NOTES FOR REMARKS TO THE PUBLIC AFFAIRS ASSOCIATION LUNCH – OCTOBER 24, 2006

….NOW, IF I WAS THE ONLY PUBLIC AFFAIRS PRACTITIONER EVER TO APPEAR ON TELEVISION, IT MIGHT BE BECAUSE IT WAS ME WHO WAS TRULY EXCEPTIONAL – OR PERHAPS EVEN DISTINGUISHED.

BUT THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS THAT, TODAY, THERE ARE LEGIONS OF COMMENTATORS, ANALYSTS, PANELISTS AND SPOKESPEOPLE FROM THE PUBLIC AFFAIRS DISCIPLINE WHO COME, UNINVITED, INTO THE PUBLIC’S LIVING ROOM WITH GREAT REGULARITY.

AND LET’S NOT DELUDE OURSELVES, THIS OCCURS NOT BECAUSE WE ARE SO MUCH MORE TALENTED OR GIFTED THAN INDIVIDUALS IN OTHER PROFESSIONS. IT IS BECAUSE OUR VERY PROFESSION MAKES US INHERENTLY MORE NEWSWORTHY. WE SHOULD ALSO APPRECIATE THAT THE EXULTED POSITION OF OUR PROFESSION IS A RELATIVELY RECENT PHENOMENON.

IN THE EARLIEST DAYS OF THE BUSINESS OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS, THE PURVEYORS OF THE CRAFT WERE NEITHER SEEN NOR HEARD. IN FACT, BACK IN THE DAY, THE PIONEER OF THE FIELD, BILL NEVILLE, CLAIMED THE JOB INVOLVED LITTLE MORE THAN SITTING BY THE TELEPHONE, WITH A GOVERNMENT DIRECTORY AT ONE ELBOW AND AN INVOICE PAD AT THE OTHER.

PUBLIC AFFAIRS PRACTITIONERS TODAY APPEAR ON TELEVISION BECAUSE THEY ARE NOW CONSIDERED AUTHORITIES. AND THAT AUTHORITY COMES FROM THE PLACE WHERE WE GARNERED THE BONA FIDES THAT ALLOW US TO BE CALLED PUBLIC AFFAIRS PRACTITIONERS.

MOST OF US RECEIVED OUR EARLY TUTELAGE IN GOVERNMENT OR THE POLITICAL PROCESS. WE LEARNED HOW GOVERNMENTS WORK, HOW TO MANAGE ISSUES OR HOW TO SHAPE A COMMUNICATIONS MESSAGE ON THE KNEES OF PRIME MINISTERS, PREMIERS, DEPUTY MINISTERS AND CABINET MINISTERS.

OTHERS STARTED OFF IN JOURNALISM. WHILE THEY HAD DIFFERENT EMPLOYERS, THEY TOO SOON CAME IN DIRECT CONTACT WITH THE NATION’S POWERFUL AND INFLUENTIAL. INSTEAD OF ASSISTING THESE LEADERS, THEIR JOB WAS TO CHALLENGE THEM, ANALYZE THEIR ACTIONS AND EXPOSE THEIR FOIBLES.

AND WHETHER OUR BACKGROUND WAS POLITICS, GOVERNMENT OR JOURNALISM, BECAUSE OF THE VERY NATURE OF THE BUSINESS, MOST OF US RECEIVED OUR TOOL BELT AT A VERY YOUNG AGE.

WHEN WE LEFT THE INCUBATOR OF POLITICS, JOURNALISM AND GOVERNMENT, AND ENTERED THE WORLD OF BUSINESS, OUR CLIENTS BECAME CEOs, EXECUTIVE VICE-PRESIDENTS AND CORPORATE DIRECTORS. STEEPED IN BUSINESS BUT LARGELY IGNORANT OF THE WORKINGS OF THE MEDIA, GOVERNMENT OR THE MIASMA OF THE EXTERNAL ENVIRONMENT IN WHICH THEY OPERATED, THESE SCIONS OF COMMERCE NEEDED THE INSIGHTS WE HAD GLEANED FROM OUR EDUCATION IN THE PRESS AND POLITICS.

