I ask Stirton and O’Shannessy what is the average age of their respondents?
If they do not answer in two days I will take it as an admission that the answer is 69 or 72.
The Big Question
Leave a comment ?
Table Talk: Bob Ellis on Film and Theatre
Published by Boban Services Pty Ltd. ACN: 001516945
About Me
Name:
Bob Ellis
Location:
Sydney,
Australia
Lets see if they answer!
Lets give them a ring and ask them.
this mobile issue is a real can of worms
Not only do less than 80pc of Australians have a land line (a year ago, so that will be nearer 75pc now) but here is evidence they don’t answer them
(This is where mobiles are actually polled)
“The fundamental difficulty has to do with changes in phone technology and human habits. Much of the polling data you see comes from phone calls. Caller identification has made it easier to ignore calls from polling outfits. Cellphones have caller ID, and people are likely to be using them from any number of places where they don’t want to be disturbed.
“In May, the Pew Research Center published a report that said that the number of households responding to phone polls had fallen to 9 percent today from 36 percent in 1997.”
http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/11/12/how-cellphones-complicate-polling/
this I’ve already posted , but worth reeating
“The number of U.S. adults with a mobile phone but no landline rose to 34% in the first half of 2012. That percentage is ticking up roughly two points every six months — a fairly rapid clip. The number of adults with a landline but no mobile phone plunged below 8% according to the study, which was picked up by GigaOm.
“These numbers may explain why some of the pollsters using landline-only calls in the last election ran off the rails so spectacularly. So many Americans can no longer be reached via a landline phone that polling methods simply must be adjusted.
“Latinos are far more likely to have a mobile-only household (46%) than non-hispanic whites (30%) according to the study; this gap is surprisingly large.
“The number of 25- to 29-year-old adults living in a mobile-only household hit a remarkable 60% in the beginning of 2012. There is a sharp generational divide here: Fewer than 25% of 45- to 64-year-old Americans have dared to drop the landline.
“Somewhat surprisingly, the Midwest is the region with the highest level of mobile-only households. Naturally, metropolitan households are more likely to depend solely on mobile phones than suburban or rural households. For the first time ever, women edged out men as the larger group of mobile-only adults.
“Back in 2006, only 10% of adults lived in a mobile-only household. Americans are kicking their landline habit with remarkable alacrity considering that many homes with small children still feel that depending solely on a mobile phone is too risky.”
http://bgr.com/2013/01/02/us-landline-usage-study-2012-279607/
Bob you really have to get back to the serious stuff and leave the polls for now.
By serious stuff I mean more Abbott bashing.
Abbott may have molested an aboriginal woman with his finger.
Linda Burney MP said Abbott’s inappropriate touch of an indigenous leader needs serious explaining
“On March 6 the multi-award-winning author was having a working breakfast with two work colleagues at Borcellis Café in Adelaide when she alleged the Federal Opposition Leader approached her table and without making eye contact inappropriately rubbed his finger up and down her bare arm.”
Is this the kind of guy we want to be PM?
Fingering aboriginal women?
Read on:
http://issuu.com/first_nations_telegraph/docs/linda_burney_mp_said_abbott___s_ina
You can get in a lot of trouble with one finger, Frank!
I have two fingers for Abbott.
hey frank you are starting to sound like a lib with a serious policy agenda.Get real.
I am real Bobby. I don’t know if Lefties watch SkyNews as they probably can’t afford the subscription. Anyway tonight Graham Richardson and Laurie Oaks were slagging off on Richo how hopeless Labor was. Worse than anything I would ever say on this blog. Made my cheeks flush red. Oakes is a Rudd supporter and I always thought a Labor voter. Not tonight. He was kicking Labor like it was a mangy dog with fleas. No let up from the once great supporter. Something has snapped in the mainstream press and like sharks smelling blood, the meal is Labor and the vitriol is massive.
Hey Frank, still waiting on you to tell us all how EXACTLY the Liberals are going to fix the debt. You remember the debt? YOU posted it on a link to me. You must remember. Try and remember.
