new-study-booz-co-shows-that-so paprotect-ip-will-chill-investment-innovation.shtml
That one may not be best illustration, but the rather Goebbels-ian distinction Mike makes between "polls" and "study" or "survey" stands up in number of results -- and intent.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Mike uses "study" or "survey" when he /agrees/ with the results.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Mike uses "study" or "survey" when he /agrees/ with the results.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Mike uses "study" or "survey" when he /agrees/ with the results.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Mike uses "study" or "survey" when he /agrees/ with the results.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Copyright?
To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries
I don't think it was meant as a tool for large corporate empires to leverage more control on society. It will be interesting to see what the next 10 years will bring.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Copyright?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Wow.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Makes Sense
Well they're now being shut down by the UK government - better not to rock the boat by actually representing the needs of consumers.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
To get it approved, I'll concoct a survey with the following question:
1 of every 6 Americans is a horrible raporist wifebeating broadbrush piratemike that wants you to eat rat poison thinking it's your morning coffee. Do you think that's bad?
A) Yes
B) Maybe
C) Probably
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Been there, done that...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
im glad i dont work there anymore, it makes me sick how many people were convinced by a random stranger that candidate x wanted to release felons from prison early without any other proof
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]