NOW THIS IS HEADY SHIT. WHAT YOUNG LAWYER, DOCTOR OR MBA CONSORTS WITH OR CONFRONTS PRIME MINISTERS AND CEOs; LET ALONE APPEARS REGULARLY ON TELEVISION AS AN “AUTHORITY”?

WITHOUT SOUNDING EITHER MODLAN OR HISTRIONIC, THE FACT IS THAT, THE PERCH OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS AFFORDS MANY OF US GREAT PRIVILEGE. NOT ONLY HAS THE DISCIPLINE BECOME QUITE PROFITABLE SINCE BILL NEVILLE’S DAY, IT ALSO GIVES US ACCESS AND INFLUENCE OVER THE NATION’S LEADERS THAT PROBABLY IS FAR IN EXCESS OF OUR WISDOM OR TALENT.

AND FOR THIS REASON, WITH THE GREAT PRIVILEGE OF PRACTICING PUBLIC AFFAIRS COMES AN EQUAL PERIL.

FOR EVERY GREAT NEWS STORY BROKEN THERE IS THE POSSIBILITY OF A REPUTATION FOREVER BESMIRCHED. FOR EVERY VICTORIOUS CAMPAIGN WAGED, THERE IS THE DEFEATED AND THE VANQUISHED.

IN THE SAME WAY THAT OUR PROFESSION OPENS DOORS TO THE OFFICES OF THE NATION’S MOST IMPORTANT DECISION-MAKERS, SO TOO IF WE PROFFER ILL-CONSIDERED OR INTEMPERATE ADVICE, WE STAND TO NEGATIVELY INFLUENCE THE NATION’S MOST IMPORTANT DECISIONS.

BECAUSE OF THIS FUNDAMENTAL FACT, THE PRIVILEGE AND PERILS OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS BRINGS WITH IT GREAT RESPONSIBILITY.

WE ARE BLESSED BY ACCESS; BURDENED BY THE DEMAND FOR SOLID ADVICE; AND REQUIRED TO EXERCISE OUR BLESSINGS AND BURDENS WITH GREAT CARE.

IN THE GIDDY BLUSH OF SWANNING AROUND WITH MINISTERS, CEOs, OR IN THE GLARE OF THE TELEVISION CAMERA, IT IS VERY EASY TO LOSE SIGHT OF THIS RESPONSIBILITY.

WHAT IS EASY, IS TO START TO BELIEVE WE ARE ENTITLED TO OCCUPY THE POSITION OF PRIVILEGE THAT WE HOLD – WE CAN FALL IN LOVE WITH THE SOUND OF OUR VOICE AND DELUDE OURSELVES THAT OUR PRESS CLIPPINGS ARE ALL DESERVED.

IF THERE IS ANY BENEFIT TO BEING AROUND FOR AS LONG AS I HAVE, IT IS TO UNDERSTAND THAT NOTHING CAN BE FURTHER FORM THE TRUTH.

BECAUSE SOON OR LATER, IF YOU GET TO THE TOP OF THE LADDER IN THIS BUSINESS, YOU WILL GET KNOCKED DOWN A FEW RUNGS. NO MATTER HOW MANY GREAT VICTORIES, SOONER OR LATTER THEY WILL BE OFFSET BE A DEFEAT. IN THE SAME WAY, ONE DAY YOUR BRILLIANT INSIGHTS AND ADVICE WILL BE REVEALED TO BE FAULTY AND SOMETIMES DISASTROUS.

WHEN THIS HAPPENS – AND I CAN GUARANTEE NO MATTER HOW EXCEPTIONAL OR DISTINGUISHED YOU MIGHT COME TO BELIEVE YOU ARE – YOU ARE FORCED TO LISTEN TO YOUR VOICE A LITTLE MORE CAREFULLY AND READ YOUR PRESS CLIPPINGS A LITTLE MORE JUDICIOUSLY.

WHILE THE CONCEIT OF AGE AND EXPERIENCE IS SUPPOSED TO BE ACCOMPANIED BY SAGACITY, I WILL NOT BE SO PRESUMPTUOUS AS TO LECTURE YOU. BUT I DO WANT TO COMMENT ON SOME TRENDS I HAVE WITNESSED OVER THE YEARS IN MY OWN CHOSEN FIELD OF THE PROFESSION – PUBLIC OPINION RESEARCH.

