PR deceit: not real but ‘fake Gallup’ commissioned to conduct exit poll for Armenian parliamentary election

There was a big PR by government controlled Armenia TV channel that they have signed up with the Gallup to conduct exit poll for upcoming Armenian parliamentary election. All the main headlines implied that the world renowned US company will conduct exit poll in Armenia, thus putting behind it its reputation.

Even with the ‘real’ Gallup, I would have concerns re polling, as taking into account local circumstances, it is very important who conducts the polls in the field. If it’s one of discredited sociological groups in Armenia, then even with the best Gallup methodology, I would not trust their results.

7or.am revealed, however, that it’s not ‘real' Gallup that is going to conduct the exit poll and pre-election survey, but the ‘fake’ one.

This is a ‘real’ Gallup: http://www.gallup.com/corporate/115/About-Gallup.aspx

This is a ‘fake’ Gallup: former “Gallup International Association”. Kancho Stoychev who signed the agreement with the Armenia TV is their Vice-President (Bulgaria). [http://www.gallup-international.com/en/who_we_are/the_board] Despite name change [“Worldwide Independent Network of Market Research”], they still contain references to “Gallup” within their website.

According to one Wikipedia reference, [US-based] Gallup Inc. and [Switzerland-based] Gallup International Association (GIA) were involved in a legal dispute over the use of “Gallup” name. In 2010, GIA merged with the market research company WIN (Worldwide Independent Network). They are currently called “Worldwide Independent Network of Market Research”.

It’s the US-based company, not the Swiss one, that is famous for Gallup Poll.

This is not what we will be getting for Armenian parliamentary election.

Yerevan mayoral candidate - Gagik Beglaryan, PhD (!)

Apparently, Gagik Beglaryan (nicknamed Chorni (Black) Gago), Yerevan mayoral candidate from the ruling Republican party, has PhD degree (its Armenian equivalent - “Kandidat Nauk”).

He ‘defended’ his thesis on local governance in 2004. Although 7or.am news outlet states that this fact was mentioned in his official biography, this is not quite true. I could not find any mention of his degree on a Republican party website.

Born in 1964 in Yerevan.In 1985 graduated from the Yerevan Institute of National Economy, obtaining a qualification of economist.In 1985-1987 served in the Army.Since 1987 worked in different branches of economy.1993 was elected deputy of the first convocation of the Supreme Assembly of the RA.Since 2002 is the Chief of Kentron community of Yerevan.Since 2006 is a member of the Republican Party of Armenia.Since 2006 is a memeber of RPA board.Married, has two children.

This info was not available within his bio when he was appointed as Yerevan mayor too (link).

But this is not the whole story.

Guess, who was his scientific supervisor? The answer is... one of our chief sociologists Gevorg Poghosyan, president of discredited Armenian Sociological Association, which conducts various election or politics related exit polls and opinion surveys, frequently under the umbrella of reputable international agencies.

I am so going to trust his surveys for Yerevan municipal election.

*photo - via 7or.am

Referendum on Karabakh settlement in Armenia: populist, useless and dangerous exercise

This may sound like breaking news that Armenian government wants to listen to public opinion and go forward with Karabakh settlement only after getting approval from the public via 'nationwide referendum'.

Sadly, this only sounds like that. In reality, this is useless and perhaps even dangerous populist exercise.

Imagine if Karabakh settlement agreement is put to a nationwide vote. Will it be the whole document or some separate clauses or, even worse, ‘principles’ which then anyone could interpret the way they want?

Then, let’s consider that understandably Azerbaijan also follows the suite and conducts its own referendum. Now hypothetical outcomes.

What if Armenia rejects it, and Azerbaijan accepts it? Does this mean war?

What if Armenia accepts it and Azerbaijan rejects it? Does this mean that Armenia would be forced to more compromises to satisfy Azerbaijan?

What if both Azerbaijan and Armenia accept it? Where does this leave Karabakh? Where is their voice? One would assume that the very people who will be directly affected by any decision signed are Karabakh citizens. It would be unimaginable that they should be left out of this ‘democratic exercise’. Till now, it was impossible for parties to agree on the terms of Karabakh referendum for its future status as reportedly a final step of the proposed settlement. There is no way that with current Azeri official position there will be any agreement to take into account the results of Karabakh’s own referendum on the settlement principles.

But forget even what I said above.

Do we trust voting, referendum, polling, you name it, initiated by Armenian authorities? The answer is simple: No. The whole history of national voting/referendum since 1995 proves that the answer is simple: No.

Unless there are fundamental changes in Armenian society and political system in terms of democratisation and representative governance, Armenian public will not accept any result of any poll initiated by Armenian authorities. This will only lead to intensifying of internal divisions and political crisis. Armenian ruling administration had almost a year to initiate real reforms, to increase faith of the public in democratic institutions. They failed so far, spectacularly.

