Sighting:
Globe Ombudsman Admits 'Poll' on Gay Marriage Was 'Problematic'

But They Won't Do Anything about It

MassNews Staff
April 11, 2003

The Ombudsman for the Boston Globe has written to a reader that the Globe knew that their "poll" question about gay marriage on April 8 was "problematic" when they asked it, but they do not plan to correct it.

The reader had asked: "Is it true that the question on same sex marriage in a poll reported on in yesterday's Globe asked respondents whether they thought gay marriage should or should not be 'legally sanctioned'? If those words were used, then the phrasing of the poll question should have been reported as well to give Globe readers what I believe is necessary information about the poll's reliability.

"Using a word with two opposing meanings -- to sanction can mean to punish -- it could very well be that a majority of respondents would go so far as to support the punishment of same-sex unions, hardly a result in favor of same-sex marriage.

"This phrasing of the poll question and its problematic nature should be reported on in your column, and a recommendation made to re-do the poll on this issue with language more equipped to elicit a meaningful response, if for no other reason than to restore the Globe's reputation for accurate analysis and judicious self-correction."

The Ombudsman replied that the question was used because it matched those in a separate national poll. This allowed the Globe to see how Massachusetts compared with the rest of the nation.

However, nothing in the Globe story indicated that this question was used in other polls, and if so, which ones. The two national polls cited by the Globe story were done in 2000 and 2001.

In any case, it allowed the paper to ask one very confusing question out of 50 other questions, which were asked on a broad array of subjects, and then give the one "problematic" question a large headline on its front page -- because it liked the answer.

Globe Is Worried About Gay Marriage Lawsuit

The Boston Globe is so worried about the gay marriage lawsuit which will be announced soon by the Mass. Supreme Court that it printed the "phony" poll on its front page, said Sarah McVay Pawlick, President of Mass. Citizens for Marriage, the day after the "poll" story was published.

She said that they did this in order to provide "cover" for the court.

The "poll" claimed that 50% of Mass. residents favor gay marriage, but this was only one question out of a long list of fifty-one about everything, ranging from the budget to Mitt Romney, Billy Bulger, etc.

The question about marriage was number 41. That fact was not revealed to the readers (although the Globe did come forth with the information when questioned by MassNews).

"The wording of this question was so confusing," says Pawlick, "that I wouldn't have known how to answer it myself."

It was the only question about marriage and the wording of it was never revealed to the readers of the Globe, which was: "In general, do you think gay and lesbian marriages should or should not be legally-sanctioned?"

Pawlick pointed out that the word "sanctioned" has two meanings: 1) approval or 2) the loss of a reward as a result of violating the law.

"So, the Globe made this into a major, front-page story from just one very confusing question," said Pawlick.

"They are desperate and they felt certain that no reader would ever learn about their deceit. Most never will, but there will be many more than the Globe realizes."

"This is good news," Pawlick continued, "because it shows that Margaret Marshall and the Globe are very concerned about whether her court should impose gay marriage on the Commonwealth. The Globe is trying to help her. They know that the people are very much against it. That is why the Globe urged Sen. Tom Birmingham to violate the Constitution last year and not allow the Legislature to vote on the Protection of Marriage Amendment. They know it would pass if it went to the people -- no matter how many phony polls the Globe does."

In addition, said Pawlick, the Globe still hasn't revealed when the questioning was done, the sex or age of the respondents, even though it stated clearly that these are all very important factors to consider. They revealed nothing about the respondents.

"This is clearly another effort by the New York Times, which owns the Globe, to impose its will on the citizens of Massachusetts. They have been the primary opponent of the Amendment from the very beginning.

"They can lie or cheat all the way but it will not help Margaret Marshall because we all know that the citizens oppose gay marriage."

Pawlick said that the refusal to release any of the data about the poll makes it impossible for independent persons to determine if the results cited are credible. Even the Globe said that its results are in "sharp contrast" to other recent polls.

Correspondence with Ombudsman

The full text of the correspondence between the reader and the Ombudsman is printed below.

Reader: Dear Ms. Chinlund: Is it true that the question on same sex marriage in a poll reported on in yesterday's Globe asked respondents whether they thought gay marriage should or should not be "legally sanctioned"?

If those words were used, then the phrasing of the poll question should have been reported as well to give Globe readers what I believe is necessary information about the poll's reliability. Using a word with two opposing meanings--to sanction can mean to punish--it could very well be that a majority of respondents would go so far as to support the punishment of same-sex unions, hardly a result in favor of same-sex marriage.

This phrasing of the poll question and its problematic nature should be reported on in your column, and a recommendation made to redo the poll on this issue with language more equipped to elicit a meaningful response, if for no other reason than to restore the Globe's reputation for accurate analysis and judicious self-correction. As word gets around the State House that potentially a majority of the public in Massachusetts might want in fact to sanction, that is to punish, same sex unions, it will not be helpful to the integrity of the legislative debate if in fact that is not true. I look forward to your reply to my question.

Ombudsman: Yes, "sanctioned" was how the poll was phrased. The Globe knew that word was potentially problematic, but decided to go ahead and use it so that the questions matched those in a separate national poll. That let the Globe know how Massachusetts residents' views differ from the national perspective. In short, it was a trade off, one the Globe chose to make.