"In a Time/CNN poll of 1,000 Americans conducted last week by Yankelovich Partners, two-thirds said it was more important to protect the privacy of phone calls than to preserve the ability of police to conduct wiretaps. When informed about the Clipper Chip, 80% said they opposed it."
Reminds me of the hilarious "How to lie with statistics". What 1000 Americans? The sort who read Time magazine? These are probably much more likely to be against Clipper anyway. Any Joe 6-packs? Probably not. "When informed" - what, and how was the information presented? Clipper can be described as an NSA plot to listen in to everyone. Or a measure against drug dealers and mafia that happens to provide more privacy to everyone using ordinary phones at the moment. It's not a good idea to take this debate to the ordinary public. The Congress, yes, Time readers, yes, but not Joe 6-pack, who quite happily gave up his gun is not likely to be concerned about principles of privacy. Particularly as an open debate could easily swing towards, and focus on, possible and current misuses of crypto technology, rather than any benefits. Joe is not as untrusting of governments as cpunks are, nor is he likely to appreciate digicash, anon posting or the Blacknet article. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Rishab Aiyer Ghosh "What is civilisation rishab@doe.ernet.in, rishab@dxm.ernet.in but a ribonucleic Voicemail +91 11 3760335; Vox/Fax/Data 6853410 hangover?" H-34C Saket New Delhi 110017 INDIA -----------------------------------------------------------------------
Reminds me of the hilarious "How to lie with statistics". What 1000 Americans? The sort who read Time magazine? These are probably much more likely to be against Clipper anyway. Any Joe 6-packs? Probably not.
From what I know, most of these surveys are conducted by random dialing.
It's much more compilcated than that though. _ . _ ___ _ . _ ===-|)/\\/|V|/\/\ (_)/_\|_|\_/(_)/_\|_| Stop by for an excursion into the-=== ===-|)||| | |\/\/ mud.crl.com 8888 (_) Virtual Bay Area! -===
rishab@dxm.ernet.in says:
"In a Time/CNN poll of 1,000 Americans conducted last week by Yankelovich Partners, two-thirds said it was more important to protect the privacy of phone calls than to preserve the ability of police to conduct wiretaps. When informed about the Clipper Chip, 80% said they opposed it."
Reminds me of the hilarious "How to lie with statistics". What 1000 Americans? The sort who read Time magazine? These are probably much more likely to be against Clipper anyway. Any Joe 6-packs? Probably not.
You are displaying not inconsiderable ignorance about Time magazine and about such polls. "Time" isn't terribly highbrow -- we aren't talking "The Economist". Furthermore, Time/CNN polls are random sample phone polls conducted by random sample by a fairly prestigious polling company and simply stuck with the Time/CNN "brand name". Those polled would not have been "Time" readers. Although you are correct in your later assertion that the information may have been presented in a slanted manner, it is likely that the sampling and statistical techniques were rigorous. Perry
rishab@dxm.ernet.in writes:
Reminds me of the hilarious "How to lie with statistics". What 1000 Americans? The sort who read Time magazine? These are probably much more likely to be against Clipper anyway. Any Joe 6-packs? Probably not. ... It's not a good idea to take this debate to the ordinary public. The Congress, yes, Time readers, yes, but not Joe 6-pack, who quite happily gave up his gun is not likely to be concerned about principles of privacy. Particularly as an open
_Time_ readers *are* Joe 6-pack. Or close enough as makes no difference. Maybe _People_ or _USA Today_ readers are a better approximation, but the circulation of _Time_ is so large that 80% of it is enough to derail any political campaign. Lyle Transarc 707 Grant Street 412 338 4474 The Gulf Tower Pittsburgh 15219 "Gossip is what makes the world go round. I have very few secrets. I would be deeply concerned if a device were marketed that could stop interception..." Emma Nicholson, MP.
rishab@dxm.ernet.in writes:
It's not a good idea to take this debate to the ordinary public... Time readers, yes...
Well, if "Time readers" aren't the ordinary public, then I give up. -- | GOOD TIME FOR MOVIE - GOING ||| Mike McNally <m5@tivoli.com> | | TAKE TWA TO CAIRO. ||| Tivoli Systems, Austin, TX: | | (actual fortune cookie) ||| "Like A Little Bit of Semi-Heaven" |
m5@vail.tivoli.com (Mike McNally) writes:
rishab@dxm.ernet.in writes:
It's not a good idea to take this debate to the ordinary public... Time readers, yes...
Well, if "Time readers" aren't the ordinary public, then I give up.
This reminds me...Several years ago I head a quote attributed to Nelson Rockefeller (then Gov. of NY) at a meeting where he said something like "Take your average American making around $75,000 a year..." -James
James Hicks says:
Well, if "Time readers" aren't the ordinary public, then I give up.
This reminds me...Several years ago I head a quote attributed to Nelson Rockefeller (then Gov. of NY) at a meeting where he said something like "Take your average American making around $75,000 a year..."
Time readers are not ordinary Americans in so far as they can generally read. More seriously, its true that the average Time reader is probably far better educated than the average American. However, "Time" is hardly some deep highbrow publication. Time is just a half notch over People. It bears the same resemblance to a real news source that Velveeta bears to cheese. In any case, the individuals in question were not Time readers; it was just a random sample poll commissioned by Time and CNN. Perry
participants (6)
-
Jeremy Cooper -
Lyle_Seaman@transarc.com -
m5@vail.tivoli.com -
Perry E. Metzger -
rishab@dxm.ernet.in -
sonny@netcom.com