Opinion Pollster Questions?

Yesterday I began putting together something of my own survey, on "opinion polls".

We should have no doubt, that last weeks deposing of Kevin Rudd was tyranny, and must not go unchallenged.

As sometimes happens, I ended up writing for some time, and here is the text:


Opinion Pollster Questions
30/06/10.

In the third week of June 2010, Australia watched as our elected Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd, was coldly deposed by his own political party, Labor.

For weeks he had sustained against a barrage of media and opposition lines denigrating him, many of them without substance, and many, particularly from the opposition leader, Tony Abbott, were downright insulting to those who heard them on the news.

Abbott's repeated line, when asked questions by reporters, questions which most often went to issues not immediately related to the merit and/or the veracity of Kevin Rudd's tenure, was “Kevin Rudd has got to go”.

As if puppets on strings, our media eventually, began to slant their news articles and interview questions and commentaries toward that same demand.

Such media, Sky News, (owned and managed by the Murdoch dynasty) for one, and the ABC, known to be sources of political event information for many, were clearly taking advantage of their demographic access advantage and thus, I put it, were able to slant their viewers' following commentaries, such as those who write and post on the internet “weblogs”, and on their own online “Have Your Say” and “comments” sections.

Also, although not directly related to this and these questions, online news sites often have their own polls, where people who go to their sites, are asked to lodge their “vote” on key issues, simply by clicking one button or the other, and then “SEND” or “VOTE”.

It seems to me that these can be dangerously simplistic.

But they are another issue.

My main concern is that of the last decade or so, there has been a dramatic increase in the influence of “opinion polls”, where the larger pollsters are able to survey people to get an apparent, alleged “cross-sectional view” of the political voting trends of the polity.

There can be no doubt, that such polls, particularly from “Newspoll”, again, from within “The Australian” newspaper, a Murdoch media arm, and from AC Nielsen, apparently based in the United States, were influential “in-the-extreme” in the recent political event, of our Prime Minister being ousted from the chair.

So I feel certain that “questions must be asked” either by the voting public, or better, although we've seen this before, by a federal Senate Committee, about the structure of these types of opinion pollster organisations, about the structure of the questions they put to those surveyed, and others about “how” they choose both the questions and those surveyed?

But perhaps my main concern is what their “demographic” is, in socio-economic terms.

This is important, because if a survey happens to ask questions from people
- who have or do not have enough political knowledge,
- who have personal, selfish reasons to answer questions with a bias, such as working for a decidedly anti-social or unethical business or industry,
- who come from the upper class,
- who had a select education at a very agenda-centred private school, so have no personal views but only those of their masters,
- who have been surveyed by that pollster company before, thus the pollster has some information already about them,
- who is recorded by the pollster as being a “positive”, that-is receptive and pro-pollster company agenda, or “negative”, that-is not friendly or not receptive to answering questions over the phone or from a “door-knock”,

the results will be dramatically one-or-the-other-sided.

These type of factors in these influential surveys are undoubtedly impacting on the democratic processes of our system of government, and are winning “pride-of-place” within the daily and hourly media news broadcasts, with out ANY qualification.

One politically-focused poll which emerged and made the news weeks prior to Rudd's ejection, came from Western Australia, and polled less-than 400 people.

This can hardly classify as worthy of broadcasting on a national news network, and surely our supposedly “publicly-owned” ABC should exercise better judgement?

In the last few days, flying over the ocean for a minute here, the government of Fiji announced that the largest Fijian daily newspaper the "Fiji Times" must sell in 3 months or close. This is because it is owned by the tyrannical Murdoch dynasty. Fiji's military-backed government has said that the paper must be majority owned by Fijians.

Until this minute, I did not link that Fijian affair with the issues that have transpired here in the last week. When I first made the link I thought Fiji was reacting to Australia's Canberra coup. But Fiji has had the ownership issue in play for months. It is an interesting coincidence nevertheless, that the two events occurred in the same week?

But, as I know the Fijian military government has the Best Interests of Indigenous and Native Fijians at heart, and know well the subversive and in-the-end demonic offshore interests and intentions of the likes of the quite psychotic Murdoch media dynasty, there should be no doubt that the Fijian government was deeply disgusted by the errant actions of the Murdoch media in the last week in Australia, and it's subversively biased “Sky news” and “The Australian” “Newspoll” surveys and media articles.

