IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cpp/issued/v31y2005i3p243-258.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Regulatory Compliance in Opinion Poll Reporting During the 2004 Canadian Election

Author

Listed:
  • Peter A. Ferguson
  • Christine De Clercy

Abstract

In May 2000, new regulations governing the dissemination of methodological information about opinion polls took effect. Section 326 of Canada's Elections Act aims to ensure that citizens receive certain sorts of basic information about the conduct of opinion polls reported by the media during election campaigns. Also, a new mechanism for enforcement, known as compliance agreements, was introduced. Proponents of such laws argue that they improve the quality of information disseminated by polling firms and the media. We test the efficacy of the new regulations through examining opinion poll reporting in 18 Canadian newspapers during the 2004 election. In the case of this election, we conclude there is low compliance in the print media; however, this does not justify abandoning the new regulations. Higher compliance levels may be secured through enforcing the act and through employing additional policy instruments to shape behaviour.

Suggested Citation

  • Peter A. Ferguson & Christine De Clercy, 2005. "Regulatory Compliance in Opinion Poll Reporting During the 2004 Canadian Election," Canadian Public Policy, University of Toronto Press, vol. 31(3), pages 243-258, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:cpp:issued:v:31:y:2005:i:3:p:243-258
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3552440
    Download Restriction: only available to JSTOR subscribers
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Tania Gosselin & François Pétry, 2009. "The Regulation of Poll Reporting in Canada," Canadian Public Policy, University of Toronto Press, vol. 35(1), pages 41-57, March.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cpp:issued:v:31:y:2005:i:3:p:243-258. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Iver Chong (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.utpjournals.press/loi/cpp .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.