|L.A. Times Distorts Own Poll On Illegal Aliens
Walter Moore[attorney, L.A. mayoral candidate] 12/11/07
Last week the L.A. Times reported the results of a poll it conducted on illegal immigration. The newspaper's bias -- political and financial -- shows when you compare the article to the poll itself, and when you look at the wording of the poll.
THEIR HEADLINE LIES
Let’s start with the headline: “1 in 3 would deny illegal immigrants social services.” The headline makes it sound like only 33% would deny illegal aliens welfare, “free” education, etc. Hidden message: if you want to deny them benefits, you’re in some kook minority.
But the actual poll results are quite the opposite. Here are the percentages of people who would deny the following specific benefits to illegal aliens:
In-state college tuition 82%
Food stamps 76%
Driver’s licenses 72%
Public schools 56%
Emergency medical 48%
Quite a difference from the “1 in 3” proclaimed in the headline, huh? If you were writing the headline, what would it say? How about something like, “Majority favor denying all social services except emergency medical.” Wouldn’t that be more accurate?
THEIR PIE LIES
Let’s move from the headline to the “lying pie.” The article also features a pie chart showing that only 36% of the respondents said illegal aliens have had a negative impact on their communities. The key words are “on their communities,” because the survey included people all over America, not just here in the “Ground Zero” of the illegal invasion. Have illegal aliens ruined Bangor, Maine? Probably not. Key West? Ditto.
The results differ dramatically when the question shifts from respondents’ “communities” to the nation as a whole. When asked about problems “facing the country,” 81% said illegal immigration is an important problem. Specifically, 54% said it was important, and another 27% said it was one of the most important problems facing the nation.
HOW ABOUT “ALL OF THE ABOVE?”
Other examples of bias abound. The questions are, for the most part, rigged to minimize the problem of illegal immigration.
For example, the poll did not ask people whether they support more border security, sanctions against employers, AND more arrests and deportations, etc. Instead, respondents were asked on which item the government should focus: border security OR employer sanctions OR more arrests, etc. Result? The poll made the percentages for each look smaller than otherwise by forcing people to chose one or the other, rather than “all of the above.”
CNN DID IT RIGHT
Another way to see the bias in this poll is to compare its wording to the wording in another poll. In October, CNN -- unlike the L.A. Times -- asked some straightforward questions, and got straightforward responses.
CNN asked, for example, “Would you like to see the number of illegal immigrants currently in this country increased, decreased, or remain the same?” The number of people who said “decreased” was 69%.
Quite a different image from the L.A. Times poll, huh? The CNN poll shows that an overwhelming majority of Americans want the number of illegal aliens in this country reduced. Do you remember reading about that poll in the L.A. Times? Me, neither.
CNN also asked a question about “sanctuary cities,” like ours. Here is that question: “When state or local police forces encounter illegal immigrants who have not broken any state or local laws, do you think the police should or should not arrest those people and turn them over to the federal government?” The number of people who said the police should turn them over to the feds was 55%. So a majority of Americans oppose “sanctuary city” policies. Shouldn’t the L.A. Times have made that a headline?
WHY IS THE L.A. TIMES BIASED ON THIS ISSUE?
Why is the L.A. Times so biased about illegal aliens? In a word: money. The L.A. Times is owned by the same company that owns Hoy, a Spanish-language newspaper. The financial success of Hoy depends on having large numbers of people here in California who cannot speak English. So the last thing the L.A. Times wants to do is stir American citizens into enforcing our immigration laws. CRO
2007 Walter Moore