The Dennis Shanahan Newspoll files

There are lies, damn lies, statistics and the way The Australian’s Dennis Shanahan interprets the weekly Newspoll figures.

Dennis Shanahan strikes again

From the September 14
subscriber email

By Our Senior Labor Insider

Labor people know there are actually three things you can count on in life – death, taxes, and Dennis Shanahan to spin a Newspoll in the best possible way for John Howard.

Take a look at what Shanahan said in The Australian last Friday after the Jakarta bombing:

For Labor that means less attention being paid to its tax package just a day after its launch. It’s not gone but it’s swamped.

The bombing also immediately reinforced all the strength of incumbency for Howard and the Coalition.

It was also all right in the Coalition’s strong field of national security and only two days before September 11.

So, according to Shanahan, the Jakarta bombing wiped out Labor’s tax policy, and would be a big boost to the Coalition. But what actually happened? No change! That’s right, the Coalition did not get a boost from the poll, or, at best, got a boost that cancelled out any rise Labor got from its tax policy.

So the lead on Shanahan’s story on a poll taken on the three days immediately following the bombing was of course, “The Jakarta bombing has failed to give the government an expected boost in the opinion polls, in a further indication the government can no longer rely on terrorism and national security to win the election.”

Get serious! I mean, how would that benefit Howard?

No, the lead was “Labor has failed to get a bounce out of its key tax and family welfare policy”. Jakarta, which according to Shanahan “swamped” the tax policy, didn’t get a mention until the eleventh paragraph!

Death, taxes, and Shanahan backing Howard. Rely on it!

Shanahan’s Newspoll spin

From the September 15 subscriber email

Now for the Green spin

Enviro-friendly PM puts the chop on Labor

If Shanahan really believes that after eight years of staunch opposition to Tassie tree huggers, Howard’s about to embrace them with open arms and end old growth logging – he’ll believe anything.

Maybe today’s main headline was more like it: Greens flirt with Howard. We all know that flirts rarely come across…

Shanahan Watch

Subscriber email – 17 September

Dennis Shanahan is at it again. The Prime Minister’s press gallery cheerleader puts a heavy spin and a slick gloss on the born-again tree-hugger PM in his front page yarn in today’s Oz: Enviro-friendly PM puts the chop on Labor

If Shanahan really believes that after eight years of staunch opposition to Tassie tree huggers, Howard’s about to embrace them with open arms and end old growth logging – he’ll believe anything.

Maybe today’s main headline was more like it: Greens flirt with Howard. We all know that flirts rarely come across…

Does Dennis Shanahan know basic arithmetic?

Subscriber email – 19 September

A psephologist writes:

Hi Crikey, I’m surprised that your Shanahan watch missed his other sterling performance on Friday, headed “Latham to gain seats, but not enough”.

On Thursday, The Australian had published a breakdown of the recent Newspolls. Comparing it with the 2001 figures (which, interestingly, they chose not to publish) for the different states showed Labor getting big swings in NSW and South Australia, but failing to make up ground in the others.

Reading off the pendulum, this translates to a Labor gain of 10 seats, or a hung parliament – not really surprising, since Newspoll also shows a 50-50 split overall.

But this wasn’t good enough for our hero: on Friday he revealed that “party analysts” have Labor falling short in the necessary seats. Despite his own Newspoll showing 6 Labor gains in NSW, he manages the remarkable assertion that “little change is expected in NSW”.

After first telling us that “Latham is still shy by at least three or four of the 12 seats he needs”, Shanahan finally admits to “an optimistic net result” for Labor that amounts to a gain of 10 seats. So 12 minus 10 equals “at least three or four”?

Perhaps Uncle Rupert needs to teach the troops some basic arithmetic.

Meanwhile, another subscriber reckons Shanahan had it wrong in the Saturday paper as well:

What is Dennis on? ALP gains, but not in marginals

“… the two-party preferred vote lifted for Labor from 48 per cent to 49.5 per cent and the Coalition’s fell from 52 to 50.5 per cent in the past two weeks … Mr Latham’s personal standing had risen, with satisfaction jumping eight percentage points to 59 per cent. Mr Latham also closed the gap on the question of who would make the better prime minister, with a rise of five points to 40 per cent, while Mr Howard’s rating fell”

Am I reading this right, or is this an unambiguously good poll for the ALP? The ALP gained 1.5% since the last marginals poll, Latham has gained a lot of ground on the leadership questions, but Dennis comes up with “ALP gains, but not in marginals”. That’s not spin, its just plain wrong. The ALP did gain in the marginals.

David
Another classic Newspoll performance from Shanahan

Subscriber email – 21 September

By Our Senior Labor Insider

Mathematicians around the world were today celebrating the discovery of the most exciting new development in the field of mathematics since the discovery of prime numbers.

The “Shanahan” is an amazing new concept which allows one to discount the poll results of one party so as to make it seem as though another party is doing much better than it actually is.

While Labor strategists who have long argued the existence of the “Shanahan” have been dismissed as biased, today’s latest Newspoll story in The Australian has finally given them the proof they have long sought – read it here.

While the poll actually shows a stunning turnaround in support for Labor, with a three point fall in the coalition’s primary vote, and Labor opening up a 5 point lead on two-party preferred, the existence of the “Shanahan” allows The Australian’s political correspondent to dismiss the result as virtually line-ball: “Labor has now opened a narrow two-party-preferred margin over the Howard Government”.

In June, when the coalition briefly surged to a 53-47 lead over Labor, there was no such qualification: “John Howard and the Coalition have bounced back to an election-winning lead three weeks after the budget.”

Yet when the campaign opened, with Newspoll recording a 4 point lead to Labor, Shanahan declared that “The Newspoll survey suggests the first six-week election campaign in 20 years has started with the major parties neck and neck.”

So there you have it – a 4 point lead to Labor is “neck and neck” a 5 point lead to Labor is a “narrow two-party preferred margin” but a six point lead to the Coalition is an unambiguous “election-winning lead”.

Further evidence of the “Shanahan” came on Saturday, when Shanahan declared that a 1.5 point swing to Labor in marginal seats meant that Latham’s performance “was not translating into clear Labor support in the key marginal electorates that will decide the election”.

Check out Peter Brent’s very fine www.mumble.com.au site for some further reading on how Shanahan’s reporting of Newspoll, and its dismissive attitude towards preferences have consistently favoured the Howard Government.

Death, taxes and Shanahan spinning a Newspoll for Howard: Count on it!

Lay off Shanahan

A subscriber and political figure we respect writes:

I’m over this daily Shanahan stuff. The b*llshit point scoring is tedious. Thank god no one decides to mark the Crikey newlsetter everyday. Dennis has been in the game 30 years or so. In the federal press gallery for 17 (counting back to when he left the NSW State Gallery). If you have an issue take it up with News Ltd – they have kept him there all that time and if any one knows Dennis’ copy it’s them. He’s not a freelancer/anon type with no care/no responsibility – like most of your contributors.

CRIKEY: The Shanahan material has come from a number of sources and it does reflect our receiver model – we haven’t commissioned or requested anything, it just comes in. The first item from the Senior Labor Insider has simply generated more follow-ups and there does seem to be something in it. Shanahan is part of the political power game and his spin can have some influence so a little bit of scrutiny and accountability is a good thing, although we’ll try to avoid it becoming a repetitive Crikey obsession.