THE DISCIPLINE HAS BEEN DESCRIBED AS ONE PART LOGISTICS, ONE PART SCIENCE AND ONE PART ART.

ANYONE WHO HAS BEEN OBSERVING THE BUSINESS OVER THE LAST 30 YEARS KNOW THAT THE LOGISTICAL SIDE OF THE BUSINESS HAS ADVANCED BY LEAPS AND BOUNDS OVER THAT TIME. OUR ABILITY TO CONDUCT AND MONITOR INTERVIEWS, THE FLEXIBILITY AND POWER OF OUR DATA ANALYSIS CAPABILITIES AND OUR OVERALL ADMINISTRATIVE SYSTEMS ARE ALL EXPONENTIALLY BETTER TODAY THAN WHEN I STARTED IN THE BUSINESS.

THE TRAINING AND SKILL SETS OF YOUNG RESEARCHERS ENTERING THE FIELD IS ALSO FAR SUPERIOR TODAY, COMPARED WITH THE PAST. INDEED, WHILE I CONTINUE TO BE ALTERNATIVELY AMUSED AND ALARMED AT THE AUDACIOUSNESS OF SOME USERS –WHO ENTER THE SUPPLY SIDE OF THE BUSINESS AND FEEL NO COMPUNCTION TO ACQUIRE A THEORETICAL OR METHODOLOGICAL GROUNDING IN THE DISCIPLINE – THERE IS NO QUESTION THAT UNIVERSITY AND EVEN COMMUNITY COLLEGE GRADUATES COME TO THE PROFESSION FAR MORE KNOWLEDGEABLE AND BETTER PREPARED TODAY, THAN THEIR PREDECESSORS.

BUT IN THE SEAM BETWEEN THE LOGISTICAL AND SCIENCE SIDE OF SURVEY RESEARCH, WE’VE ALLOWED A DIRTY LITTLE SECRET TO FESTER AND GROW — ONE THAT NOW THREATENS THE VERACITY AND GOES TO THE VERY HEART OF OUR CREDIBILITY AND AUTHORITY.

THE FOUNDATION OF OUR DISCIPLINE IS RANDOM PROBABILITY THEORY — THAT IS, IF WE CHOOSE A SAMPLE OF RESPONDENTS FROM A DEFINED UNIVERSE OF CASES, THAT SAMPLE WILL ACCURATELY REFLECT THE POPULATION FROM WHICH IT IS DRAWN. (FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO ARE LESS FAMILIAR WITH THIS, MORE ARCANE, SIDE OF THE FIELD, THIS WORKS SOMETHING LIKE THIS: IF SINGLE WOMEN LIVING IN APARTMENT BUILDINGS REPRESENT 10 PERCENT OF THE TOTAL ADULT POPULATION, A SINGLE WOMEN LIVING IN AN APARTMENT BUILDING WILL HAVE A 10% “CHANCE” OF BEING SELECTED IN A RANDOM PROBABILITY SAMPLE. IF WE SELECT RESPONDENTS ON A TRULY RANDOM BASIS, LOW AND BEHOLD, 10% OF THE SAMPLE WILL BE COMPRISED OF SINGLE WOMEN LIVING IN APARTMENT BUILDINGS).

GENERATING THIS A PROPORTIONAL SAMPLE REQUIRES THAT WE NOT ONLY SELECT RESPONDENTS ON A RANDOM BASIS, BUT ALSO THAT ALL ELIGIBLE MEMBERS OF THE POPULATION HAVE AN EQUAL LIKELIHOOD OF BEING SELECTED. THAT OF COURSE, NECESSITATES THAT WE HAVE EQUAL ACCESS TO ALL GROUPS WITHIN THE POPULATION. (TO CONTINUE THE EXAMPLE, IF WE ARE UNABLE TO CONTACT SINGLE WOMEN IN APARTMENT BUILDINGS, IT IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR OUR SAMPLE TO ACCURATELY REPRESENT THIS SUB-SET OF THE POPULATION).

