This is an archive of the old Stones Cry Out site. For the current site, click here.

« Let's Get One Thing Straight | Main | Is Homeschooling the Best Option? »

April 25, 2005

New Media Peer Review

Terry Neal, political director and columnist for took up a story in his talking points column yesterday that I have been working on extensively since March 31. Neal writes:

“…there's lots of chatter in the blogosphere, but little coverage in the mainstream media, of a study that suggests the early exit polls that showed Kerry beating Bush may have been accurate after all. The study, conducted on behalf of U.S. Count Votes, a non-partisan but left-leaning non-profit organization.
He’s referring to a study that I mentioned here, signed by a group of mostly math and statistics PhDs from distinguished universities, which suggests the exit poll data is more consistent with a fraud hypothesis than with the official explanation that Bush supporters were more reluctant to participate in the polls than Kerry supporters.

Terry Neal quotes Warren Mitofsky, the exit pollster for the 2004 exit polls, who speaks on the record for the first time regarding the US Count Votes study, as well as Mystery Pollster Mark Blumenthal, who has posted on the subject here and here.

I will have a bit more to say about this story soon. Read up because behind this story is a much more interesting story of on-line collaboration that brings new meaning to “peer review.”

Posted by Rick at April 25, 2005 09:13 PM

Trackback Pings

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference New Media Peer Review:

» Vote Fraud Theorists Battle Over Plausibility from
However, what the report implies as "wholesale vote fraud" I propose is actually "wholesale exit poll fraud". Which is more plausible? Top-to-bottom coordination across state lines to throw the election to Bush through vote fraud, or misleading exit ... [Read More]

Tracked on April 27, 2005 03:30 PM