You don't need to have an advanced degree in mathematics to understand that there are several surveys that just wouldn't make any sense.  If you conducted a telephone poll of a sampling of individuals and asked each person "Do you currently have phone service?", you may not be surprised to find out that "yes" responses were all you received in response.  

A similar nonsense survey is taking place currently in Mason County, whose nonsense results may determine whether local agencies will be able to qualify for grants.  Connecting Mason County established themselves on Facebook on December 15th, 2020, providing a Connecting Mason County Broadband Survey two days later.  You will note that the survey itself asks no questions on whether you actually have internet service, but to participate you have to not only be on the internet but on Facebook.  

The COLDNews published a story that day saying in relevant part:  

"The survey takes about 5 minutes to complete. It can be found on the Connecting Mason County Facebook page, or through a QR code.  For those who lack internet access completely, paper copies will also be made available at the Mason County District Library locations in Ludington and Scottville.  The survey is designed to gather data about what internet access issues Mason County residents are facing, and where those issues are most prevalent."

Mason County Press article also made on that day (solely on internet sites) said the same. 

Therefore, in order to access the survey you must either be on the internet using Facebook, using a smartphone with internet access to read the QR code, or go to the two libraries, both of which have been mostly-closed since December 15th and offer only limited curbside services during very limited hours.  Of course, if you didn't have internet access, you would only know about this survey if you were one of the very few people who caught an understated newspaper article a week before Christmas and were moved enough to go to the library between 11 AM-3 PM on weekdays (when a lot of people are at work) just to take a 5 minute survey which doesn't have a physical location to send it to when you're finished.  

If anybody thinks this survey will get an accurate result or a result that would reflect the need for more internet services, read on.  Between December 17th and now, the survey has been advertised on various internet sites, the few times it has been marketed on sites available to those without internet service (such as WMOM and TV 9&10) the public has not been told how or where to take the survey if you don't have internet.  

Yesterday, another low key COLDNews article reminded us the survey was still available to take without offering a link to the survey, only offering a QR code for smartphones.  They mentioned a surprising result:

"Based on the survey results so far, the group learned that roughly 12% of survey respondents do not currently have access to the internet... Of those who have responded thus far with access to the internet, many showed some level of dissatisfaction with the speed of their service. More than 54% are dissatisfied with their speed, and more than 50% with the cost, according to the release."

If you look again at the survey, none of the questions deal with whether you have access to the internet, none of the questions deal with satisfaction of cost and speed of internet.  Oddly enough, once you open the survey you get a lot of hidden questions, one of these is whether you have internet access at home, another is whether you're satisfied with the cost and speed of it.  

The problem is if "12% of survey respondents do not currently have access to the internet", how did they get to that point in the survey?  Is it fair to disbelieve that 12% of the hopeful 2500 participants (or 375 people):

1) noticed the 12-17-2020 article in the COLDNews, and read it

2) were motivated enough by that article to go to the library and receive a survey

3) completed the survey and took it back to the library in their limited hours of operation

And isn't it logical to presume that it is more likely that 100% (or very close to that number) of those who voted took the survey using the internet-- the internet that the survey takers say that 12% of them have no access to?  Yet, the bigger conclusion is that this type of methodology reduces the actual percentage of people in Mason County who have little or no access to the internet, because those without internet cannot access the survey nearly as easy as those who have it. 

Connecting Mason County is actually undercounting those who are internet-deprived in Mason County, and indirectly hurting their ultimate cause by doing so.  It's just like conducting a phone survey to find out the percentage of people who have phone service.  A more reliable and credible sampling methodology was needed for this survey to give it any kind of validity or utility.

Views: 221

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Oh my God. How did civilization survive without the internet? Whiny millenials.

Do these people realize that people are watching them? 

I have never seen such unprofessional behavior and wasted time...

Talking about themselves, laughing at awkward times, slugging drinks from large containers...just  buzz words and jargon. Cant Ludington do better than this ?

WOW!

And did you hear Heather say " Oh no!" when Eric said we were NOT underserved? There it is folks... a town official that is disappointed that we may NOT be underserved and therefore not able to get the state freebie grants. Their solution... ... "Fix the survey"

More wifi is a vehicle for more indoctrination... watch out . I see giant towers in everyone's backyards.Yard signs! Ha Ha! Wonder who made those?

There goes the view ...

This is not the first time that Heather was 'shorting' her bets on local success.  For years, Ludington did not qualify for some grants because it didn't have enough low-to-moderate income population.  When they finally did (about the same time they voted for the $101 million school bond), Heather was so happy that she could now shoot for larger MEDC grants and have a higher chance of getting it.  And rather than seek $2.3 million to do something constructive, like expand broadband opportunities or offer opportunities to lift those poor-moderate income folks up, she decided to redo James Street Plaza into an overpriced pocket park.

Anyone who works for Ludington Community Development should have to live in the city, so they can daily experience what their development is like as a resident.

Agreed!

About time people hold this rogue bunch accountable. 

I see the "walk around the town with a beer cup" social area just passed.

Just what Ludington needs to add to it's ever growing problem of drunk driving and meth addiction. 

One could think of more important things to focus on while the city is struggling back from this  pandemic lunacy.

They do seem to be very daft in regard to what the city of Ludington needs right now...

Beer cups and fire pits are not going to cure the ills of crumbling infrastructure, dying businesses and empty storefronts.

I wonder if they are going to have "beer police?"  Because, I'd buy one beer cup and then go back to my car cooler and filler-up all day and just walk around drunker than the drunkest.  Maybe there will be sticker time limits on the beer cups.  But how can they force someone to drink an alcoholic beverage in a certain amount of time.  I hope they extend it to the beach so we could drink at the beach and walk out on the pier.

LL, I agree completely daft, like Daffy Duck, but what can you expect with the caliber of past experience? And the city manager recommends the walking drinking districts, like it will help boutique businesses while they wait for a table to eat, they can buy souvenirs? Good thinking. Like the casinos, get people drunk enough so they don't know how much they spend? We all need to move out of town and come into town just to get drunk, and then go to our peaceful place 1/2 mile out on a dirt road.

I didn't hear any discussion from Heather and the gang about how Connecting Mason County will help the citizens to more easily view porn.

"Pornographic "sites" on the Internet are by far the most popular visiting places in cyberspace, according to an analysis of thousands of computer searches around the world. Nearly half of the most repeated searches on the worldwide network of computers were for pornography, Harold Thimbleby, Professor of Computing Research at Middlesex University, told the British Association meeting in Newcastle upon Tyne."

A bit ironic that the David Bossick editorial was most likely seen only by individuals who subscribe or read it at the library.  Not actually the market he needs to target. 

RSS

© 2021   Created by XLFD.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service