Therefore, a step ahead, as they seem to be in Fiji, they rightly took the step they took by shutting down and basically deporting the Murdoch agenda from Fiji.

For we must be frank here (?)! Prime Minister Elect Kevin Rudd was unceremoniously deposed not by the public, nor even by his own party, but by anti-democratic and malicious, psychotic forces, and subversive OFFSHORE forces, through that vital “fourth estate” of the media.

Rupert and James Murdoch should, the next time they come to Australia, be arrested and charged with political subterfuge, or whichever charge best fits the crime, the crime of interfering with the processes of democratic government of Australia.

There is no doubt they were intent on undermining our processes of government, to what aim, I can only estimate. But there can be no doubt they have abused their privilege of owning the most powerful media on Earth, and we may also have few doubts that they were doing this, undermining Australia's elected government, primarily because it was/is for their own psycho-pathological socio-political and power and profit-centred interests.

Therefore....,

Preliminary questions for Opinion Pollsters:

1. Is your company 100% Australian owned?

2. If not, where is it's HQ?

3. Is the company listed on a stock exchange?

4. What is the main focus of the business, if other than opinion polling?


To the questionnaires:

5. Do you (being the company), target any particular socio-economic sector, residential (outer, middle or inner suburban) sector, business sector, city, regional or rural sectors of Australian society?

5.1. Are there any sectors, suburbs, or individuals that the survey team are instructed to NOT survey?

6. What level of information does the company have on it's “books” on both the people they survey, and on the public in general?

Information either gathered during contact with the questionee, or from other sources, such as

- education, level, and school
- tertiary education, qualified,
- graduate, profession,
- income bracket,
- if educated at a private school, which religion,
- accommodation - renting, buying on a mortgage, home-owner,
- employment, own business, employee, small or large company, management, lower, middle, upper?

With the dramatic improvements in telecommunications technology in the 1990s, there was a concomitant advance toward “information gathering” by large organisations.

The adage “the information age” meant more than it may first appear to.

Wars were being waged across the globe by ruthless and paranoid people from the upper echelons of society, who had thousands of employees consigned to the gathering of information about people.

Mostly, behind their apparently “shallow” personages and company interests, these companies and wealthy owners, were deeply political and were seriously concerned that the world was about to fall under a more socialist, democratic order.

So they, the Packer dynasty for one, Murdochs another, were racing every other mogul in the business of gathering as much information as possible about as many as possible, so-as to ensure they could manage any social democratic reforms or GOD HELP US? Revolution.

It seems this grew to it's insane proportions because of technology's advances, both in faster and further-reaching comm's, and in a machines' ability to store, collate, and disseminate “information”.

So, today, there is nearly nothing any person, in a first world country (Australia I classify 'a first world country', although we, like all nations, have disproportionate populations of 'third world' citizens) can do, without some information being gathered and concentrated in the psycho-powerhouses of the nations' or the world's elites.

Anyone who enters a supermarket, has the purchases collated either by the supermarket corporation, or by the bank which transacts the purchase, and, we are forced to assume, by any other groups who has access, either by unlawful electronic means, or by their close association with the retailer, and has an interest in “shopping trends” etc.

There should be no doubt that major share-holders, in retail corporations have “privileges” which enable them to access certain levels of information about the people who shop there.

And “major share-holders” we would find, include a very broad cross-section of people, from CEO's of major corporate partners, to dynastic family members, upper management, insiders who work within an organisation while unlawfully hacking into databases then on-sell whatever they access, and those from without these firms who have an interest in any one or number of people, and have the finances to employ a hacker and buy the info.

Then, of course there are the government agencies, both the upper class likes of our Australia Secret Intelligence Organisation - ASIO - and the state and federal police forces. We should have no doubt also, that each of our governments have more than one even more secret section which gathers info on whomever they deem it should be gathered, and not only our so-called “criminals” or so-called “terrorists”.

And that goes only to those type from the domestic, or Australian law, political, and commercial scenes.