BEFORE CALL ANSWERING MACHINES, CALLER ID, CELL PHONES, ¾ OF THE POPULATION IN THE WORKFORCE – NOT TO MENTION, BEFORE THE PROLIFERATION OF POLLING – OUR ACCESS TO THE ENTIRE POPULATION WAS FAIRLY WELL DISTRIBUTED. IN FACT, WHEN I STARTED DECIMA IN 1979, OUR RESPONSE RATES WERE ROUTINELY IN THE 60 TO 70% RANGE. TODAY THEY ARE NOW BELOW 20%. AND OUR INABILITY TO CONTACT THAT OTHER 80% DOES NOT OCCUR ON A RANDOM BASIS. WHAT WE FIND TODAY IS THAT WE ARE SYSTEMATICALLY UNDER REPRESENTING YOUNG PEOPLE, VISIBLE MINORITIES, HIGH INCOME EARNERS AND YES…. OTHER HIGHLY MOBILE, HARD-TO-REACH GROUPS LIKE SINGLE WOMEN LIVING IN APARTMENT BUILDINGS.

IN TANDEM, WE ARE ALSO RUSHING TO ESTABLISH INTERNET RESEARCH AS A PARALLEL AND (OVER TIME, WITHOUT ANY DOUBT) A SUBSTITUTE FOR TELEPHONE INTERVIEWING. HERE TOO HOWEVER, THE RANDOM BASIS OF THE DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM IS FOUND WANTING. NOT ONLY IS INTERNET PENETRATION LESS THAN UNIVERSAL, IT’S PRESENCE, USE AND THE TENDENCY TO RESPOND TO INTERNET SURVEY IS HIGHLY SKEWED TO CERTAIN GROUPS IN THE POPULATION, WHILE OTHERS ARE SYSTEMATICALLY EXCLUDED.

TAKEN TOGETHER, I DO NOT THINK IT IS ANY EXAGGERATION TO SAY THAT THE ACCURACY OF OUR WORK – AND OUR ABILITY TO PROJECT SURVEY RESULTS AS AN ACCURATE REFLECTION OF THE ACTUAL STATE OF PUBLIC OPINION – HAS NEVER BEEN MORE IN DOUBT.

YET THE EXTENT TO WHICH THIS DIRTY LITTLE SECRET IS DISCUSSED AT ALL, IT IS ONLY WITHIN THE CLOSED CONFINES OF INDUSTRY AND SCHOLARLY PAPERS. PUBLICLY, FAR FROM USING CAUTION WHEN WE FORECAST, WE HAVE NEVER BEEN MORE CAVALIER OR MORE LIKELY TO MAKE CLAIMS OF VIRTUAL CLAIRVOYANCE.

WHICH BRINGS ME TO ART ASPECT OF THE PUBLIC OPINION RESEARCH – THE ABILITY TO CRAFT THE RIGHT QUESTIONS AND THEN TO ANALYZE, SYNTHESIZE AND INTERPRET THE DATA.

IN MANY WAYS, WE ARE GUIDED BY CERTAIN RULES AND STATISTICAL MEASURES IN THIS ASPECT OF THE CRAFT. NEEDLESS-TO-SAY, THOSE WHO ARE UNSCHOOLED IN THESE RULES OR STATISTICAL METHODS FORGE AHEAD WITHOUT THIS GUIDANCE.

THE RESULT CAN BE — AND OFTEN IS — BAD QUESTIONS AND DUBIOUS FINDINGS.

BUT EVEN WITH A SOLID GROUNDING IN THE THEORY AND SCIENCE OF SURVEY RESEARCH, IT IS VERY EASY TO LOSE YOUR WAY IN THE HUBRIS OF THE PROFESSION ITSELF.

FOR GOOD OR ILL, POLLSTERS HAVE BECOME THE SOOTHSAYERS AND ORACLES OF MODERN PUBLIC AFFAIRS.

NOT ONLY IS OUR PERSPECTIVE ON THE NUMBERS TAKEN AS GOSPEL, BUT THROUGH SOME STRANGE PERVERSION, WE ARE OFTEN ASK TO COMMENT ON ALL MATTER OF CURRENT AFFAIRS THAT HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THE RESEARCH WE HAVE UNDERTAKEN. EVEN MORE PERVERSELY, INTOXICATED BY THE EXALTED POSITION WE HOLD, IT IS STUNNING HOW FREQUENTLY, POLLSTERS WILL VENTURE FORTH WITH THEIR OPINION COMPLETELY UNIFORMED BY THE AID OF THEIR POLLS.

