PORpedia is an online open-source information hub designed and operated by the Asia Pacific Chapter of the World Association for Public Opinion Research (WAPOR Asia Pacific) to centralize all information related to the development of POR (public opinion research) around the world. Its prototype is launched in 2023 and its pace of development will depend on the supply and demand of POR communities around the world. In its matured form, everyone can freely edit POPpedia, but at its development stage, only registered WAPOR community members can edit its content via submissions to the Secretariat of WAPOR Asia Pacific at wapor.asia@gmail.com.
One important function of PORpedia is to keep everybody in the world informed of POR development in various parts of the world, in relation to the three core values of WAPOR, namely, Liberty, Quality, Humanity. PORpedia starts with the information collected and published by WAPOR in its previous global surveys of the freedom to conduct and publish opinion polls, and invite people around the world to enrich and enhance the information here. Please sent your submission to wapor.asia@gmail.com.
Australia:
1997: There are no restrictions.
2002: No embargo, no change expected.
2012: There has been one high profile case that has led to a member of our professional personal membership body AMSRS resigning before complaints against him were heard. This fellow was operating in the fringes using polls to generate news related promotion for himself and not participating in mainstream polling activity. Other than this case, there are no issues for us.
Bangladesh:
2002: No embargo, no change expected.
Bhutan:
2012: We have civil service rules and regulations which restrict civil servants from sharing critical opinions about government policies.
Cambodia:
2012: [The surveys] are not conducted in Cambodia.
China:
1997: No public opinion polls are conducted. The only subjects that may be included in surveys are questions related to values, readership, and a few private matters. No change is expected. The voting system of China makes traditional polls impossible. The system is built stepwise beginning with district elections, followed by voting in the cities, and in the final stage, the People’s Representative Committee elects the leaders. Nevertheless, nowadays there is a lot more data collection for other purposes (readership, consumption habits, transportation etc.) – areas far removed from our present subject.
2002: “With a population of 1.3 billion people China is every pollster’s dream, except for the fact that opinion polls are simply not permitted. Market research is booming in China but questions that even lean towards views on government policy are not allowed. The State Security Bureau must approve every questionnaire prior to fieldwork and results are to be submitted to the SSB before they can be sent to a client. Studies that could embarrass the government are not allowed either. Market research in China has a history of just 10-15 years and has developed tremendously. Opinion polls are not likely in the near future, but it will happen someday.”
2012: The context in China, political and social, is quite different from other countries/regions, especially western countries/regions. So I feel the issue of public opinion poll and its publication cannot be divided from specific political system, actually it is a part of the whole "machine". Another point is that we should say the public opinion poll, its industry as well as its academic research is developing fast in China nowadays. For example, there are more and more CATI centers in China, and more and more online survey results are published on media. But there are no clear laws/codes to guide the whole industry and publication. We don't have a common sense about professionalism. It is a problem closely related with the political system and media regulation. The situation in China is always more complicated than what we can imagine. But we should say it is still on the way towards to advancement.
Fiji:
2012: Public Opinion poll should be considered in my country/region.
Hong Kong:
1997: The only restrictions today pertain to questions about defence and foreign policy. But what about the situation after mid-1997? The best guess is that Beijing will abolish the legislature on July 1 and install a rump parliament from which representatives of the democratic parties - who poll about 55% of the popular vote - will be excluded. The popular opinion among pollsters is that some laws which were liberalised in the last 10 years, will be reinforced in full, and that criticism of the government may be regarded as seditious which could limit polling.
2012: In 2000, there was a "Polling Incident" (also called "Robert Chung Incident") whereby the academic freedom to run public opinion polls was curtailed. In 2008, there was another controversy over the use of partisan exit polls for election day engineering conducted by 35 pro-establishment organizations under the banner of "academic research". To overcome these problems, Hong Kong should adopt some professional standards or codes of ethics for opinion polling. We, the HongKongers are facing deteriorating freedom in many aspects of our life. We need independent organizations to put pressure on the Chinese government.
Media only reports those polls favourable to the government or their own agenda. Mainland China is intervening the results and academic freedom of certain public opinion research.
India:
1997: Most polls are conducted during election time. Political parties often claim that pre-election polling can affect voting behaviour and suggest that controls should be introduced. No political stand has been taken until now.
2002: No embargo. No change expected. “India proudly declares itself as the largest democracy in the world and has a tradition of political polling. Opinion polls have been conducted for over 30 years. Polls and election predictions are followed closely and commented on in many news programs as an important ingredient of the election process. All political parties use market research companies, and those companies also sell their services in Sri Lanka and Bangladesh.”
2012: Prediction of seats is generally off the mark. This makes all discussions generally meaningless. There are a number of regional players beside two main national players and that makes seat prediction and who will form the Government a lot more difficult. In spite of all this, there are sponsors and the need for surveys is felt strongly, to look at the trends.
Indonesia:
1997: Ongoing pressure to introduce further restrictions is expected to extend the existing embargo of 21 days.
2002: “Whilst there are no official restrictions on publications shortly before the elections or on choice of subjects, the lack of law and order and the lack of a political tradition can interfere with fieldwork.”
2012: Working committee in parliament suggests restriction in public opinion and quick counts publication, media and survey institutions are only allowed before and during campaign period.
Japan:
2002: No embargo. No change expected.
2012: There are too many companies which conduct public opinion poll with different methods and techniques. In the wake of such a situation, the diversity of findings of public opinion poll is increasing.
Kazakhstan:
1997: Polls are carried out occasionally and there is a 24-hour embargo on publishing public opinion poll results before an election.
2002: No embargo and no questions or subjects which can not be included in public opinion survey interviews, or findings that cannot be published.
Malaysia:
2002: No embargo. No change expected.
2012: There are polls that are privately conducted for government agencies and these are not revealed to the public. There are opinion polls that are conducted also by government agencies but the results take a long time for the results to be known of.
Maldives:
2012: Limited efforts to collect public opinion.
Nepal:
2002: Embargo of one day.
2012: Public opinion polls should follow code of conduct and norms.
New Zealand:
1997: There is an embargo from 07.00 to 19.00 hours (when voting is closed).
2002: No embargo, no change expected.
2012: On-line panels are the main source of polling data. This use of on-line panels is a trend I expect to continue, and this will produce different biases to traditional telephone polls.
North Korea:
1997: The situation is similar to that in China although some improvement in support of survey research is anticipated as an increasing number of investors have expressed a need for consumer information, for instance on their products or media habits etc.
Pakistan:
2002: No embargo.
Philippines:
1997: Polls are generally carried out during the 6-12 months prior to an election but otherwise irregularly.
2002: No embargo, no change expected.
South Korea:
2002: Embargo of 23 days. Shorter embargo expected. “The Rep. of Korea has been a democracy since the mid-nineties and opinion polls have rapidly grown as an important field of research. Most political parties and candidates use polls, focus groups and consultants to determine their strategy.
Most media have sizeable contracts with the major market research companies, with values between one to two million US dollars. They often include penalty clauses if the poll results deviate too much from the actual results. Remarkably, voters cannot be interviewed within 500 metres of the polling station – a very impractical requirement in urban areas.”
Singapore:
2012: Opinion polls may be conducted, but conduct of survey and release of results are highly restrictive. These are due to legal restrictions. A climate of fear still exists in Singapore, and respondents may self-censor and over-interpret questions, leading to responses that conform with popular expectations of official positions. This may mask actual opinions. Opinion polls on elections are generally not allowed to be published during elections. This reduces the information available to voters to make informed decisions.
Sri Lanka:
2012: Doing an opinion poll in itself is a challenge in these areas.
Taiwan:
1997: Questions cannot be asked about the Royal Family.
2002: No embargo, no limitations to publication. No change expected.
Thailand:
1997: Occasional polls are carried out, generally related to social and economic issues. Very few political questions are asked.
2002: No embargo, no limitations to publication, no interference of government, no change expected.
