ABC/WaPo on NSA Phone Records

Legacy blog posts President Bush

Did yesterday’s USAToday story on the collection of domestic telephone records by the NSA do President George Bush a backhanded favor?  An overnight survey released earlier this morning by ABC News and the Washington Post suggests that it may be doing just that.  Here’s the lead from the Post‘s Richard Morin:

A majority of Americans initially support a controversial National Security Agency program to collect information on telephone calls made in the United States in an effort to identify and investigate potential terrorist threats, according to a Washington Post-ABC News poll.

The new survey found that 63 percent of Americans said they found the NSA program to be an acceptable way to investigate terrorism, including 44 percent who strongly endorsed the effort. Another 35 percent said the program was unacceptable, which included 24 percent who strongly objected to it.
A slightly larger majority–66 percent–said they would not be bothered if NSA collected records of personal calls they had made, the poll found.

Complete results and the text of the questions are available in this PDF file also released this morning by ABC News. 

Yes, this survey involves a relatively small sample size (502 adults) with a slightly larger margin of error than other national polls (+/- 4.5%).  And yes, calling was completed in a single evening, a practice would have missed those not at home last night and possibly overrepresented those watching the news on television last night.   However, the findings are generally consistent with previous polling on the NSA domestic eavesdropping. It is also worth remembering that the brief upward movement in President Bush’s job approval rating coincided with the disclosure of the stories on NSA wiretaps in January.

MP makes no predictions, but Bush can only stand to gain if the public’s attention shifts from his handling of gas prices, the economy, immigration and Iraq to his administration’s efforts to "investigate terrorism."  The Post-ABC poll found that 51% approve (and 47% disapprove) of "the way Bush is handling Protecting Americans’ privacy rights as the government investigates terrorism."  That is "hardly a robust rating," as the ABC release puts it, "but one that’s far better than his overall job approval, in the low 30s in recent polls."

UPDATE:  Reader DRM posts a comment below worth considering:   

I’m disappointed you didn’t discuss my belief that the results of a
telephone survey about privacy and electronic monitoring are likely
invalid by definition. A person who places a low value on their
personal privacy seems to be much more likely to speak on the telephone
and answer personal and potentially controversial questions than a
person who places a high value on personal privacy. I’m not sure you
could pick a question for a phone survey that would have a
significantly greater skewing effect than the Post/ABC question.

I’m not sure questions about privacy are "invalid by definition," but DRM makes a fair point about the potential for non-response bias on a question like this.  In other words, those who refuse the survey may have different opinions on these issue than those who participate.

It certainly makes intuitive sense that those who refuse interview requests are more likely to value their privacy, and thus be more likely to take the privacy-protection side of this debate.  But ultimately the extent of any such "skewing" is unknowable, since hard core survey-refusers would presumably refuse to participate whether the survey was done on the phone, in person, by mail or over the Internet.   

One helpful though admittedly inconclusive bit of evidence comes from the Pew Research Center study from 2003 that compared findings from two parallel surveys:  A "standard" five-day survey that expended "the same amount of effort that would be applied to any Pew Survey Project" had a response rate of 27% (using (using the AAPOR3 definition).  A second "rigorous" survey obtained a response rate of 51% with a much longer field period and greater effort to reassure respondents of the legitimacy of the project (procedures that included advance letters, monetary incentives and follow-up letters to refusals to "describe the survey process" — see page 13).   

Both surveys included the following question:  "How much do you worry that computers and technology are being used to invade your privacy?"  The responses were virtually identical on both surveys.  Thirty-nine percent (39%) of standard survey respondents and 37% of the rigorous respondents said they worried "a lot;"  exactly the same percentage on both surveys (69%) worried either "some" or "a lot." 

Two conclusions:  First, even among the more eager respondents, respondents were not shy about expressing concerns about invasions of their privacy to a stranger on the telephone.   Second, the initially reluctant respondents expressed no greater privacy concerns than those who were initially more eager to do the survey.   Of course, these data do not preclude the possibility that the roughly 40% that refused might have different feelings about the invasion of their privacy, but my take from all of the data is that any "skew" is probably modest.   

Of course, your conclusions may differ.  And even anonymous comments are welcome below

UPDATE (5/13):  The results of the Newsweek poll, released on Saturday look very different.  See my take here.   

Mark Blumenthal

Mark Blumenthal is the principal at MysteryPollster, LLC. With decades of experience in polling using traditional and innovative online methods, he is uniquely positioned to advise survey researchers, progressive organizations and candidates and the public at-large on how to adapt to polling’s ongoing reinvention. He was previously head of election polling at SurveyMonkey, senior polling editor for The Huffington Post, co-founder of Pollster.com and a long-time campaign consultant who conducted and analyzed political polls and focus groups for Democratic party candidates.