NOT ONLY IS THIS AN AFFRONT TO AN UNDERSTANDING OF THE LIMITS OF THE DISCIPLINE, IT IS ALSO A VERY DANGEROUS AND UNHEALTHY CONTRIBUTION TO PUBLIC DISCOURSE.

IF, UNDER THE IMPRIMATUR AND LEGITIMACY OF THE PROFESSION, PRACTITIONERS ARE PROFFERING ADVICE THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THEIR AREA OF EXPERTISE, THIS IS NOT ONLY AN AFFRONT TO THE PROFESSION BUT ALSO TO ALL THOSE WHO TOIL IN, AND VALUE, PUBLIC LIFE.

SOMEHOW, WE HAVE COME TO THE POINT WHERE PUBLIC OPINION RESEARCH HAS BECOME THE FINAL ARBITRATOR OF WHAT IS GOOD OR BAD POLITICS AND THEREFORE WHAT IS GOOD OR BAD PUBLIC POLICY.

IF MY CLIENT – THE GLOBE AND MAIL – PUBLISHES A POLL THAT SHOWS CANADIANS OPPOSE “TWO-TIER” HEALTH CARE FOR EXAMPLE, ANY POLITICIANS WHO HAS ADVOCATED THE CONSIDERATION OF SUCH AN OPTION IS DEEMED, IPSO FACTO, “OFF-SIDE” WITH THE PUBLIC. FROM THERE IT IS A SMALL LEAP TO DECLARE HIM OR HER ERROR-PRONE OR POLITICALLY INSENSITIVE.

WHAT IS EVEN MORE LIKELY TO HAPPEN HOWEVER, IS, ARMED WITH THE SAME PUBLIC OPINION INFORMATION, POLITICIANS WILL NOT WANT TO TREAD DOWN THE PATH OF “TWO-TIERED” MEDICINE, AND SO THE OPTION IS NOT EVEN PUT FORWARD. THIS STIFLYING OF DEBATE, LEADS TO INERTIA; INERTIA LEADS TO THE DETERIORATION OF THE HEALTH CARE SYSTEM, WHICH IN TURN, FURTHER ERODES THE PUBLIC’S CONFIDENCE IN THE POLITICAL SYSTEM’S ABILITY TO RESPOND TO THEIR NEEDS.

IN THIS WAY, WE CREATE AN INTELLECTUAL JIHAD, WHERE THE TYRANNY OF PUBLIC OPINION LIMITS THE OPTIONS UNDER CONSIDERATION AND ROBS US OF THE RICHNESS OF UNFETTERED DEBATE.

RATHER THAN ILLUMINATE, PUBLIC OPINION RESEARCH, USED THIS WAY, TURNS US INTO UNTHINKING KNOW-IT-ALLS.

WHEN GEORGE GALLUP INTRODUCED COMMERCIAL POLLING, HE HERALDED IT AS “THE PULSE OF DEMOCRACY”. HIS IDEA WAS THAT BY LETTING POLITICAL LEADERS KNOW WHAT THE PUBLIC WAS ACTUALLY THINKING, THEY COULD BETTER RESPOND TO THEIR NEEDS. THOSE NEEDS HOWEVER MAY INCLUDE RIGHTING THEIR VIEWS WHEN THE POPULATION WAS ILL-INFORMED OR FORGING A CONSENSUS AROUND POLICY, WHEN NONE EXISTS.

PUBLIC OPINION POLLS GIVE DECISION-MAKERS A MAP.

WE ARE THE CARTOGRAPHERS OF CURRENT AFFAIRS, AND SHOULD NOT BE DELUDING OURSELVES THAT WE ARE THE DRIVERS, SHAPERS OR LIMITERS POLICY AND POLITICS.

POLLSTERS, WHO ACTUALLY UNDERSTAND PUBLIC OPINION – AND UNDERSTAND THAT IT CAN BE FLEETING, ILL-INFORMED, CONTRADICTORY AND OFTENTIMES, LITTLE MORE THAN AN ARTIFACT OF THE WAY A QUESTION IS ASKED – SHOULD BE ADDING NUANCE TO DEBATE, NOT IN THE FRONT OF A PARADE OF THE IGNORANT.

FOR THAT IS BOTH THE PRIVILEGE AND PERIL OF PRACTICING OUR PROFESSION.