Egypt:
2002: “In Egypt there are no specific regulations for approving certain studies from the Central Agency for Public Mobilization and Statistics (CAPMAS). It actually depends on the topics of discussion and the questionnaire itself. In other words, there is no guarantee for the approval of political polling studies, until it is presented to the CAPMAS.”
Egypt:
2002: “In Egypt there are no specific regulations for approving certain studies from the Central Agency for Public Mobilization and Statistics (CAPMAS). It actually depends on the topics of discussion and the questionnaire itself. In other words, there is no guarantee for the approval of political polling studies, until it is presented to the CAPMAS.”
Israel:
2002: Embargo of 1 day; a longer embargo is expected. No embargo in 1996.
Kuwait:
2012: They need more legislation and more academic method.
Turkey:
1997: In 1995 the embargo was extended from 24 hours to 30 days.
2002: Embargo of seven days compared to 30 days in 1996. “According to Turkish law research companies need to get permission from the national statistic institute, however there is no punishment for violating the rule.”
United Arab Emirates:
2002: No embargo, no change expected.
Kenya:
2012: Pending legislation known as opinion polls bill whose warped rationale is that publication of opinion polls prior to our 2007 elections greatly contributed to post election violence, i.e. the public having been exposed to polls were unable to accept results of a burgled election. Secondly opinion polls are perceived by the political class to be critical in influencing the voting intention. The political class in Kenya so hates pollsters for telling the public the truth, that they vilify and attack them in public rallies, they trivialize poll results that don't suit them and their interests and they constantly try and infuse negative propaganda surrounding opinion polls. E.g. they ask Kenyans, "How can a poll with a sample on only 2400 respondents truly reflect the views of all adult Kenyans? It is impossible!!" All in all it takes GUTS to be a pollster in Kenya.
Nigeria:
2002: No embargo, no limitations to publication, no government interference. Previously there was an embargo on the publication of opinion poll results six weeks before an election.
South Africa:
1997: Embargo of six weeks, unchanged since first study in 1984.
2002: No embargo, no limitations to publication, no government interference. Previously there was an embargo on the publication of opinion poll results six weeks before an election.
“Following the first democratic election held in1994, the law was changed before the 1999 election to allow publication of results up to the day before the election and the conduct of exit polls, providing results are not published before voting is closed. The electoral regulations will be reviewed on a regular basis as this is a young democracy.”
2012: There is a high degree of ignorance about what constitutes a good quality poll. A number of organizations will publish suspect polls - i.e. conduct interviews only in metropolitan areas only and then present it as if it were representative of the country/region as a whole. The journalists are not always trained adequately to pick this up. Provisions that relate to "blackout" periods before the vote or the coverage of opinion polls is still problematic in some occasions. Similarly, general legal provisions such as the law of defamation is still facing a dilemma of implementation in some cases as a result of cultural sensitivities.
Albania:
1997: Polls were only introduced 2 or 3 years ago and until 1992 no polls were conducted at all. Albania considers itself to still be in a transition period. Currently there are no general restrictions but questions should not be asked about foreign policies or the armed forces.
Armenia:
1997: Polls are carried out occasionally and there is a 24-hour embargo on publishing public opinion poll results before an election.
Austria:
1997: There are no legal restrictions but there is a voluntary agreement among a few institutes who recommend an embargo period of 4 to 6 days.
2002: No embargo.
Belarus:
1997: Polls are carried out occasionally and there is a 24-hour embargo on publishing public opinion poll results before an election.
Belgium:
1997: A law was introduced whereby a committee should have been created to check that opinion polls are conducted in line with certain requirements and that this committee would authorised research institutes to conduct opinion polls. This committee was never set up. Furthermore, whilst a four week moratorium on the publication of opinion poll results was proposed, this has never been enacted and opinion poll results are published right up to the day before an election.
2002: No embargo, no limitations to publications, no change expected. “There was a ban on publication voted in the late 80’s but never applied by the media. It was withdrawn in 1991. There is still legislation applicable to quality control on polling agencies and a commission of experts to verify this. However this was never put into practice and might be abolished.”
