THE VIEW FROM RIZAL
“How do I make sure I do well in the surveys?”
Every time election time looms on the horizon, young, aspiring public servants vying for elective posts approach me and ask me that question. My usual answer is: “Don’t rely on them.”
The reliability of election-related polls has suffered major blows recently, particularly in the aftermath of the just-concluded presidential elections in the United States. Former President and now incoming President Donald Trump won the elections via a surprising and unexpected margin including wins in states the pundits thought would go to his opponent.
Throughout the campaign season, pollsters kept saying, “It is too close to call,” meaning, there appeared to be no clear advantage shown by either US presidential candidates based on the numbers. If the surveys were to be believed, the recent US presidential election was supposed to have been a closely fought contest. The popular vote was supposed to go to the candidate of the Democratic Party. In the end, it was not a “tight” race after all, and incoming US President Trump won the popular vote.
Did the surveys “fail”? Both pollsters and experts in the academe are now looking for answers.
In our country, warnings have been aired before about the “unreliability” of surveys — or, at least, those with questionable methodologies.
We recall that, during the last elections, faculty members of the University of the Philippines (UP) School of Statistics, pointed to the “pervasive abuse of survey methodologies by some entities doing their brand of research and promoting them in social media.”
“We have been observing these practices, including surveys not based on random sampling, such as videos of ‘kalye surveys’ being done by some vloggers and suspicious online surveys, especially on Twitter and Facebook,” they added.
Such surveys are obviously intended to “mislead.” They are designed to create the impression that one candidate is leading the pack — a tactic used in the hope of triggering a “bandwagon” effect and which usually fails.
The UP faculty added that they also “witnessed PR companies, private individuals, and even some media organizations publishing results of surveys with unclear methodologies.”
Since numerous surveys have been released and more will be released soon — particularly focused on senatorial candidates — it may be good to recall the advice given by the UP faculty.
They determined whether or not we should believe a survey, they advised that we ask the following questions: How was the sample selected? Which sectors of the population, if any, are being represented? What events surround the period of data gathering? When facing an interviewer, was the respondent interviewed in a neutral yet professional tone? What are the control mechanisms implemented to ensure the accuracy of the protocols in data collection?
For the record, I am not saying that all surveys are deliberately inaccurate. There are surveys done by reputable pollsters who abide by the proven and legitimate framework used in the science of surveys and statistics. The work of these handful of survey organizations produces results that help us understand public sentiment. We use this understanding to refine our message and tools of communication.
Back to the question of young, aspiring public servants. If faring well at, or topping a survey is not the primary goal of a candidate, then, what is?
The advice I got from our elders is this: create a memorable brand, brand value, and brand promise.
Simply put, make sure voters get to know and remember you, understand and experience the benefit you bring to their lives, and discover what makes you different and the difference you make. It is how voters define their understanding and experience of you, and the description of you that become the basis of the decisions they make — which you hope to be in your favor.
This is the lesson taught to us by the late former Rizal Province Congressman Gilberto “Bibit” Duavit, Sr., the person who stood as my godfather in my baptism. “Ninong Bibit” had many accomplishments in life. He served under the late former President Ferdinand Marcos, Sr., was the delegate of Rizal Province in the 1971 Constitutional Convention, and served three terms in Congress representing the First District of his province. He was a lawyer and served as chairman of the board of a major radio-television network.
To the people who consistently supported his public service mission in an elective post, “Ninong Bibit” had a clear brand, brand value, and brand promise. It was “education.” He once chaired the Congress Committee on Education. He donated some of his properties so schools could be built and provide education to underprivileged children. He championed the cause of teachers and inspired students to aim for higher goals in life.
He did not care much for “surveys.” He focused on “making a difference” in the lives of the people he served. He passed away in 2018. A grateful province marked his sixth death anniversary last Dec. 14. He will not be forgotten.
He achieved what most of us are still aspiring to.
(The author is the mayor of Antipolo City, former Rizal governor, DENR assistant secretary and LLDA general manager. Email: [email protected])