Frank?
Hey Frank, you there?
Hey, Mrs Frank, could you ask him to come out and play?
Oh, he’s wet his pants, you say?
Again?
Oh.
Oakes pretends to the middle ground rather like Rootin’ : ie he is a conservative.
Richo is a traitor who took the 30 pieces of silver a long time ago.
They are part of the groupthink bedevilling the MSM.
They think they are so clever, so fucking clever.
Very funny. YOU talking about ‘pretenders’.
Jesus DQ whatever gave you the idea Rootin was a conservative?
Must be something he said.
Forbearance Bob Ellis.
Sometimes they probably like to leaven the bread with a younger demographic, gets tough hunting down new nursing homes for the usual one and the “don’t knows” to every question probably tests their imaginations for right answers to jig the results.
NO:-Uncle Bob and I cross swords on this a lot but let us look at another fool-Alan Jones from 2GBias.Who is listening to Jones? Not that many yet he gives the impression all of Oz is! Ditto for those phone polls-all dinosaurs. They are not a true representative of the population.
For the first six Nielsen radio ratings surveys of this year, Jones’s breakfast talkback show on 2GB attracted an average daily audience of just over 162,000 people in Sydney out of a potential audience of 3.75 million. That’s a little more than Gardening Australia on ABC TV, but not quite as high as Call the Midwife. By comparison, The Sydney Mourning Herald attracted a weekday readership of 649,000 people over the same period, according to Roy Morgan Research.
Just over half of Jones’s audience is over 65, with 22.5 per cent between 55 and 64. Definitely NOT a left wing audience! With this in mind Bob, is probably right about the age of the people who have Landlines. Jones is NOT aligned with his listeners. He lives in The Toaster, inner city. 92% of his listeners live in places he would not be seen dead in. He is NOT one of them, yet pretends he aligns with them and possesses all of their values. Clearly this is not the case. Morgan has it that 84% of the aged voted Lib/Nat at the last election in Jones’s listening net whilst Gillard captured only 7.4%.
Hey, I’m 64 and I vote Labor and have for the last 30 years after I went to the ANU. That got me thinking. Education is the answer to all this crap. We have an ignorant population of selfish, self serving morons, who aspire to live the great american dream. The almighty dollar the God of all. The rich and powerful rule the world. Maybe we should have adopted the “Royal” instead of the dollar as this set the rot. I am angry about what is happening to this country. The meanness of spirit to Julia, the meanness to everyone who isn’t YOU. the backyard groggy politics! For god’s sake! Wake up Australia! Rant over. Will go back to my sewing.
this mobile issue is a real can of worms
Not only do less than 80pc of Australians have a land line (a year ago, so that will be nearer 75pc now) but here is evidence they don’t answer them
(This is where mobiles are actually polled)
“The fundamental difficulty has to do with changes in phone technology and human habits. Much of the polling data you see comes from phone calls. Caller identification has made it easier to ignore calls from polling outfits. Cellphones have caller ID, and people are likely to be using them from any number of places where they don’t want to be disturbed.
“In May, the Pew Research Center published a report that said that the number of households responding to phone polls had fallen to 9 percent today from 36 percent in 1997.”
http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/11/12/how-cellphones-complicate-polling/
this I’ve already posted , but worth reeating
“The number of U.S. adults with a mobile phone but no landline rose to 34% in the first half of 2012. That percentage is ticking up roughly two points every six months — a fairly rapid clip. The number of adults with a landline but no mobile phone plunged below 8% according to the study, which was picked up by GigaOm.
“These numbers may explain why some of the pollsters using landline-only calls in the last election ran off the rails so spectacularly. So many Americans can no longer be reached via a landline phone that polling methods simply must be adjusted.
“Latinos are far more likely to have a mobile-only household (46%) than non-hispanic whites (30%) according to the study; this gap is surprisingly large.
