Flemington, NJ, September 16, 2008 – A new national focus group among 312 self-reported Democrats, Republicans and Independents, revealed that after viewing a new ad by the Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund regarding "Palin's Wildlife Record", there was moderate movement among all parties toward Barack Obama.
The study was conducted by HCD Research and the Muhlenberg College Institute of Public Opinion (MCIPO) on September 15, to obtain Americans' perceptions of a new ad which questions Governor Sarah Palin's record in regard to wildlife in Alaska.
"The ad which focuses on Governor Palin's record regarding the treatment of wildlife in Alaska seemed to strike a chord with voters," commented Glenn Kessler, president and CEO, HCD Research. "The recent ads from both parties have had little impact among voters. This is the first ad in over a month that seems to have broken through," he added.
Among the study findings:
The ad earned Barack Obama a Political Communications Impact Score (PCIS) of 29.4 and John McCain received a score of 5.9, resulting in a net score of 23.5 for Barack Obama. The scores can be compared to a mean score of 9.3 for previously tested Obama ads and 7.5 for previously tested McCain ads. To date, the total mean score for all previously tested ads is 8.3
The most prevalent emotional responses reported from voters were "angry" and "disturbed" after viewing the ad.
|
|
Total |
Registered Democrat |
Registered Republican |
Registered Independent |
| Anger |
25% |
36% |
15% |
26% |
| Inspiration |
1% |
2% |
0% |
2% |
| Sadness |
16% |
20% |
14% |
14% |
| Skepticism |
22% |
8% |
39% |
21% |
| Confusion |
3% |
3% |
2% |
3% |
| Disturbing |
29% |
31% |
26% |
29% |
| Embarrassment |
2% |
1% |
0% |
4% |
| Pride |
2% |
0% |
4% |
1% |
| Happiness |
1% |
0% |
1% |
1% |
The PCIS is a metric scoring system designed to gauge the effectiveness of political communications by generating a score for each candidate to monitor changes in voter perceptions. The PCIS score is derived from the change in voters' support and the extent that the support shifts. To view scores and results of recent studies go to: http://www.mediacurves.com/PCIS/
While viewing the video, participants indicated their levels of believability by moving their mouse from left to right on a continuum. The responses were recorded in quarter-second intervals and reported in the form of curves. The participants' emotions were measured using the Ayer Emotion Battery. Participants were also asked pre- and post-viewing questions. To view believability curves and detailed results go to: www.mediacurves.com.
The Media Curves web site provides the media and general public with a venue to view Americans' perceptions of popular and controversial media events and advertisements.
Editors/Reporters: For more information on the study, or to speak with Glenn Kessler, president and CEO, HCD Research or Chris Borick, Ph.D., director of the Muhlenberg College Institute of Public Opinion, please contact Vince McGourty, HCD Research, at (908) 483-9121 or (vince.mcgourty@hcdi.net).
HCD Research is a communications research company headquartered in Flemington, NJ. The company's services include traditional and web-based communications research. For additional information on HCD Research, access the company's web site at www.hcdi.net or call HCD Research at 908-788-9393. Headquartered in Allentown, Pennsylvania, MCIPO is a respected source of public opinion data on local, state and national issues. For additional information on Muhlenberg College, go to www.muhlenberg.edu
Rate this thread Flag as inappropriate
Rate this message Flag as inappropriate
Good grief. If you think there's more to it, go research it! Otherwise, you're just sticking your head in the sand.
Rate this message Flag as inappropriate
Perhaps you have not seen the slow, painful death of an animal starving to death. That is brutal. Although many people think an animal should never be killed, it is much kinder to cull the herd than to allow them to die by slow starvation.
Not to mention the devastation they began to cause to cattle and sheep as some left the park in search of other sources of food. I would imagine that seeing a video of wolves tearing apart these animals who have no defense is not a pretty sight; especially the lambs and calves. It is an unfortunate fact of life that there are not unlimited supplies of food for all animals. Responsible people need to ensure that the size of the group is managed in order to prevent a much more cruel death.
I hope you will make your kids watch a video of these animals starving to death. I am sure you want your children to be fully informed on the issue; as a responsible parent, of course.
I hope you will make your kids watch a video of elk starving do death or dying of rampant disease because of overpopulation. Not to mention the devastation that deer and elk cause to forests because of their browsing.
Rate this message Flag as inappropriate
Encarta Encyclopedia
Sarah Palin has no soul.
Rate this message Flag as inappropriate
It sickens me to no end to read and hear people talk of wolves as if they are the ones at fault. Man chose to move into their territory with their families, pets, and livestock and that has broken up the habitat for many animals. We have no right to make them the outlaws. Those wolves are following the niche laid out for them by Nature. For anyone to move into an area where they know there are wolves, or bears, or any wildlife, and then declare war on that wild life is just plain ludicrous. Before the wolves were reintroduced, elk, deer, and pronghorn were dying of starvation and disease because there wasn't enough food to support them all. Now that the balance is back, hunters, ranchers, and plain wolf haters wnat the wolves all killed off.
"The moral progress of a country is evidenced by the way it treats its animals"- Mahatma Ghandi
This country's moral progress is nil. Sarah Palin is no role model to me. She is a vicious, animal hating, self serving, sub human that will be punished by The Great Spirit. Anyone supporting this type of cruelty to any animal is despicable.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17735990/
The last time a bounty was put on wolves it nearly wiped them out to extermination.....now what do we have coyotes. Disturbing..