2012: For academic surveys and under strict rules, researchers may make use of random samples from the national registers. For mail surveys, Total Design Method may be used but letters and questionnaires are sent by the personnel of National Register. For face-to-face surveys, the researchers receive the sample under strict conditions. One should delete the cases completely after explicit refusal (e.g. by letter or spontaneous phone call), but in case of refusal at the door, one can insist and go back another time. This is conditional refusal conversion. The rules are created by National Privacy Commission in cooperation with academics.
Bosnia and Herzegovina:
2002: No embargo, no change expected.
Bulgaria:
2002: Embargo of seven days, no change expected. The embargo is longer than in 1996. “The election law bans any campaigning activities which may influence (bias) the process of voting on the eve of elections and on election day.”
Czechia:
2002: Embargo of seven days, no change expected.
Croatia:
1997: No restrictions apart from a 24 hours moratorium.
2002: Embargo of 24 hours. No change expected.
Cyprus:
2002: Embargo of seven days. Regulations were also proposed in Cyprus that completed questionnaires should be submitted to a committee of MPs together with the methodology and sample details before any results are published. There were no restrictions on poll research in 1996.
Denmark:
2002: No embargo, no change expected. “It will be difficult to muster a majority for banning/restricting polls in Parliament.”
2012: In Denmark there are not only exit polls right after the elections are over, but also during the day when people go to the polls.
Estonia:
2002: No embargo. “Sometimes questions suggest answers but generally it is lack of professionalism and less a desire to manipulate.”
Finland:
2002: No embargo, no change expected.
2012: In Finland, the situation of public opinion research has remained stable during the last 37 decades. There are two or three major companies who's main area is market research, and they use their methods for public opinion polls also. There are no significant changes in sight in the near future. The whole society in Finland is stable and well-structured, and this is also true regarding the polling industry.
France:
1997: It is prohibited to publish the results of pre-electoral polls 7 days before an election. If a general election is immediately followed by a local election, this can effectively mean a 14 day moratorium on the publication of pre-electoral polls.
The French law “Informatiques et Libertes” offers respondents access to information which concerns them and the names of those who have received this information. As this law also applies to opinion polls, some political candidates have tried to obtain access to unpublished poll results in which their names were mentioned and to find out who commissioned the survey. So far research institutes have refused to comply and the national association, SYNTEC is challenging this request which would oblige research institutes to provide poll results to their clients’ opponents. This is being defended by the research institute concerned but a final decision has still to be made by the highest legal authorities.
2002: The 1977 Act prohibited the publication of opinion poll results seven days before an election. It also required that in order to publish and circulate opinion polls during election time, the market research company must give notice to the Opinion Polls Commission, including the name of the opinion poll’s buyer, the number of interviewed people, the period during which the poll will take place. Technical instructions must be written and specify the aim of the opinion poll, the method applied to select respondents, the structure of the sample, the interviewing conditions, the text of the questionnaire, the proportion of not answered questions, the confidence limits of the published results. If necessary also to be mentioned are the deduction method for indirect results (“rectification”). A decision pronounced in July 1997 by the Council of State mentioned that the person appearing in the opinion poll must not be informed of the commissioner of the opinion poll’s buyer, nor the results to the questions where he namely appears.
The 1977 law has now been overturned and the 2002 Act has reduced the embargo period to 24 hours. In enforcing this new law, the companies belonging to Syntec, the national association of market research agencies, agreed to not publish opinion poll results on the Saturday preceding the elections that take place on Sunday in France.
Germany:
1997: Article 5 of the German Constitution guarantees the right to freedom of opinion and the press and thus prevents the introduction of any restrictions on the publication of poll results. The sole binding regulation is that the results of exit polls cannot be made public until the polling stations have closed.
2002: There is no embargo. The only restriction is a prohibition on publishing exit poll findings before polling stations close.
Greece:
1997: In Greece, as in many other countries, the two leading parties are at present running neck-to-neck, and consequently the polls often display conflicting indication of a small advantage for one or the other party. This has caused speculation and comment concerning the reliability of the polls and the techniques used. There is mounting political pressure to introduce certain restrictions, mainly in order to reduce the number of poorly conducted or irresponsible polls. A new bill is being discussed to restrict the publication of voting intention figures for 10 days prior to an election.
