Oh, come on. It says "so many percent of you" did this or that, all over the iPM page.
What that means in practice is "so many percent of those people who have a telephone that is not set up precisely in order to keep the owner's privacy intact, and who were sufficiently prepared to talk to a complete stranger not to have said Go Away and hung up on us", doesn't it?
You will not have asked anyone who uses the telephone preference service to eliminate cold-calling.
This survey is saying "people who talk with strangers are more likely to have talked with strangers who live near the house they moved into as well as to strangers on the telephone".
I heard David Cameron interviewed on the Andrew Marr show. He said that the scrutiny of legislation has been not good enough and he wants to make scrutiny much more effective. He said and this is it "what we have at the moment (for scrutiny) is a Poodle" he wants to make it much more rigorous. I suppose that means a LABRA-DEM-DOODLE!
Sid, I would be more impressed if they said anywhere what proportion of the people they rang simply hung up on them, to be honest.
Also I would like to know at what time of day these calls were being made, and whether to cellphones or landlines. If they were during the day and to landlines they will have reached a completely different selection of the population from that which they would have reached on cell-phones or after work.
I mean, who is going to be at home during the day and on a landline? Not the people who commute from home and never even *see* most of their neighbours from one week's end to the next, I wouldn't have thought.
This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
Oh, come on. It says "so many percent of you" did this or that, all over the iPM page.
What that means in practice is "so many percent of those people who have a telephone that is not set up precisely in order to keep the owner's privacy intact, and who were sufficiently prepared to talk to a complete stranger not to have said Go Away and hung up on us", doesn't it?
You will not have asked anyone who uses the telephone preference service to eliminate cold-calling.
This survey is saying "people who talk with strangers are more likely to have talked with strangers who live near the house they moved into as well as to strangers on the telephone".
Colour me completely unsurprised by this result.
Complain about this comment
Chris - 2 comments:
1) is that not implicit in all surveys?
2) the TPS only bars 'marketing' calls, not 'research' calls.
Complain about this comment
I heard David Cameron interviewed on the Andrew Marr show. He said that the scrutiny of legislation has been not good enough and he wants to make scrutiny much more effective. He said and this is it "what we have at the moment (for scrutiny) is a Poodle" he wants to make it much more rigorous. I suppose that means a LABRA-DEM-DOODLE!
Complain about this comment
fJd 3, Nice necktie on Marr...
Complain about this comment
Sid, I would be more impressed if they said anywhere what proportion of the people they rang simply hung up on them, to be honest.
Also I would like to know at what time of day these calls were being made, and whether to cellphones or landlines. If they were during the day and to landlines they will have reached a completely different selection of the population from that which they would have reached on cell-phones or after work.
I mean, who is going to be at home during the day and on a landline? Not the people who commute from home and never even *see* most of their neighbours from one week's end to the next, I wouldn't have thought.
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS