Political Doublespeak

[citizen]

Before we cast our vote on Monday, we should consider an in-depth analysis of both the form and function of the words and phrases used by the political machinery. I am amazed at how politicians are allowed to use "weasel" words, which appear to say one thing but in fact say the opposite, or indeed, nothing at all. The news media is replete with revealing examples of nonspecific and noncommittal language. I should caution my fellow citizens to reserve special attention for the word "help", on which I bestow the dubious honour of being the number one weasel word; "help," I posit, lacks definition of outcome and is totally subjective.

It is clear to me that political language owes its persuasive power to four factors: it is edited with purpose to trigger a specific response, it is rich and catchy (often a play on words), it involves the voter (usually with controversial issues), and it is simple (with a low fog index). I also maintain that "politics is only a reflection of our society" and I encourage voters to learn how politicians function, so that we can be better prepared to sort out the sugar from the cane, and discover the real meaning of the message.

We need to be aware of the catch phrases from which we can recognize the doublespeak of politicians and thus unravel the true meanings of the weasel words. We need to identify the words and phrases that accurately attest to the vagueness and ambiguity of political language before we vote. As citizens, we would all be better off if we would heed the advice to "read the manifesto", in a critical and unbiased manner. We can only blame ourselves for the inaccuracies perpetuated by politicians, who often suggest that the end (getting the vote) justifies the means (use of misleading statements). In conclusion, "voter beware" remains the best motto for the voting public and the best protection against the hype and glitz of the politicians, especially during the silly season.

[Somebody007]

I vote for the UNC.

[citizen]

At this point, UNC-A and PNM appear to be the same old khaki pants. COP may bring some fresh ideas to the implementation of proper governance, country infrastructure, fiscal responsibility, and quality of life for the citizens of T&T.

[peanut]

But they are a day late, $1 and 41 seats short of forming the Gov't.

[citizen]

Peanut:
You are probably correct. However, prediction is very difficult, especially with regard to the future (old Chinese proverb). I am very skeptical about the polls and will reserve any opinions until the last vote has been cast. Indeed, the last time I corresponded with a pollster, he was not apologetic for his lack of understanding of concepts in probability and statistics beyond the rudimentary principles. Based on the results of recent "polls", I can assure you that they are unacceptable. They appear to be more "political" than "analytical".

The poll should strive to be simultaneously accurate, enlightening and informative. Indeed, if properly designed, a poll will expose the myths and exhibit the realities of some of the fundamental underlying mathematical and scientific principles, which are of paramount importance when designing surveys to uncover the truth and to present a realistic snapshot of the voting profile of a population.

First, there is the absolute requirement of sample representativeness in polls to obtain valid and robust conclusions. Second, it is important to use an adequate sample size in order to reduce the margin of error (the degree to which the results can be considered accurate). Third, one has to question the plausibility of the mechanical aspects of the poll with a healthy dose of skepticism. Fourth, you have to add the concept of "construct validity" is so far as you must highlight the caveat that the questions must be properly designed and answered. In doing so you will uncover an essential truth about surveys, and one that is often not stated: The answers you obtain depend on the questions you ask and how you ask them.

Of particular note, when conducting a poll in a heterogeneous society like Trinidad, the sample must be weighted to accurately reflect the demographic realities of the country. This exposes the fatal flaw that damages the credibility of most, if not all, of the recent polls conducted in Trinidad.

Only with wit and wisdom, coupled with clarity of thought and clarity of expression, will we be able to inform the Trinidad and Tobago public that we should accept the findings of these polls with a grain (or perhaps a kilogram) of salt. Finally, anyone's voting preference should not be influenced by the results of a poll, no matter who conducts it or when it is conducted.