AGMORC, the national research association, is lobbying to have this proposal dropped and to increase self-regulation of the research industry instead. AGMORC members will be required to apply all the sections of the ESOMAR guidelines to opinion polls at all times for surveys on voting intentions. These conditions must form an integral part of any contract made between a client and AGMORC members. AGMORC hopes that these measures will help to protect the Greek research industry as a whole from unwelcome publicity arising form the abuse of important research tools.
2002: In 1996 there was no embargo but after mounting political pressure, the situation now is that poll results cannot be published 15 days before an election and any violation of the law is punishable by a term of imprisonment of over six months and a heavy fine.
Polls on voting intentions may still be conducted during the embargo if ordered by a political party providing the information is not published. “Most public opinion polls are conducted by certain political sides or newspapers/TV stations which have a clear political position and they only publish results when the results are positive for their position.”
Exit polls are permitted outside the polling station but they cannot be published or broadcast before 19.00 hours after the polls close.
Iceland:
2002: No embargo. No change expected. “Exit polls have not been conducted in Iceland - a lot of cost for little gain. We once requested permission for exit polls outside the stations (within its legal area) and that was granted provided we did not publish until after all polls close.” “People realise that that you cannot ban information as long as it doesn’t threaten the interests of the general public.”
Ireland:
2002: No embargo. Change expected. “In July 2001 the government attempted to pass legislation to ban the conduct and publication of opinion polls for seven days prior to local, national or European elections or any referendum. This was rejected at Senate stage on a technicality. We therefore expect the government to return to the issue in two to three years time ahead of the next general election campaign.”
Italy:
1997: It is forbidden to publish the results of pre-election opinion polls to parliamentary elections and a 24 hour embargo prior to all other elections.
2002: In 1996, there was a 28 day embargo. Now the conduct of election polls is not restricted but the publication and diffusion of election polls is forbidden 15 days prior to election day. During this period, publication is allowed if accompanied by an “information note” with several specifications related to the poll, which must be published in the media together with the poll results, and recorded on a dedicated website. “The chief of government controls the main media (newspapers, TV, etc.) and so can control the type and time of information.”
2012: The Italian polling industry is populated by many small operators who probably do not possess sufficient methodological skills for performing a scientific poll.
Phone interviewing faces an increasingly serious challenge (in terms of sample representativeness) in the fact that a very high proportion of Italian households no longer have landlines and may be reached only via mobile phones, for which there exists no directory. In typical voting intention polls, up to half of all respondents do not express a substantial choice (i.e., they state they will not vote or are undecided), and percentages referred to parties are calculated only on a subset of respondents. Variations in party strength of fractions of a percentage point are commented upon as is they were significant, whereas they may correspond to shifts of 2-3 respondents in an overall sample of 1000 units and 500 actual respondents). In general journalists are not very competent vis-à-vis the technical features of sample surveys. Many media outlets have continued to carry out non-scientific “polls” that are called polls even if they do not reflect the official legal definition.
Except for the 15-day pre-election ban on publishing political-electoral polls, the other features of legal regulations enjoy virtually no public awareness or debate, and the enforcement framework is relatively weak. Also, many of the documentation criteria are vague, and even a w ell-intentioned pollster will encounter difficulties in describing them adequately.
Over the last decade, published pre-election polls have grown in number, but have been based on progressively smaller sample sizes and have supplied increasingly less exhaustive methodological information.
Latvia:
2002: No embargo, no change expected.
Lithuania:
1997: There is a 3 day publication moratorium prior to parliamentary elections and a 24 hour embargo prior to all other elections.
Luxembourg:
1997: The embargo period is 30 days which is one of the longest in Europe (together with Turkey).
2002: Embargo of one month. No change expected. “No exit polls conducted to date. Anything that could possibly interfere with the elections is forbidden. There is no jurisprudence making this more specific.”
Macedonia:
2002: Embargo of five days. “No changes expected because the electoral law was last changed in June 2002.”