As Australia is owned by overseas interests, we are also monitored to an horrendous, unjust and most unethical degree by the likes of the British MI6, the main-player, Israel's Mossad, Russia's FSB, China's CCIS (? CSIS ?), and pretty-much every other nation's SS.

So, it is that the public must assume that, whether a survey company, a retailer, a bank, a credit agency, a government, a religious cult, an electronics manufacturer, or a computer software corporation, most all of them have an interest in what you buy, how you live, what your desires are, and what your voting intentions and preferences are.

Personally, I am not overly concerned about those who are so paranoid that they have to monitor my purchases, etc.

Today, with the above opening concerns about our political affairs a priority, and with the clear and disproportionate influence the likes of opinion pollster companies and media corporations have on the ability of an elected government to go about it's business, any survey published and effecting voters and the security of both the Prime Minister and of Democracy, has to be placed under the scrutiny of the whole body-politic.

Of a certainty, we do not yet live in a “Democracy”. Even our nation's Constitution states we have a “potential democracy” (I think it says “potential”?)

But just how far we are from democratic governance, and how far we have returned to or descended deeper into being ruled by an evil totalitarian state, ruled in fact by the idiot-but-wealthy minds of - MY ANCESTORS - and other undoubtedly genetically flawed - inbred - elite and clearly psycho-pathological foreign dynasties, perhaps of the Murdoch kin-kind, we must, somehow, endeavour to establish?

If anyone in Australia has any Integrity, they will make a noise about the skulduggery we all witnessed this last week in Canberra.

But rather than just being “me-too's”, and convert THE issue into their own “buggered-if-I'm-gonna-get-arrested!” small-beer event, they will grab the REALPolitik issue of political interference by the Murdoch media corporation and urge our politicians and lawyers and courts AND POLICE to issue writs for the arrests of Rupert Murdoch and his second-in-charge son, James Murdoch.

The tyranny of last week cannot go unaddressed, and not alone by our own legal authorities.

Therefore I say that Interpol has to be notified that two arrest warrants have been issued against the two Murdochs by Australian authorities, and that it is Interpol's duty, as well as the duty of the British policing services, to seek and arrest these two tyrants, to be “transported” to Australia and held until a case is put together around charging them, and of their parts in the subversions of last week in Canberra.

Wealth and the ensuing power and influence are NOT “qualifications” or “passports” to political Wisdom, and owning the global media to the extent that the Murdoch's do, demands the highest levels of Integrity from them.

In this, both of them, have acted, for many years, dangerously immaturely, if we are to remember the utterly subversive right-wing propaganda which poured from the United States Murdoch-owned “Foxtel”, and which essentially gave the chairs of the US President to the utter dolt GW Bush a decade ago, and V.P., to the psychotic cultist Dick Cheney. (Sorry George! I know yoo's a lot smarter these days! And, I gotta say, as a bloke “I like ya!”)

Like Murdoch's media stable in the print arena, he has made his pile by appealing to everyone's “lowest common denominator” interests of talking shit, sensationalising trivia, of knocking the “tall poppy”, destabilizing governments, and from raw sexual desire.

I have been a right royal prude when it came to sex, I admit, but these days, while without it for over a decade, I know well that there is no life without sex. (How DO I breathe??)

When it comes to unwanted sensationalism, I go so far as to suggest that it is exactly the sensationalist Murdoch media models which have brought into existence the so-called “paparatsi”.

Therefore, one might well correctly lay the responsibility for the death of Princess Diana, ex-wife of the Prince of Wales, Charles of England, upon the head of Rupert Murdoch, for leading the world into seeking after mere pictures and trivia on people, to the point where they are literally, driven to their deaths?

But, what do I know? Princess Diana was a Champion against the evil weapons makers, etc, etc? What I DO know, is that her death was not an accident.

While Murdoch, and his insane son James are free to play havoc with our political affairs and processes, via their media, the world is heading downhill even faster than it would without them.

ARREST RUPERT AND JAMES MURDOCH!

CHARGES: Political interference and subversion in the United States of America, Australia and Fiji.

And, PLEASE...,

answer zee above qvestions...........

As it happens, I didn't send this "questionnaire" to the pollsters........

Come-orn!? As if they'd answer zee qvestions...????