The 3rd Media Monitor or any bonus can be posted here #universityofthephilippines #UPDiliman

The third Media Monitor or any of the bonuses can be posted here, deadline Tuesday Feb 23, 12 noon, instructions as stated in class. Thanks. (the comments box is at the bottom of the page, before the widgets, where it says “comments are welcome anytime”. tnx Ü )


  1. 3rd Bonus Media Monitor

    Nearly 4 in 10 Filipinos expect election cheating – poll

    Pulse Asia Survey conducted a survey asking “In your opinion, will there be cheating or none in the coming May 2016 election in your place?” The results showed that 39% of the people believe that there will be cheating. It followed the provisions given in the PPI Code of Ethics, where it states “Be cautious in reporting surveys: In using scientific polls, the sample size and the margin of error should be disclosed.” The report showed the population size and the margin of error on each of the states and the margin of error nationwide of the survey.

    However, I still think it could’ve worked on the diction used in the article. The report states that “The Pulse Asia survey shows 39 percent or ‘a sizeable plurality of Filipinos’ believe cheating will take place in the May 2016 presidential elections.” By calling 39% ‘sizeable’ is wrong because I believe calling the population ‘sizeable’ should be 50%. Moreover, the question “In your opinion, will there be cheating or none in the coming May 2016 election in your place?” kind of conditions people that they should expect cheating because it is now normal. The question makes it seem like cheating during the presidential elections is normal in our country.

    Moreover, they also reported 2 other surveys done, where one was about political dynasties and another follow up to the first survey asking the participants to agree or disagree with the statement “”The May 2016 elections will be clean and the results credible for the citizenry because the counting of votes is automated.” The report about political dynasties didn’t even include the sample size and the margin of error and was so short it was negligible to the whole report. The same goes for the other report where they also didn’t show the sample size and margin of error, and focused on the results as well. Both of these reports violates the PPI Code of Ethics provision “Be cautious in reporting surveys: In using scientific polls, the sample size and the margin of error should be disclosed.”

  2. 3rd Bonus Post
    Laylo poll: Poe is top pick for Internet, social media users

    The article was able to give the margin of error, the number of respondents, the specific types of respondent (i.e. registered voters who are cellphone, internet, and social media users), number of places where the sample was taken, and the duration of the data gathering period. The source of the survey results was also indicated in the article. This follows PPI Expanded Coded of Ethics’ provision which states, “Be cautious in reporting surveys: In using scientific polls, the sample size and the margin of error should be disclosed.” Hence, it was able to disclose some necessary information that the public is entitled to know. However, it is still a big deal that Rappler was not able to disclose the actual questions asked to the respondents as well as the specific method done to gather the data.
    The article title, “Poe is top pick for Internet, social media users” is quite misleading. There were three categories: (1) cellphone users, (2) internet and social media users, (3) social media users. Considering the first and third categories, Poe is the top presidential candidate because there is no way that she would have a statistical tie with the second placer. The margin of error (+/-1.8%) is also very small. However, in the second category, there was a statistical tie with Duterte. Thus, it is problematic to claim that Poe is the top pick for internet, social media users. The author should have mentioned such claim for the cellphone users instead.
    Nevertheless, the writer of this article was responsible enough to disclose some basic information that the public needs to know about the survey method. However, the way it was written could bring negative repercussions. This violates the PPI Code of Ethics because surveys, as much as possible, should not be misused or misinterpreted.

  3. 3rd Bonus Post
    2012 78 409

    This article by the Philippine Star talks about how Binay topped the latest SWS presidential survey (conducted last Feb 5-7) despite a drop in his actual percentage (from 31% to 29%). Binay is followed by Poe and Duterte, both at 24%, Roxas with 18%, and Santiago with 4%. Although the article mentioned the number of respondents (1,200) and the question asked by SWS, it failed to present and discuss the margin of error (which should be +/- 3%), which is unethical because clearly, the candidates could have been statistically tied. If we apply the margin of error on the percentages of the candidates’ votes, Binay, Poe, and Duterte could be statistically tied at 26, which clearly does not necessarily make Binay top the survey. Same is true with Poe, Duterte, and Roxas, who could be statistically tied at 21%.

    The failure to recognize and discuss to the public the issue on the margin of error can mislead people, especially when the journalist decides to frame the headline as if it is the gospel truth, disregarding the statistical errors there may be. Journalists must not also assume that people readily understand what the margin of error implies since not all are literate in statistics. As such, even if they are able to include a line revealing the margin of error, they must still be able to briefly and concisely discuss what it implies in order to avoid conflict and confusion.

  4. 3rd Bonus Media Monitor

    In this article, it is worth noting how the headline included the term “statistical tie”. While most articles fail to mention this, this article explain how Roxas and Duterte are “statistically tied” with Roxas gaining 23% and Duterte, 20%. However, it did not explain what “statistically tie” means, which may result to confusion among the readers. Furthermore, it did not include the margin of error. Nevertheless, that shortcoming aisde from that shortcoming, the article included the following:
    i. date when the survey was conducted (Jan. 24-28, 2016)
    ii. question asked in the survey: Sa mga taong nasa listahang ito, sino ang inyong iboboto bilang PRESIDENTE NG PILIPINAS kung ang eleksyon ng 2016 ay gaganapin ngayon at sila ay mga kandidato?
    iii. number of respondents: 1,800 respondents
    iv. screengrab from Pulse Asia’s release

    With the inclusion, the article can be considered generally ethical with some room for improvements.

  5. Thanks everyone. The 4th media monitor window will be opened on Friday Feb. 26 with deadline Tuesday noon as usual. Comments beyond this line will be considered for the fourth. Tnx 🙂

comments are welcome anytime EXCEPT those with more than 12 links or 12 URLs pasted. Tnx)

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s