Neil
Hello. This is 6 Minute English from BBC Learning English. I’m Neil. 

Sam
And I’m Sam. Predicting the future is not easy but that’s exactly the job of opinion pollsters – researchers who ask people questions to discover what they think about certain topics. Often their aim is predicting which political party will win in election by asking members of the public how they intend to vote.

Neil
But predicting the future is never one hundred percent accurate, and opinion polls don’t always get it right. In 2016, few pollsters predicted a victory for Donald Trump over Hillary Clinton in the US presidential election.

Sam
And in the 2020 US elections, most polls predicted Trump would lose to Joe Biden by a much larger amount than he actually did. These mistakes, sometimes called misfires – when things do not work in the way intended – have damaged the reputation of opinion pollsters. In this programme we’ll be taking a look into the opinion polling industry and, of course, learning some useful new vocabulary as well.

Neil
But first I have a question for you, Sam, and it’s about another time when the opinion polls got it wrong. Few pollsters predicted that Britain would vote to leave the European Union in the 2016 Brexit referendum which, in the end, it did. But what was the final split between those who voted to leave and those who wanted to remain? Was it:
a) 51 leave to 49 remain?
b) 52 leave to 48 remain?
c) 52 remain to 48 leave?

Sam
I think it was b) 52 percent voted to leave and 48 percent to remain.

Neil
OK, Sam, I’ll reveal the answer at the end of the programme.

Sam
One of the biggest polling companies was founded by George Gallup. Born in 1901 on a farm in Iowa, Gallup was a student of journalism. He wanted to know people’s opinion on a range of subjects and came up with a simple idea – why not try asking them? Here’s G Elliot Morris, a data journalist for ‘The Economist’, explaining more to BBC World Service programme, More or Less…

G Elliot Morris
And he publishes his dissertation on this - how to measure what people want, basically. And he gets hired by a much bigger advertising agency in New York called Young and Rubicam. And they basically give him a blank cheque to do their research, to figure out how to call people, how to talk to them, to figure out if they remember or liked a certain product. Basically to figure out early methodologies in advertising. And then by 1931 or so, he's wondering: well, if it works for toothpaste, why not politics?

Neil
George Gallup tried to figure out what customers wanted to buy. If you figure something out, you finally understand it or find a solution to a problem after thinking about it a lot.

Sam
Later he was hired by a New York advertising agency to find out people’s opinion of consumer products like toothpaste and soft drinks. George was given a blank cheque – an unlimited amount of money and freedom to do his job.

Neil
At this time, polling was focused on consumer preferences, not politics. But asking people about their political views is a lot more complicated than asking them about toothpaste. Making accurate election predictions depends on polling a sample group of people who accurately represent the population as a whole. One of the reasons for pollsters failure to predict Trump’s election in 2016 is that they didn’t ask enough white, non-college educated voters.

Sam
So, polling is a very complex process, one which is never totally reliable according to G Elliot Morris, speaking again here to BBC World Service’s, More or Less…

G Elliot Morris
If people were understanding this process, that’s generating all the polls, then they would understand polls as less precise tools – tools that definitely can’t offer the laser-like predictive accuracy we’ve come to expect from them, then the difference between polling’s’ expectations and performance wouldn’t be so stark.

Neil
Opinion polls can estimate the outcome of an election but they can’t give us laser-like accuracy. If you describe something as laser-like you mean it is very accurate and focused, like a laser.

Sam
If people understand how hard it is to predict the future, they might be more realistic about how accurate opinion polls can be. Then, differences between a prediction and the final result wouldn’t be so stark – obvious and easily visible, or harsh.

Neil
Predicting the future is difficult, otherwise everyone would be a lottery winner by now! Maybe it’s not opinion polls that are broken but our desire to know the future that’s the problem. OK, it’s time to reveal the answer to my question about the Brexit referendum.

Sam
I said the final result was 52 percent for leave and 48 percent for remain.

Neil
Which was… the correct answer! and another example of an opinion poll misfire – a situation where something does not work as intended. OK, let’s recap the rest of the vocabulary from this programme about opinion pollsters – people who conduct polls asking the public their opinion on particular subjects, especially politics.

Sam
If you figure something out, you finally understand it, or find the solution to a problem after thinking long and hard about it.

Neil
If someone gives you a blank cheque, you have unlimited money and freedom to complete a task.

Sam
When you describe something as laser-like you mean that it’s very accurate and precise.

Neil
And finally, the adjective stark has several meanings including obvious, harsh and plain. Once again, our six minutes are up. Bye for now!

Sam
Bye!

