POOR Jun Magsaysay and Dick Gordon must be agonizing over what they should do to improve their rankings in the current senatorial race. Should they learn to dance Gangnam style like some lady candidates? Should they appropriate a movie star girlfriend? Should Dick be more likeable? Should Jun wave the “Magsaysay is my Guy” flag, the way JV Ejercito-also-named-Estrada is riding on his father’s mass appeal?
As reported by media, the surveys conducted by Social Weather Station and Pulse Asia provide absolutely no clue. And it doesn’t look as if the media have exerted any efforts to dig below the surface to, at least, enlighten the public on where the May elections are headed and why.
Indeed, the rankings in both public opinion polls, as detailed in the news reports, are of little use to anyone desiring to understand the way the Filipino voter’s mind works.
Haven’t we always wondered – with much grief – why virtual illiterates have been elected to national office? Aren’t we always telling ourselves that people should “vote intelligently” and that “the masses ought to be educated on making the right choices.”
In this regard, shouldn’t public opinion polls and media reports, at the very least, contribute to achieving those objectives?
I say, “at the very least…contribute” because, frankly, the way these survey results are being released by the research companies and publicized in mass media, they actually encourage the bandwagon mentality among voters and create a perception of the inevitable victory of certain candidates. This, in turn, provides a convenient advance justification for subsequent questionable results.
The folks at Pulse Asia and SWS will hate me for this. But, either they have been remiss in their methodology or the people in media do not appreciate the importance of the survey data beyond the relative rankings of the candidates.
What’s lacking in the surveys or in the media reportage?
There’s no indication of WHY some candidates are leading and others are lagging behind. No insights on the perception of the voters. No clues on their expectations and the way the candidates are seen as meeting or failing to meet them.
A more comprehensive survey or a more intelligent analysis by media of the data would provide valuable insights, not only to the candidates themselves but also to social and political reformers who want to improve the quality of candidates voted into high office.
This body of information would guide the candidates in overcoming any deficiencies, sharpening their message, enhancing their image and improving their media penetration. The insights could also suggest ways of arresting the surge of senatorial rivals, or scuttling their campaigns altogether.
More importantly, for social and political reformers, the reasons for voter preferences could help explain the magic of Erap Estrada and the secret behind the popularity of Loren Legarda and Chiz Escudero. Is there something more than macho appeal or “maganda kasi” or “mabait” that prompts the masses to place the fate of the country in these candidates’ hands? Or are the reformers dealing with a voting population consisting of hopeless simpletons?
Even that disheartening insight would be invaluable, because it would instruct the reformers to get off their high-fallutin’ perch, descend to the grassroots and learn to speak the language of the masses.
The question is: Did Pulse Asia and SWS do any kind of probing, aside from reading from cut-and-dried questionnaires? If they did, why haven’t they released the results? If they did not, why not?
It doesn’t take Marketing 101 to understand that research should be used as “a lamp to illuminate and not as a lamp post to lean on.”
My late boss at Advertising & Marketing Associates, Tony de Joya, from whom I first heard this saying, would have blown his top if he had been shown the results of a survey showing Nescafé market share going down, without a corresponding analysis of why it was happening.
At any rate, if AMA had presented those incomplete results to Nestlé, the agency would have been fired.
I’m using the Nescafé example because I’m quite familiar with it, having created the advertising campaign that still stands as the most successful for that brand in the Philippine market.
Like Jun Magsaysay and Dick Gordon not landing in the list of possible senatorial winners (at least, so far), Nescafé was losing ground to Blend 45. Any bean counter could have told Nestlé that. The key question was WHY and WHAT COULD BE DONE about it.
The consumer research conducted by Dr. Ned Roberto provided the clues. Consumers believed that Blend 45, which was less expensive than Nescafé, “tasted good enough.” But when they were given a hypothetical situation where they had won in the Sweepstakes, they readily conceded that they would buy Nescafé. Further probing revealed that it was due to the “perceived high quality” which was, in turn, based on the “imported” image of the brand.
Based on these findings, we countered Blend 45’s price advantage with the campaign, “Nescafé, enjoyed in the great cities of the world.” This subsequently morphed into “One World of Nescafé.”
Of course, selling coffee is different from promoting a senatorial candidate in a number of ways. As a matter of fact, a high ranking in the surveys is not a guarantee of victory – not in Philippine elections, whatever the COMELEC might say about its automated system. After all, the system can only count the ballots. It can’t distinguish between freely cast votes and those that are bought or cast under duress.
At best, the Pulse Asia and SWS poll results should prompt the candidates to conduct their own research, to dig deeper into the minds of the voters, get a handle on their perceptions and expectations and realign their campaign efforts accordingly. If they’re doing it now, there may still be time for a course correction. The truly wise candidates must have done their reading of the voters’ psyche long before the campaign began, using the Pulse Asia and SWS surveys merely as indicators.
What is unfortunate is that it is unlikely that the insights derived from these proprietary studies will be shared with the media, the social and political reformers and the general public. Sayang.
At any rate, I sincerely hope I’m wrong about the way Pulse Asia and SWS have been conducting their surveys. Maybe, they have, in fact, been doing a thorough job and have simply been keeping the details under wraps, only choosing to release to the media what they think the latter can comprehend.
In such a case, they certainly owe it to the public to disclose the full results, including the methodology and the questionnaires, to demonstrate that they have been doing a professional job.
I also sincerely hope that I’m wrong about the disappointingly shallow way that media have been reporting the survey results. Perhaps the editors have simply been on vacation, leaving the sports and show business reporters to write the stories.
That’s too bad. Our people deserve more from a truly responsible media sector than the rankings in a karera ng daga.
* * *
Email [email protected].