And, finally, one somewhat minor point. If this poll, or ‘referendum’, initiated by Armenian government, is expected to be non-binding, why not conduct a proper opinion poll instead to reveal public views, even if for internal use only? The alternative in form of a proposed ‘nationwide referendum’ is populist, useless and dangerous exercise.

P.S. A1plus blog has also made a relevant entry on this subject matter (in Armenian)

'Impressive show of power'

Picture of the Day:

*Security forces are on standby in central Yerevan as oppositionists meet to protest (photo by Photolure, via ArmeniaNow)

by John Hughes, ArmeniaNow

[...] In taking the presidency Sargsyan assumes the seat of power following a day of voting that challenged definitions of “free and fair”.

It is further expected that Armenia’s third president will take over with the begrudged blessing of western allies who once again for the sake of regional stability, will need to overlook this government’s apparent willingness to dodge democratic fundamentals – open voting and vote buying among them, as witnessed by members of this staff. (Press conferences are scheduled later today by observer missions who monitored yesterday’s process.)

To claim his landslide victory Sargsyan was aided by an army of loyalists who handed out money for votes and were accused of physically assaulting and emotionally intimidating his opposition at polling stations. Complicit, too, was State Police, who dismissed reports of such incidents as “groundless” for investigation. (To be fair, wrongdoing was not unique to the Republican Party. Ter-Petrosyan’s camp was accused of some incidents of intimidation, though in far fewer reports from sources generally sympathetic to the opposition.)

The outcome was further aided through the engagement of a British polling agency that – for the first time in Armenian elections – produced exit poll data.

The British “Populus” analysis group announced – within 45 minutes of polls closing – that Sargsyan was the run-away winner. (Conveniently, their numbers are consistent with those expected to be released by CEC.) Two giant asterisks should be attached to the group’s findings. First: the number crunchers were hired by government-run television. Second: They used data provided by the pro-government Armenian Sociological Association.

A separate poll, conducted by a coalition of Armenian non-governmental organizations, produced a considerably different outlook, giving Ter-Petrosyan 37 percent and Sargsyan 35 – a win for neither.

In a less suspicious contest, the result would likely have been close, probably forcing a Sargsyan-Ter-Petrosyan runoff. (In Armenia’s system, a candidate must get 50 percent plus one vote to win in one round.) But a runoff would not have favored Sargsyan, as his opponent might have inherited the support of other opposition candidates to amass enough votes for a second-round win.

To move from prime minister to president, Sargsyan needed a first-round win that was most easily achieved through means that may not be found in this or any other Election Code.

It is an impressive show of power. It is, too, a demonstrative prediction of what Armenians can expect for, probably, the next decade – a forceful leader with determined aspirations for what is best for his country and for himself.

Levon Ter-Petrosyan: gaining momentum

This was the most successful rally of former president and presidential hopeful Levon Ter-Petrosyan. Participants of the rally told me that Liberty sq and surrounding areas were full of people, and they reckon it was the most attended rally in recent years. This time people from much varied backgrounds and more young people attended too. Interestingly, some of the people who were in the rally said that they somehow felt the atmosphere of 88s when Karabakh movement just started and eventually brought Levon and others to power. Most significantly, while substantial proportion of people in prime minister and presidential hopeful Serj Sargsyan rallies are ‘ordered’ to attend using all sort of administrative pressures and resources, here people come because they want to come.

As to the unification of opposition leaders behind Levon Ter-Petrosyan, according to sources in Arthur Baghdasaryan’s Orinats Erkir opposition party, Arthur is behind Levon, negotiations are still in process and they will announce their support by 14th of February. The reasoning behind this is the desire to use campaigning, including by TV channels, as full as possible. At least, that’s what I’ve been told. I am not sure whether it’s right to wait, instead of announcing it now, but let’s see.

Next rally will be on 16 February, at 3pm, in Liberty sq.



*video via A1+

Election monitors, like polls: Do we trust them?

International election observers, particularly those from various European structures, used to be considered by people living in countries which struggle with the establishment of democratic institutions as an important tool to limit potential electoral fraud and to grant legitimacy to those who got elected, be that President or MP.

However, recent developments in the region and particularly Georgia, cast serious doubts on political motivations of observers’ decisions. Well, there was always a suspicion of it, but what happened in Georgia was so blatant that could lead to serious breach of credibility towards the whole system.

Immediately after the Georgian presidential elections, they declared that the elections ‘generally met standards’, thus giving so much desired legitimacy to Georgian president Saakashvili. Then, soon after they published a report detailing serious irregularities, which under any other circumstances should have cast serious doubts on the conduct of election. And now a senior US representative in the region Matthew Bryza, who previously endorsed the elections, warns that Georgian elections could not be considered as a good example for others. So why did not they shout about before? Why now, when their “concerns” do not worth a penny? Was it because of Saakashvili’s “pro-Western” status? Rhetorical question, indeed.

