The Times Colonist website has a polling function that had not been used until last week.
If you look at the poll, there's a line at that bottom that very succinctly states: "This is not a scientific poll."
Translation: "This poll in no way accuarately reflects what any specific segment of society thinks about this issue. Instead, it's an opportunity for special-interest groups to hijack the poll and claim the results as valid."
In other words, it's for discussion purposes only.
Here's the text of the poll we posted Friday: "Should the B.C. government enter into binding arbitration with the B.C. Teachers' Federation?"
It's a yes-or-no answer.
If you'd like to vote or see current results, you'll find the poll in the right-hand column of our homepage. (It is outside the paywall.)
Response was decent to the poll, then we promoted it through Twitter:
Have you seen the poll at http://t.co/ANNQq9wjMD? Our online readers agree (three-quarters) that binding arbitration is the way to go. #bced
— Times Colonist (@timescolonist) September 8, 2014
That brought this heads-up from a reader:
@timescolonist Did you know this #bced poll was swarmed by design on #bctf led Facebook 'collusion and lobby' page? https://t.co/Bc4eGGJnNH
— Rustifox (@Rustifox1) September 8, 2014
Which led us to this page on Facebook:
(It's worth visiting the page and reading the comments.)
And there you have the hijacking. I don't really mind. In fact, it's flattering that they care enough about our poll to try to skew its results in their favour.
Scientific or not, everything that happens online is significant.
You just have to figure out why.