Netherlands:
1997: There are very few restrictions on the conduct and publication of public opinion surveys but data privacy laws mean that the identity of respondents may not be disclosed and if sensitive questions are included in a survey, this must be reported to the data protection authorities. These restrictions are however not applied to government-owned institutes which are also permitted to draw addresses from the census data bank without specific permission. This disparity creates much irritation among private institutes which do not have access to this source of information.
The only other restriction is that results from exit-polls may not be published on the day of the election. The same restriction applies to Norway.
2002: No embargo, no change expected.
Norway:
2002: No embargo, no changed expected.
2012: In Norway Election Day polling since 1993 is done by means of telephone surveys, either a panel re-interviewed on E lection Night, or an Election Night only survey. This method has proven quite successful, and would have been the preferred method even without restrictions.
Poland:
1997: The law concerning parliamentary elections restricts the publication of polling results related to voting intentions and the 7 day embargo was extended to 12 days in 1993.
2002: Embargo of one day compared to 12 days in 1996. “Some change expected as regulations change very often.”
Portugal:
1997: There is a 7 day embargo on publication of opinion poll results prior to elections. However AACS (the body controlling the media and political surveys) is proposing a new law to Parliament that only companies registered with AACS will be able to publish polls. On the other hand, a shorter embargo, possibly of 2 days is expected in Portugal.
2002: The publication of polls is not permitted the day of and the day before an election. “When poll results are published, the following information must be included: The person or agency that commissioned the opinion poll; geographical coverage; characteristics of the sample; margin of error; response rate; mode of interview (telephone, in person, via computer); dates of interviewing and question wording. Exit polls are permitted outside the polling station and results can be published after the polls close. This is enforced by a parliamentary commission which controls all the published opinion polls and requires that the market research company send all information and results to this Commission before sending it to the publisher.”
This compares to a seven-day embargo period in 1996.
Romania:
2002: Embargo period of two days. No change expected.
2012: The trend is to impose a strong regulation to conduct polls. The polling market is relatively new (around 20 years). It was necessary a period for accumulation, to let this domain to develop itself, but now it's the right moment to control it by proper regulation according to the ESOMAR / WAPOR Code and ISO 20252.
Russia:
1997: No restrictions apart from a 48 hour moratorium. In recent years, the number of polls has increased and their quality has improved. Russia has since the last few years been included in the regular barometer studies initiated by European Commission
2002: No embargo period but this could be changed.
2012: More and more polls conducted by Internet sites among their Internet audience are published without any reference that the sample is not national probability sample at all, and media discuss the results of these polls for ages and never look at the nature of these "polls".
Slovakia:
2002: Embargo of 14 days. Change expected. “The discussion goes on however abolishing the ban would be too radical change from the point of view of politicians.”
Slovenia:
1997: No restrictions apart from a 24 hours moratorium.
2002: Embargo of seven days compared to 24 hours in 1996, no change expected.
Spain:
1997: Pre-electoral poll results cannot be published in the five days before an election. Any survey results published in a pre-electoral period must include technical details such as sample size, margins of error, the number of people who idd not answer and the wording of the questions. These requirements are fulfilled to a limited extent only and the electoral body does not fully enforce their application.
2002: Election polls may only be published up to five days before the day of the elections. Other technical requirements are to be applied for the poll published during the electoral periods, but they are basically consistent with WAPOR and ESOMAR self-regulation.
Sweden:
2002: No embargo, no changed expected.
Switzerland:
2002: Embargo of 10 days compared to seven days in 1996. No change expected.
Ukraine:
2002: No embargo, no change expected. “The media can publish poll results (including exit polls) after all elections are closed.” “During elections some unknown firms appeared, which conducted biased surveys or even published data without any surveys.”
United Kingdom:
2002: No embargo. No change expected.
2012: Polls in the UK are about 50% online and 50% telephone.
Canada:
1997: The embargo of 72 hours which was introduced in 1993, does not include Quebec and is only valid for federal elections.
2002: Embargo of two days, no change expected.
2012: WAPOR should look seriously at the new methodologies that are used like IVR and panel opt-in polls. They may influence the vote and we do not know much about how these polls are carried.
