Will the Media Correct its FIU Cuba Poll Stories?

Thursday, June 19, 2014
In yesterday's The Miami Herald, Professor Guillermo Grenier, who led FIU's 2014 Cuba poll, admitted to manipulating the results.

"Grenier acknowledged his numbers reflect only those respondents who said they favored or opposed the embargo and did not include 'don’t know/no answer' replies. Including those numbers in the tally would change the percentages to 45-41 (from the reported 52-48) against the embargo — short of a majority and with 12 percent replying 'don’t know/no answer.

Leaving out the don’t know/no answers — and reporting percentages as if those numbers didn’t exist — raised eyebrows among other pollsters.

'What you’re telling me is unusual. Really unique. Very, very extremely rare,' David Hill, a nationally known pollster with Hill Research Consultants in Washington D.C., said of FIU’s method. 'The ‘unsures’ tell us many things about an issue: how strongly people feel about it, how well an issue is known.'”

Moreover, there are a host of other omissions, contradictions and conflict of interests.

This casts doubt on all of the poll's released numbers.

Will those journalists who wrote that a majority of Cuban-Americans support lifting the embargo correct their stories?

This is false for many reasons -- in this case, by Grenier's own admission.

Moreover, will those journalists who are citing FIU's Cuba poll numbers demand that the actual results be released with all of the respondent's answers?

Once again, by Grenier's own admission, answers were omitted from the results and the percentages purposely distorted.

Or, despite Grenier's own admission, will these journalists simply continue to regurgitate manipulated data and distorted results?