For some reason Ipsos Mori haven’t taken kindly to a ‘Labour source’ telling LabourList’s Mark Ferguson that they “consistently brief highly selective data to create misleading impressions”. In a withering riposte on their website, they insist things really are that bad for Ed:
“Mr Ferguson’s complaint appears to be about Joe Murphy’s coverage of our questions about Ed Miliband in the Evening Standard. He states that “To read the report you’d think that the results were abnormally bad for Ed Miliband (as it happens, Cameron was far further behind Brown at this stage than Miliband is behind Cameron)”, and Joe Murphy himself reported that “A Labour source said David Cameron was further behind Gordon Brown at the same stage in the last Parliament.” But the results are, all, abnormally bad for Ed Miliband, and Cameron was not further behind Brown at the same stage in the last parliament… We therefore request that Mr Ferguson:
provides evidence for or corrects his assertion that Cameron was further behind Brown than Miliband is behind Cameron at this stage of the parliament;
makes it clear in his piece that the changes in satisfaction for both Cameron and Miliband since last month are not statistically significant.”
Fight…
mdi-tag-outline
Blogging on Blogging
Labour Party
Media Guido
Polls
“Mr Ferguson’s complaint appears to be about Joe Murphy’s coverage of our questions about Ed Miliband in the Evening Standard. He states that “To read the report you’d think that the results were abnormally bad for Ed Miliband (as it happens, Cameron was far further behind Brown at this stage than Miliband is behind Cameron)”, and Joe Murphy himself reported that “A Labour source said David Cameron was further behind Gordon Brown at the same stage in the last Parliament.” But the results are, all, abnormally bad for Ed Miliband, and Cameron was not further behind Brown at the same stage in the last parliament… We therefore request that Mr Ferguson:
