Sunday Times GRA Survey

[FloraFox]

I may be being dim in this but I can’t find the results of the survey the Times has been running this week. Last I saw the vote was 98% against the question of whether anyone who self-identifies as a woman should have access to women’s spaces. It said the results would be published in this week’s Sunday Times but I can’t find it. Has anyone else found it?

Possibly they're delaying it due to the consultation having been delayed, if it was originally meant to go in after the consultation closed.

If the answer isn't want they expect they might not publish.

The survey is so unscientific they can't publish it as 'news'. That result is obviously skewed and doesn't reflect real life opinion.

When the polls are a bit of fun that doesn't matter, but on a serious topic like this I think it's important they separate fact from fiction.

It’s a survey of the Times’s readership. How is it obviously skewed?

Because the Times readership doesn't reflect the full population (richer, more southern), and because a very small % of Times readers will have taken part - largely those with existing strong views on this debate.

They do sell The Times 'oop North'. We can read, you know.

That result is obviously skewed and doesn't reflect real life opinion
Eh?

Almost 10,000 readers responded.

That's what a reader survey is.
Newspapers habitually publish results of reader surveys. It's not fiction, it's a particular type of survey which anyone with any sense will know has certain limitations.

It doesn’t purport to be representative of the entire nation. It’s very common to have surveys of specific parts of the population. “X% of Guardian readers want to remain in the EU” “Y% of doctors believe z” etc. It seems that at least 8,000 people responded which seems a decent response rate for a newspaper survey.

It was 97% no.

The number of respondents was 9,816.

Any survey is 'skewed' to the people that answer it! And 10,000 is a huge number of respondents.

The Times is now the most trusted news source in the UK, more trusted than the BBC - it is a very reputable organisation.

Because the Times readership doesn't reflect the full population (richer, more southern), and because a very small % of Times readers will have taken part - largely those with existing strong views on this debate

So? It’s a reader survey ffs! It’s not being used for government statistics or anything. Geez.

They may have been stopped from publishing it.

I don’t read the Times but responded as it was shared on Facebook. I think being such a high profile issue it will have been more likely to elicit a range of responses outside the Times readership as it was widely shared.

Whereas those suicide statistics that Mermaids peddles were based on what was it, 27 self selected respondents?

Certain charities are touting the results of a survey of 2000 people as absolute fact but because you don't agree with it its (predicted) results it should be ignored. Ok then.

And I live oop north, not only can I read and understand big words, I even managed to to to a really big school called university.

10,000 people means nothing if many of them have found the survey after being directed there by Facebook, as they will already be thinking about the issue. And yes, obviously the Times is read in the North, but hat doesn't make its readership representative.

Take a look at the thread about the CoCL 'consultation' cherry picking evidence. If we want to have the moral high ground we have to hold ourselves to higher standards.

Yes, newspapers regularly publish these kinds of things. But they're usually silly fun that doesn't matter, or naked clickbait (99%of Express readers want to leave the EU TOMORROW kind of thing).

It stayed below the activist radar for quite a while, till the responses were around 5K with 98% against. Then I started seeing it shared and linked more and it crept down to 97.
I think the Times will have every reason to consider it pretty representative of their readers.

So a survey of 27 self-selecting participants conducted by a partisan lobbying organisation based on dubious questions can form the basis of government policy but a succinct question at the heart of said policy answered by 10,000 shouldn’t even be published?

They won't let a result like that go without comment.

It's was pretty unanimous that the readership is against self-identified women using women-only. By extension do not believe TWAW and probably against self-ID.

I agree it's probably because the consultation hasn't ended yet. It's a shame because by next Sunday it'll be 'old news' so not sure what they'll do.
Maybe print something on Tuesday? Or maybe publish a long-read analysis of the entire debate on Sunday.

Don't worry, The Times won't let this drop. They've nailed their colours. Especially since the treatment of Janice Turner, they have really stuck by her. She needs a medal.

I am actually fully signed up to the GRA cause. Filled in the consultation base on the Women's Place guidance and all.

Surveys by ComRes or whoever of 2000 people are different. They will have selected 2000 respondents to have the same balance of men and women, age, location, education ect as the general population. That's not what happened here.

Terrible data from skewed surveys are being used to tell everyone kids are killing themselves in high numbers to push an agenda. It’s sickening.

@FloraFox where did I say the Mermaids survey was sensible? I think it's a crazy thing to be used as the basis of policy making.

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/readers-poll-should-everyone-who-identifies-as-female-have-access-to-women-only-spaces-c36hw0qgk

Here is a link, it's behind a paywall, sorry.
And a photo of the results