Now if wolves were actually hurting your livestock or your family, that is different, but you hardly ever ever hear of a wolf killing a person. They are shy & like to stay away from humans-SMART! I am in Alaska every year- and also have personally lived with wolves for over 12 years. I know from what I speak. They need to get the hunters on the ground and chase them with airlplanes & shoot them a slow death. So if you want to know the real story, research it yourself. The truth is out there.
I know that they have very much had an impact on the livelihood of ranchers in Wyoming and surrounding states. Your shy wolves surround and kill animals who have no natural defense to them; surely, being informed as you are, you know what happened to the elk herd in Yellowstone National Park. Do you think it is o.k. for them to starve to death. That is not humane; no way, no how.
Do you ever think about what cows and sheep and pigs go through to feed you. They are defenseless. They are surrounded by humans that hit them in the head with hammers or herd them into an area where a machine does it for them. Is that humane? Should we not kill and eat because those animals are defenseless? Should someone shoot us in the back because we feed on animals that can't defend themselves?
People like you kill me. Just because we are on the top of the food chain doesn't make us any better then the rest of the food chain. Without the rest of the food chain we would cease to be.
AT the rate this world is going that won't be much longer. We as human's are destroying our planet. And those of us that are trying to set things right have to deal with people like you that just don't give a crap. As long as your doing ok the heck with the rest of God's creatures.
The immediate response from farmers will probably not be a welcome noise to the party powers either. Here in Henrietta Township, people who turn in the front feet of dead gophers get a bounty of $1.50 from the county and $.50 from the township. That differs from the bounty for wolves legs in what way?
It smells too much of PETA (not the People Eating Tasty Animals one, the other one). Yes, wolves do look a lot like our beloved doggies and react to being shot just as Fido would. The issue is not that the animals look and act in much the same way, it is one of being a responsible hunter. If the camera crew was just along to see wolves get shot by a guy with enough money to rent a plane and buy a really neat-o firearm, the crew should have asked up front whether the person in the plane was a good enough shot to deal an immediately killing blow to a moving animal while leaning out the door of an airborne Cessna.
The people whom I know and to whom I refer as "hunters" always try to make a killing shot. Many of us (me included) will pass up a shot at a fine trophy animal if there is a chance it will suffer a slow and painful death from an ill-advised or poorly placed shot.
The ad comes across as very anti-hunter, meaning it will cost a great deal in both Pennsylvania and Michigan because those vital states have incredible numbers of hunters, many of whom are those same blue-collar white males the Obama campaign so desperately needs. This ad is a bad idea.
Rate this message Flag as inappropriate
I am one of the people who have been donating money to run this. I am 63 years old and can't afford to be spending this money, but I feel I have no choice. When I heard who McCain had chosen for his running mate, I cried because I had known about her for quite some time.
She has voted down a bill to require a mining company to clean up their water before it goes into the sea - google for it.
The killing does not just involve wolves - includes bears also - even the black bear.
If there is money involved, this woman will do anything. I would have LOVED to see a woman VP or President, but not like this.
I have never been able to understand how people who are so extremely religious feel no shame to destroy what God created. To me it seems like spitting in God's face.
Rate this message Flag as inappropriate
Using testimony from Alaska Department of Fish & Game staff, a master hunting guide, and Alaska Board of Game members, the video exposes the fallacy behind Governor Sarah Palin's claim that predator control is based on sound science. Declarations that the program is for the benefit of subsistence hunters are shattered with documentation showing that sport and trophy hunters take up to 73% of prey in areas where aerial wolf hunting has taken place. Five years in the making, this video exposes the truth about the stranglehold the hunting lobby has on wildlife management in Alaska.
Most of these arguments miss the point, in my view. The point is that whenever humans have interfered with the natural balance in any area on the planet, there have been problems. For example, where I live now in New York, there is a lack of natural predators for rodents because the local red fox population has been all but eliminated. In one area in New Rochelle, the fox are protected. Sounds great? No, it's not. The rodents know to leave the protected area where the fox live, and so we have splattered skunks and squirrels all over the streets that border the protected park.
It takes careful management to solve these problems, not simple answers. In Pennsylvania, the local fish and game wardens would determine each year how many whitetail needed to be culled. Wolves were out of the question, since the parkland bordered a residential area. Anyway, licenses were issued, and hunters went out in pairs with volunteer guides to make their kills. I was one of those guides, and I can tell you the system worked extremely well. Car accidents with deer dropped over 80% by the second term of the program.
I'm sure someone will point out that such a system won't work in Alaska. That's not my point. The point is that if a population needs to be controlled, it should be controlled carefully and with thought. For example, subsistence hunters should get licenses as such. Farmers should be able to apply for licenses to kill wolves that stray onto husbandry areas.
But, to simply allow thrill seekers to randomly shoot wolves from the air is not management. Fish and game wardens should determine populations, set a cull level, and issue licenses appropriately. I'm sure that hunters in Pennsylvania and Michigan already understand that there is oversight on hunting and that licenses are required.
If what Palin has set in place does not involve such careful management, then I am fully against it.