The beginning of this Bloomberg story is completely false:
Most Americans oppose President Barack Obama’s ban on deepwater oil drilling in response to BP Plc’s Gulf of Mexico spill, even as they hold the company primarily responsible for the incident.
Almost three-fourths, or 73 percent, say a ban is unnecessary, calling the worst oil spill in U.S. history a “freak accident,” according to a Bloomberg National Poll.
Without looking at the poll’s toplines (PDF), you might not realize what is wrong with these two paragraphs. As it turns out, Bloomberg’s poll did not ask about President Obama’s temporary ban on deepwater drilling. Here is the question they actually asked:

As you can see, they asked whether all offshore drilling should be banned in U.S. waters, without specifying a timeframe. President Obama’s moratorium, on the other hand, applies only to deepwater drilling (deepter than 1,000 feet) and only for six months.
I’ve emailed the Bloomberg reporter who made this mistake, Kim Chipman, and will be updating here if a correction is made.
The Daily Beast and The Atlantic have also picked up Bloomberg’s erroneous reporting on this. I’ve requested corrections from both of these publications as well.
ABC released polling yesterday with a similar question (PDF): "Do you support or oppose the current six-month ban on new offshore oil drilling while authorities investigate the cause of the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico?" Although ABC also failed to make the distinction between between deepwater drilling and all offshore drilling, they did ask specifically about President Obama’s six month moratorium. Surprise, surprise, this wording produced a significantly different result:
In the ABC poll, 60% of respondents supported Obama’s temporary moratorium on deepwater drilling, while just 39% opposed it. Loading their poll questions with framing that is likely to produce business-friendly results is bad enough. Completely misreporting the findings of their polls is going too far. Bloomberg should follow CNN’s lead on this and correct their piece as soon as possible.
Update — Kevin Drum had similar thoughts:
This is stunningly bad journalism. Pending a safety review, Obama has put in place a five-month moratorium on deepwater drilling in the outer continental shelf. But the Bloomberg question doesn’t ask about this: it asks if offshore drilling should be flatly "banned in U.S. waters." These aren’t even remotely the same things, and in no way can you conclude from this question that "most Americans oppose" the moratorium. They might, but an ABC poll that actually asks the question properly1 tells us that only 39% oppose Obama’s moratorium.
The Bloomberg results make for an exciting headline, but that’s about it. Correlation with reality is pretty close to zero.
Update 2 — At WaPo’s Behind the Numbers blog, Jon Cohen writes:
On Wednesday, one headline screamed "Americans in 73% Majority Oppose Deepwater Drilling Ban." Another poll showed 56 percent support for the moratorium.
What gives?
The answer is pretty straightforward: the two national polls asked about completely separate things. You decide.
In the new Washington Post-ABC News poll, respondents were asked this: "Do you support or oppose the current six-month ban on new offshore oil drilling while authorities investigate the cause of the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico?" Some 56 percent of those polled said they’re in favor of the temporary suspension. (In the most affected Gulf counties, the results were flipped, with 60 percent opposition.)
The Bloomberg questionnaire phrases it thusly: "Do you think the spill proves off-shore drilling is just too dangerous and should be banned in U.S. waters, or was just a freak accident and offshore drilling can be made safer and should not be banned?" This is the one showing 73 percent on the negative side.
Obviously, I see the first question as a clear read on a current policy choice, and the second as about something else entirely. The latter question is useful to understanding public attitudes, but it’s not necessarily focused on the ban that’s in place. That question potentially confounds views on the short-term ban, drilling more broadly and the cause of the spill.
Update 3 — Kudos to Atlantic Monthly’s Nicole Allan, who has corrected her piece. She notes that Bloomberg’s story about the poll is incorrect:
*This post formerly read that 73 percent of Bloomberg respondents thought the deepwater drilling moratorium was "unnecessary." This assertion directly reflected Bloomberg’s article about the poll, but has been revised to reflect the polling language.




8 Comments

good catch – recc’d
recommended
It is a terribly worded question steering respondents to a predetermined outcome. On the one hand, you have a complete ban on all offshore drilling and too dangerous. On the other, you have freak accident, could be made safer, should not be banned.
In general, if you give people a choice between an absolute and a non-absolute, they will choose the latter because this is usually perceived as a more reasonable position. Scope and timeframes are not listed, as noted. You could also substitute “gross negligence” for “freak accident” in a question like this and still get a similar response.
I would think the real question to ask would be along the lines of: If oil companies can not show they can drill safely in deep water, should they be allowed to?
Is that tilted? Yes, but the idea is to find out if oil production really trumps safety or not.
Most citizens do realize how deep our reliance, dependence and addiction to oil is, so they’re afraid to stop drilling outright. Plus environmentalists have been effectively demonized as being more of a villian than oil companies who just have “ooopsie” mistakes.
What was that someone said: Lies and the lying liars that tell them?
And where or when do we ever see anything said about needing to get off this insane addiction and at least starting to develope alternatives? Never? Most likely.
I’ve recommended this so it will stay visible a while longer. Hugh’s comment is spot on, as usual – it was a bad question and they fumbled interpreting it anyway.
Good catch, Josh.
When I was in elementary school and they had us hide under our desk just in case the evil Russians were going to kill us with a nuclear bomb, I always thought what a bunch of stupid a-wipes. If I only have a few short moments, I want to kiss the cute girl in the third row with the pony tails. You hide under the stinking desk. So check this out:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=20131
Just because they would lie us into an illegal war. Torture, murder, worse, less, … You can always be sure that your TV is telling you the truth, or at least as close to it as you are entitled to, so shut up and like it.
What Hugh said. But in the overall picture when was public sentiment ever relevant to our government in the making of policy? This constant poll taking is nothing more than dangerous manipulation by the media designed to give people the false illusion that they are somehow engaged in a viable democracy.
Um, Josh, doesn’t the graph you post show (to use vulgar terms) that while only 39% of Americans oppose the six-month moratorium, 60% of those located on the Gulf Coast oppose it?
It hardly invalidates your point but I don’t think you have the graph you want up there.