Costa Rica:
2002: Embargo of two days, no change expected.
Dominican Republic:
2012: Any person or organization can publish a study without any adherence to quality control.
Honduras:
2002: No embargo. No change expected.
2012: Electoral tribunal requires inscription of those who conduct public opinion polls. However, media, advertising agencies and consultant achieve inscription, not just polling firms.
Mexico:
1997: Laws are introduced by the National Election Institute (IFE) which consists of the various political parties, citizens and governmental institutions. General expectations are for an increasing level of freedom for public opinion research in the coming years.
2002: Embargo of seven days. “Results can be disseminated via the media after all polling stations have closed.” “There is a growing pressure by some political analysts, NGOs and politicians themselves to allow the disclosure of polls closer to election day”.
Panama:
2002: Embargo of 24 hours.
Puerto Rico:
2002: No embargo, no change expected.
United States:
2002: No embargo. No change expected.
Argentina:
1997: There is currently no embargo on the publication of poll results but Congress is considering a proposal to introduce an embargo on poll findings before elections.
2002: Embargo of one day. “From 08:00 hours on Saturday, the publication of opinion polls data and campaign information is prohibited as well as during election day which runs from 08.00 to 18.00 hours on Sunday. The data of exit polls can only be issued in public after 18.00 hours on Sunday. But, this is a theoretical, because foreign broadcasters (mainly from Uruguay) air information before this deadline.”
Bolivia:
1997: Embargo of 2 days
2002: Embargo of two days, no change expected. “There is a law that we must register, five days before, at the electoral court every survey that we will publish. You have to say who is paying for the survey, how much is paid, sample size, margin of error, sample design, data collection, data, questionnaire, and so on. You don’t have to register the results of the survey, just technical information.”
Brazil:
1997: There is no longer a moratorium but polls must be registered with the Electoral Court 5 days before publication with technical details such as sample size and type of collection.
2002: No embargo. “The only restriction is that a poll must be registered in the High Electoral Court five days before the publication. People think that this restriction is now meaningless”.
2012: I think that we need to improve the quality of the press in general, which is dominated by interest groups are not always transparent.
Chile:
1997: Embargo of 7 days (a 30-day embargo is being discussed).
2012: Polls are used for political purposes, its scientific value is of no concern. Scientific community of peers is non-existent in Chile. In Chile there are no exit poll since 1993. The one performed failed to anticipate correctly the result of the national election.
Colombia:
1997: Embargo of 7 days (recently reduced from 10 to 7 days).
2002: Embargo of one day. Exit polls are permitted outside the polling station.
Peru:
1997: Embargo of 15 days (a 72-hour embargo is being discussed).
2002: Embargo of seven days. Changes expected. “Although we don’t expect changes regarding the publication of polls before elections, we do expect some changes because some Congressmen are preparing laws to control and restrict our work. One of the proposals says that if the projections of a company are very different from the election results, the research company cannot work for a period of time.”
2012: The electoral authority has tried to impose and enforce some rigid methodological standards to electoral polls. They have a rigid interpretation of the technical aspects of the polling process which denotes a lack of field experience of the official in charge of making those remarks. The problem is that some of those technical remarks have implied fines or restrictions to the work of some polling firms.
Uruguay:
1997: Embargo of 15 days.
2002: Embargo of 7 days, no change expected.
2012: Survey problems face to face for the existence of unsafe areas, reducing the use of telephone (and its replacement by cell phone), age and education bias in the use of web survey.
Venezuela:
1997: Embargo unchanged at 15 days.
2002: Embargo of two days. Some expect a longer period. Exit polls are permitted outside polling stations. “Venezuela has no major restrictions on public opinion and electoral polls till now. But, the regime is willing to control mass media news and that will certainly affect our business sooner or later. At the National Assembly (our Congress) there is a proposed law to regulate public opinion polls not yet disclosed.” “There is possible media censure. The state is increasing economic and political controls”
2012: Phone surveys are becoming standard. Some parties do not trust new methodologies. Political polarization may affect views on survey reports.