“The number of 25- to 29-year-old adults living in a mobile-only household hit a remarkable 60% in the beginning of 2012. There is a sharp generational divide here: Fewer than 25% of 45- to 64-year-old Americans have dared to drop the landline.
“Somewhat surprisingly, the Midwest is the region with the highest level of mobile-only households. Naturally, metropolitan households are more likely to depend solely on mobile phones than suburban or rural households. For the first time ever, women edged out men as the larger group of mobile-only adults.
“Back in 2006, only 10% of adults lived in a mobile-only household. Americans are kicking their landline habit with remarkable alacrity considering that many homes with small children still feel that depending solely on a mobile phone is too risky.”
httpCOLON//bgr.com/2013/01/02/us-landline-usage-study-2012-279607/
Did Abbott deal with Cathy Jackson when he was Health Minister?
Your are confusing yourself.
There are 10.7 million odd landline connections in Australia.
The number has barely moved in the last 3-4 years.
While 14% of households do not have a landline at all the rest, that is 86%, do. They are used for telephones.
A wild guess or a jsa ‘I’d say’ does not a fact make.
You also when using American data on fixed line connections have to understand who and how provides the services.
It’s quite different from here.
Consequently the take up and use of mobiles in the USA is influenced by other factors.
So getting peachy keen comparing them and us is leading you up your own garden path.
There may be worms there as well as fairies.
On the ACMA website is a document “Communications report 2011–12 series: Report 3 — Smartphones and tablets - Take-up and use in Australia”
on page 7 is a graph showing phones of Australians aged 14+ at June 2012
fixed-lines:
80pc of Australians had a fixed-line telephone - down from figures of 90-89-87-85-82 over the years since 2007, so would be maybe only 79pc now
16pc have a mobile but no fixed line phone
trend since June 2007: 6-7-9-12-14-16. So we may expect it to be 18pc now
Also, it is known that a significant, but unknown to me number of people with fixed-lines do not use it for telephone services
Also, these figures are provided to ACMA by Roy Morgan. I suspect a wise political observer would suspect room for error, and I suspect the reality is closer to the US situation, where I suspect the figures are more robust, because there is big money in knowing where the customers are, and telecom in Australia is still recovering from the days of PMGTelecom/Telstra dead-headedness
Technology uptake is one area where Australia leads the world, and the various quibbles over service quality etc in the US are swamped by the lust for the latest toys
Bottom line: a wise political observer/operator would be extremely wary of any polling by telephone
I slipped: fixed-line usage among Australians now would be not 79% but 78 or 77 on the trends. Also, remember a significant proportion have a line but not a phone
You slipped: the use for no handset connections already taken into account by the ACMA.
not on the figures I gave, citing ACMA sources; the ones you pulled out of your arse, maybe
Mine are ACMA pal.
No guesses.
I doubt if I am representative, but I have a landline (for ADSL2+) and a handset (off a splitter) that I never answer and rarely use for any outgoing calls.
^exactly^ my situaton
What are you hiding from? A poll?
telemarketers - I get tired of telling them to “bugger off”.
OK.
A lot still call despite the ‘do not call’ register,originate from outside of the jurisdiction maybe. I get that myself.
But even if you are on the register you still get your polling call.
Still, the others can be sport if the mood takes you.
On the ACMA site is a presentation which says that in early 2011
16pc of Australians were ‘mobile phone only’
65pc of all mobile-only were aged 34 or less - so the mobile-only percentage of young people is a lot higher than 16pc - and that was 2 years ago
once again the information was from Newspoll and other surveys - not a very robust source I would suspect, and I’d also suspect, if I were a canny political observer/operator, that the American situation is closer to the mark
http://engage.acma.gov.au/one-in-five-australians-go-mobile-only/
Finally: this all matters, because the debate at present is so much driven by poll results looking bad for Labor.
Providing doubt about those results would change the conversation in Labor’s favour. And there is clearly good basis for doubting the age-mix representativeness of any phone poll
And there is good reason to suspect younger people favour Labor
The ACMA figure I am using takes into account the use of some connections for no handset connections IE naked DSL.
