Dear Editor,
Vishnu Bisram should continue his role as a commentator. An article in Caribbean Daylight newspaper (Mar 24) in N.Y caught my attention relating to the role of the pollster and political pundit arguments in SN. It seems that the Daylight article buttresses the defence made by Vishnu Bisram (Mar 14) of the dual role of pollsters.
In SN Mar 7, Walter Jordan voiced the view that pollsters should not be political commentators – responding to a Bisram commentary on how Guyana regressed after it became a Republic. I don’t see how the two roles can be separated – all pollsters are commentators and therefore, I disagree with Randy Persaud (Mar 17) that pollsters should not be pundits. I don’t quite understand Dr. Persaud’s motive for getting into this argument to muddy his outstanding reputation. He has been shown to be a learned scholar who writes with clarity on political subjects but on this particular issue he is not factual.
In claiming that pollsters comment only on their poll findings and not on other issues, Dr. Persaud seeks to undermine Bisram’s argument that pollsters all over the world make commentaries on non-polling issues. Dr. Persaud’s claim is not supported by facts. Indeed many pollsters comment about their polls’ findings.
But many engage in analyses having nothing to do with polls. I wish to refer Dr. Persaud to pollster Dick Morris’s columns – of thousands of columns very few are about the findings of his polls. I also refer to Frank Luntz (Republican pollster who also did polls for the AFC) – few of the hundreds of his columns are about his polls. Instead, they focus on his views and opinions on political issues bashing Democrats.
Mr. Bisram’s commentaries don’t bash any party. They are fair, balanced objective analyses based on facts on relevant issues.
I also wish to refer Persaud to the Roper Institute website which has thousands of columns from eminent independent pollster Al Roper – few of which deal with polls. I read Selwyn Ryan’s weekly column in the Sunday Trinidad Express; of thousands of columns, few are about the findings of his polls. The writings of the late Carl Stone did not focus exclusively on his polls. In fact, only a few of his columns were on polls. This now brings me to the Daylight article in which Barbadian pollster Peter Wickham gave an analysis of the impact of the quashing of Panday’s conviction in Trinidad.
He made no reference to any polls in voicing his views. So clearly, Bisram is on the right side of the argument of the role of pollsters. And I would advise that he remain impartial and objective. Like Dr. Persaud, Bisram is one of the few commentators who appeal to reason and logic and are not swayed by ethnic emotions. I enjoy reading Bisram’s many analyses and his reports on the Guyanese diaspora as well as his travel experiences. If he should restrict his writings only to polls, as suggested by Persaud, polling which Bisram does occasionally in Guyana, we would be deprived of his intellectual contributions on other more important and relevant issues.
I think Bisram should continue what he is doing – to stay above the political fray and remain both a respected pollster and pundit.
Yours faithfully,
Suresh Singh
