CAIRO, February 6, 2006 - The barrage of opinion polls associated with the escalating battle over the Danish cartoons of Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) raised a number of questions on the credibility and indication of such polls on the one hand, and the seriousness of their results, on the other.

"These polls can never be credible or even indicative," Dr. Safwat El-Alem, media professor at Cairo University points out.

"Internet polls, generally, do not follow scientific or methodological tools and measures. The nature of the sample (of participants) and its characteristics is not accurate and can not be indicative of the society," he adds.

Large numbers of media outlets, including TV and radio stations, papers and magazines, in addition to Web sites, have set up polls for their users over the Danish cartoons depicting Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) that caused massive protests and triggered boycotts of Danish products across the Arab and Muslim worlds.

On CNN, IslamOnline.net, Al-Jazeera.net, MSNBC, a German TV station, Web sites of most papers and magazines, in addition to hundreds of Web sites and Web blogs, users are asked their opinion on the issue of freedom of expression and respect for religions.

Two main features are easily noticed as far as this phenomenon is concerned: First is the increasing numbers of participants and second is the sharply changing result.

Over 90,000 participants voted in the CNN poll related to the cartoons issue (even though the question itself does not explicitly mention the cartoons) in less than five days.

"Internet polls, generally, do not follow scientific or methodological tools and measures," El-Alem said.

On the result of such polls, El-Alem said participants are usually affected by what they read on the concerned issue.

"In addition to this, questions are mostly indicative of the answer. They further tend to limit big issues to a yes-or-no question," he adds.

"If a participant is a regular reader of IOL, he is certain to be affected by what the Web site has to publish on the issue. This way, when this reader participates in any poll, his answer will be a direct result of what IOL published on that particular issue," Mohamed Hakim, an Egyptian social researcher says, agreeing with Alem.

Another problem related to these Internet polls is linked to the nature of the tool itself.

"The lack of personal interaction between the researcher (in this case, the mouse plays that role) and the participant makes it almost impossible to trust the result of such polls," both Alem and Hakim believe.

Both go even further by casting heavy doubts on the very authenticity of some of these polls.

"The poll itself can be fabricated from A to Z sometimes. During Egypt's presidential elections in September, some polls claimed 90% of Egyptian supported a certain candidate (not the winning Mubarak). A big number of institutions, I believe, often use such polls for propaganda purposes no more," according to Alem.

The process of designing questions is in itself a killer of the scientific factor in conducting such polls, according to Hakim.

"Taking the cartoon war as an example, if you look at the questions of most online polls, you can easily see the point here. As an example, when you ask people "What is more important? Respect for religious beliefs or freedom of expression", what result do you expect?"

He was referring to the question of the CNN poll. As of Monday, February 6, 3:30 p.m. Cairo Time (13:30 GMT), the result showed 68% of participants saying freedom of expression. About 93,000 participants had already clicked the vote button at that time.

The question by the German TV station's Web site is another example. It reads as follows: "Should the media limit its freedom of expression in order to respect the feelings of Muslims" (in German). Out of some 26,000 participants in that poll, 40% voted yes and 60% rejected the suggestion.

According to Hakim, such kinds of questions totally ignore the various angels of the issue at hand and resort to generalizations, often "directing participants to a certain approach".

Another remark that deserves analysis here is the varying and sharply changing results of these online polls.

A poll on IOL, asking voters whether "there should be limits to freedom of expression when it comes to what is sacred in religions", could be seen as a point in case.

The poll went online Monday, January 30 and three days later, some 3,500 participants were registered, over 70% of them saying "yes". On Thursday, February 2, and in a time span of almost two hours, over 2,000 participants voted "no". The result was remarkably overturned.

"When it was clear something was wrong, we had to conduct some technical research and a certain IP address was traced, specifically in Denmark, to be the source of massive voting," according to IOL technical sources.

Online activists are widely blamed for discrediting the result of online polls, as they use general mailing lists to urge people to vote in a certain way, regardless of what individuals might actually think of the issue on vote.

As a result, both Alem and Hakim conclude that results of such Internet polls should not be considered a factor in drawing strategies or policies on how to deal with certain issues.

Furthermore, most Web sites running such polls post a disclaimer of their results.

"This QuickVote is not scientific and reflects the opinions of only those Internet users who have chosen to participate. The results cannot be assumed to represent the opinions of Internet users in general, nor the public as a whole. The QuickVote sponsor is not responsible for content, functionality or the opinions expressed therein," according to the CNN disclaimer.

As a matter of fact, a Danish journalist went a step further by recommending discussion forums (online) and polls should be avoided while tackling thorny issues like the battle over cartoons.

Guest of the IOL Live Dialogue Adam Hannestad, 40, Middle East and North Africa correspondent for the Danish newspaper Politiken since 1992, answered questions by Muslims and non-Muslims on the cartoon issue and it was revealing.

"Discussion Forums and polls should be avoided on such issues because they will only lead to further polarization," Hawa Irfan, Managing of Society Zone of IOL, concluded after putting together a report on the Live Dialogue.

"The way forward? We have never been in a situation like this before. And really, it is not about Denmark or those cartoons -- that's just the catalyst. It is about years of growing mistrust between two parts of the world," Hannestad, non-Muslim, said, in his replies.

"I believe the only way out is dialogue, tolerance, and to STOP THINKING ABOUT IT AS "US" AND "THEM". I hate the ideas of Osama bin Laden, but I like almost all the Muslims I know. I hate the doctrines of extremists like Jean-Marie Le Pen of France, but I like almost all the Christians I know."

• Qaradawi Condemns Violent Cartoon Protests 

• Cartoons of the Prophet: A Pitfall Trap

  ---

** Khaled Mamdouh is an editor on IslamOnline.net’s News Desk. He is also a radio announcer, and journalist and translator for several Arabic magazines. You can reach him at khaledm69@hotmail.com.