尼爾
你好。這裡是 BBC 學習英語的 6 分鐘英語。我是尼爾。

薩姆
而我是薩姆。預測未來並不容易，但這正是民意調查員的工作—研究人員透過向人們提問來瞭解他們對某些話題的看法。他們的目的通常是透過詢問公眾如何投票來預測哪個政黨將在選舉中獲勝。

尼爾
但是，預測未來從來都不是百分之百的準確，民意調查也不總是正確的。2016 年，很少有民調機構預測唐納德．川普會在美國總統選舉中戰勝希拉蕊．科林頓。

薩姆
而在 2020 年的美國大選中，大多數民調都預測川會輸給喬．拜登，而且輸得比他實際輸得多。這些錯誤，有時被稱為失誤—當事情沒有按照預期的方式進行時—已經損害了民意調查員的聲譽。在這個節目中，我們將對民意調查行業進行考察，當然也會學習一些有用的新詞彙。

尼爾
但首先我有個問題要問你，薩姆，是關於另一次民意調查出錯的情況。很少有民調機構預測英國會在 2016 年的英國脫歐公投中投票離開歐盟，而最終，英國確實離開了歐盟。但是，投票離開的人和想留下的人之間的最終分歧是什麼？它是：
a) 51% 脫歐對 49% 留歐？
b) 52% 脫歐對 48% 留歐？
c) 52% 留歐對 48% 脫歐？

薩姆
我認為是 b) 52% 的人投票贊成離開，48% 的人讚成留下。

尼爾
好的，薩姆，我將在節目結束時揭曉答案。

薩姆
最大的民調公司之一是由喬治．蓋洛普創立的。1901 年，蓋洛普出生於愛荷華州的一個農場，是一名新聞系學生。他想知道人們對一系列主題的看法，於是想出了一個簡單的想法—為什麼不試著問問他們？以下是《經濟學人》的數據記者 G．艾略特．莫里斯向 BBC 世界服務節目《或多或少》解釋的內容。

G．艾略特．莫里斯
他發表了關於這個問題的論文—基本上是如何衡量人們想要什麼。他被紐約一家大得多的廣告公司聘用，該公司名為 Young and Rubicam。他們基本上給了他一張空白支票，讓他做研究，弄清楚如何給人們打電話，如何與他們交談，弄清楚他們是否記得或喜歡某種產品。基本上要弄清楚廣告的早期方法。然後到了 1931 年左右，他在想：好吧，如果它對牙膏有效，為什麼對政治無效？

尼爾
喬治．蓋洛普試圖弄清楚顧客想買什麼。如果你想明白了什麼，你終於明白了，或者在思考了很久之後找到了解決問題的方法。

薩姆
後來他受雇於紐約一家廣告公司，瞭解人們對牙膏和軟性飲料等消費品的看法。喬治得到了一張空白支票—無限量的錢和自由來做他的工作。

尼爾
在這個時候，民意調查的重點是消費者的喜好，而不是政治。但詢問人們的政治觀點比詢問他們的牙膏要複雜得多。要做出準確的選舉預測，取決於對準確代表整個人口的樣本群體進行民意調查。2016 年，民調機構未能預測川普當選的原因之一是，他們沒有詢問足夠多的白人、非大學學歷的選民。

薩姆
所以，投票是一個非常複雜的過程，根據 G．艾略特．莫里斯的說法，投票從來都不是完全可靠的，他在這裡對 BBC 世界服務的《或多或少》節目進行了發言。

艾略特．莫里斯
如果人們理解了這個產生所有民調的過程，那麼他們就會把民調理解為不那麼精確的工具—這些工具肯定不能提供我們所期望的雷射般的預測準確性，那麼民調的期望和表現之間的差異就不會那麼明顯了。

尼爾
民意調查可以估計選舉的結果，但他們不能給我們提供雷射光般的準確性。如果你把某個東西描述成雷射光一樣，你的意思是它非常準確和集中，就像雷射光一樣。

薩姆
如果人們瞭解預測未來有多難，他們可能會對民意調查的準確性更加現實。那麼，預測和最終結果之間的差異就不會那麼明顯—明顯且容易看到，或者說強烈。

尼爾
預測未來是很難的，否則現在每個人都會成為彩券贏家了 也許不是民意調查出了問題，而是我們想知道未來的願望出了問題。好了，是時候揭曉我關於英國脫歐公投的問題的答案了。

薩姆
我說過，最終的結果是 52% 的人支持離開，48% 的人支持留下。

尼爾
這是......正確的答案！也是民意調查失誤的另一個例子—在這種情況下，有些事情並沒有按照預期進行。好吧，讓我們回顧一下這個節目中關於民意調查員的其餘詞彙—進行民意調查的人詢問公眾對特定主題的意見，特別是政治。

薩姆
如果你想通了某件事，你終於明白了，或者在思考了很久之後找到了解決問題的方法。

尼爾
如果有人給你一張空白支票，你就有無限的金錢和自由來完成一項任務。

薩姆
當你形容某樣東西像雷射光一樣時，你的意思是它非常準確和精確。

尼爾
最後，形容詞 stark 有幾個意思，包括明顯、嚴厲和樸素。再一次，我們的六分鐘到了。在此說再見了！

薩姆
再見！