We are just 2 weeks away from presidential elections in Armenia. What happened in Georgia has already seriously damaged observers’ reputation. In order for observers to regain it, they have to behave like proper independent observers, regardless of vague “pro-Russian” or “pro-Western” labels. Their preliminary conclusion, which is normally made the day after the election, should not differ substantially from final one. If they are not sure, they’d rather wait few more days and then declare their findings which are very important in terms of acceptance and legitimacy of the results. Otherwise, they risk equalling their reputation to that of polls in Armenia. Nothing could be more damaging.

P.S. On a kind of bizarre note, via Reporter_arm, below is a clip with John Prescott, head of PACE observation mission in Armenia for upcoming presidential election. During his own election campaign in Britain back in 2001, he (then deputy prime minister) actually punched one protester who threw eggs towards him.

US cancels 'Exit Poll' proposal for presidential elections in Armenia

I was very positive re news that for the first time US offered conducting exit poll for presidential elections in Armenia and Armenian government green lighted that idea. However, mistrust towards local organisation(s) who were supposed to conduct exit poll made this good idea eventually cancelled.

"After intensive and detailed discussions with interested parties regarding a proposal to conduct exit polling in Armenia during the 2008 presidential elections, the International Republican Institute (IRI) and Baltic Surveys Ltd/Gallup Organization were unable to resolve all of the detailed procedural questions in a way that was fully satisfactory to all sides. Consequently, the U.S. Embassy and USAID have decided to cancel the project.

We continue to think that, in principle, exit polling can be a useful instrument for enhancing the transparency and credibility of elections. In this particular case, however, given the limited preparation time remaining prior to the February 19 election and the questions raised from various parts of the political spectrum, we decided it would be wiser not to go forward with a project that faced implementation problems and risked becoming an unhelpful distraction in the Armenian political debate."

While I consider this news as BAD news, in general, in relation to democratisation of elections in Armenia, I must admit that in current circumstances it is probably good idea. Unless US and others administer exit poll via truly independent agency, its conduct, instead of positive outcomes, would lead to something completely negative, fuelling speculations and eventually discrediting the whole idea behind the exit polls.

There is also another lesson from this whole ‘exit poll’ and other ‘pre-election poll’ stories. Mistrust towards all sort of polls in Armenia is so high (and conveniently so for many parties) that it’s almost impossible to get people accept the results, even in case of independent conduct of polls or (theoretical) clean elections.

‘Undecided’ will decide the fate of presidential elections in Armenia

According to the telephone poll commissioned by Aravot newspaper and conducted by APR group during 28 November – 1 December 2007 among 663 Yerevan residents, if elections were to be conducted in “coming Sunday” (2 December), the votes may have the following distribution:

Serj Sargsyan – 19.2%
Levon Ter-Petrosyan – 9.2%
Vazgen Manukyan – 4.4%
Artur Baghdasaryan – 2.1%
Vahan Hovhannisyan – 2%
Artashes Geghamyan – 1.4%

Undecided – 31.5%
Against everyone – 18.7%

Based on my subjective understanding of the situation, these numbers (especially re Serj Sargsyan and Levon Ter-Petrosyan) seem close to reality, as for today. The way ‘undecided’ will vote, would determine the outcomes of the elections. They, in turn, may be influenced by the choice of other respected politicians not participating (unfortunately!) in the election per se (Raffi Hovhannisyan), and redistribution of votes for the second round of elections, which is inevitable.

So, here we are, opportunities for presidential hopefuls to battle for our votes – no bribes, your programmes, please!

‘Exit Poll’ is good news for presidential elections in Armenia

It is not frequently that we hear good news related to upcoming presidential election campaign in Armenia. However, this news I would certainly consider Good News.

For the first time, exit poll will be conducted during presidential elections in Armenia. This offer was made by current US envoy in Armenia during his meeting today with Prime Minister and presidential hopeful Serj Sargsyan. Armenian Prime Minister accepted the offer, adding that even if US did not offer it, they would have sought assistance of specialised agencies to conduct exit poll. This is certainly positive development. If the results of exit poll, which are usually announced immediately after polling stations closed, would be similar to official results published by Central Electorate Commission, this would add to legitimacy of conducted elections.

Of course, having exit poll by no means an indicator of fair and free elections (recent example - Russia), because exit poll is mainly aimed at the latest stage of election process – vote count, to ensure that count of votes at local polling stations and in Central Commission are not falsified. This is very important, as we know that one of the most common voting irregularities during Armenian elections used to happen during the vote count. However, it does not reflect pre-election campaign and voting process per se, although indirectly exit poll may reflect the effect of mass ballot stuffing (if it happens) on the final results. What is also important is to ensure that pre-election period gives equal chances for all candidates to access media, and specifically TV (and specifically Public TV!); also to ensure that people are free to make their votes during voting process itself. Only then the elections could be considered free and fair.

In any case, having exit poll is a positive development, and I welcome Armenian government’s positive attitude towards it.