Sir, - In the pursuit of its own vested interest regarding opinion polls (i.e. increased sales during election times), your newspaper has demonstrated a complete lack of balance in its comment and reporting on the issue of banning them.
Yes, it can be argued that banning polls would curtail the right to free speech, but this had to be balanced against the much more positive aspect of the proposal, which was the possibility that more people would actually give their own opinions via the ballot box either in referendums or elections because they were unaware of the opinions of others.
Opinion polls can have any of three effects:
1. That people will not vote because they feel their view is prevailing. This effect arguably resulted in the Conservatives being elected in Britain in 1970 and was the fear of Tony Blair in the recent British election.
2. That people will not vote because they feel that their view is being overwhelmed - arguably the situation regarding the Fianna Fail candidate in the recent South Tipperary by-election.
3. That people will jump on the bandwagon and vote according to how they perceive everyone else is going to vote. This pressure to conform is a psychological fact demonstrated, among others, by Asch in the 1950s.
All of these scenarios could lead to the success of a proposal, Government, local authority, MEP, or President that the electorate does not want. Remember how close the results of a number of seats in recent elections and referendums were; a small percentage difference would have made all the difference.
Yes, you can argue that if people do not vote, or do not vote with their convictions, then they must take the consequences; but on the other hand, anything that might facilitate them in actually giving their opinions must be welcomed.
The banning of opinion polls immediately before any referendum or election would be a small price to pay for the benefits that might ensue. - Yours, etc.,
Frank Barr, Glasnevin Woods, Dublin 11.