The poll figures tell that a proportion of younger people do like Labor but significantly a large number also favour the Greens.
Morgan often give the age grouping and male/female breakdown so we already can tell, Morgan being widely accepted as the most reliable, what percentages care for who with voting intention.
I’m afraid that the polls are bad, that is a fact, it cant be wished away.
The differences between the basic data of Morgan and the other two main polls are very little.
Unless you intend for the methodology world wide to be changed somehow, what you see is what you get.
the “acma figures” you are using are wrong, see my detailed figures with sources
The ACMA figures are the ACMA figures, sorry.
“Unless you intend for the methodology world wide to be changed somehow”
that is just what is being faced overseas, see my other posts
you are as careless of facts as Rootin’, and like him, when I refute them with chapter and verse you just keep right on lying
this is my last response to you on this matter; if anyone serious comes along I’ll respond
Not that intersted if your responses are full of crap like most of it so far.
But I will comment and call bullshit when I see it.
Please try and get it right and no guessing.
I live in the seat of Richmond. They just had a newspaper poll here. The local labor member Justine Elliot…they have her on 67%, the Un-Nationals, 12% minor parties the rest
Nice lady, I met her once.
Pro Rudd.
fool
That not a nice thing to say about Justine!
The big question is did Jackson scam come to light in 2003/4 when LNP was staring into the electoral abyss and did someone decide to leave it as a nice little hand grenade for anticipated incoming Labor government? And then when LNP won by the grace of the devil it suited to let it tick along on the premise it would come in handy soon enough?
Now here’s a different view of the polls from outside the Murdoch songsheet, which blinds its readers with biased headlines and skewed analysis.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jun/18/tony-abbott-polls-coalition
“Tony Abbott is weaker than Labor’s crisis suggests”
A closer look at polling data suggests that Abbott is in a much weaker position than the two-party preferred vote would indicate. For example, the often-repeated claim that he is a uniquely effective opposition leader is undermined by Newspoll data on his performance, which consistently showed dissatisfaction running 20% or more ahead of satisfaction all through last year. His party fares little better: according to Essential Research, 67% of voters think the Liberals “will promise to do anything to win votes”, 59% think they are “too close to the big corporate and financial interests”, and 54% think they are “out of touch with ordinary people”.
The lack of enthusiasm for the conservatives was borne out in a remarkable poll of 24 marginal seats in March. It found a two-party preferred voting intention of 59.4% for the Coalition, but at the same time only 43% said they wanted an LNP government!
A large proportion of LNP voters favour higher taxes on corporations and the rich (rather than cuts to welfare and infrastructure) to balance the budget, and around half think that big business, mining companies and high-income earners don’t pay enough tax.
Some 54% of LNP voters think that privatisation of public services — a key part of Liberal philosophy — is a bad idea in general. On industrial relations, 74% of Coalition voters support penalty rates, while 28% think workers would be better off with stronger unions.
Sounds about right to me. I do not think the Australian voters have any intention of electing an Abbott-led coalition.
Gillard-led Labor by 5-10 seats, if they do not panic as the media and the rag tag pretenders of the coalition would like them to do.
If he is elected, how long before Turnbull is put in by the born-to-rule silvertail elite of north sydney?
by the way, what is “A bottled coalition”?
Get your eyes tested, Salvador!
As for Abbott, I’d give him about 6 months to fuck up properly.
DQ - you’re right about the eyesight! all these clocks look like they’re melting…
Problem with Abbott fucking up (for which the vulnerable will pay) is this: how will the media, who have anointed him and shepherded him into power, find the decency to finally discharge its professional obligations and confess that he is, and always was, simply a follower not a leader, a man of division not of vision, a thug not a thinker.
I doubt that they will; not until Rhubarb Murdock’s life support system is turned off.
Rupert likes to back winners. Abbott is on borrowed time, though it seems he will survive until the election; to lose again will see him off for good.
A “win” will give him six months, perhaps a year if they still can’t work out who to replace him with.