By late June, Mallory McMorrow’s campaign to be Michigan’s next senator was probably already doomed(注定失败的). The Democrat was squeezed(被夹击、受挤压) between Abdul El-Sayed, a dynamic leftist, and Haley Stevens, an establishment-backed(获得建制派支持的) centrist, in a heated primary. When a poll was published showing she had the support of only 9% of registered voters, it seemed to be a death knell(丧钟、终结的信号). Reporters asked when she would drop out(退出（竞选/比赛）), which she did on July 5th. It now seems that poll was fake.
到6月底，马洛里·麦克莫罗竞选密歇根州下一任参议员的努力，很可能已经注定失败。在这场激烈的初选中，这位民主党人被夹在充满活力的左翼人士阿卜杜勒·埃尔-赛义德与获得建制派支持的中间派黑利·史蒂文斯之间。当一份民调显示她仅获得9%登记选民的支持时，这似乎成了她的丧钟。记者们纷纷追问她何时退选，而她最终在7月5日宣布退出。如今看来，那份民调是假的。
An investigation published on October 20th by FiftyPlusOne, a data-journalism outfit(机构、团队), found that a group called Wedgewood Polls had fabricated(伪造的、捏造的) its results. The discovery follows another in August, when the Los Angeles Times spotted a forged(伪造的) poll on the city’s mayoral candidates. FiftyPlusOne has also criticised a pollster for manipulating figures to serve its client. The spate of bad polls undermines(削弱、损害) an industry already widely distrusted.
10月20日，数据新闻机构FiftyPlusOne发布的一项调查发现，一家名为Wedgewood Polls的机构伪造了民调结果。这一发现紧随8月的另一起事件：当时《洛杉矶时报》发现了一份针对该市市长候选人的伪造民调。FiftyPlusOne还批评过一家民调机构为服务客户而操纵数据。这一连串糟糕的民调，进一步削弱了一个本已广受质疑的行业。
Wedgewood published 15 public polls ahead of the midterm elections. Then FiftyPlusOne—led by G. Elliott Morris, a former journalist at The Economist—received a tip(线报、内部消息) that the data were fake. Mr Morris and his colleagues confirmed the forgery by comparing Wedgewood’s figures with data from a provider the firm had supposedly employed.(莫里斯及其同事将Wedgewood的数据与该公司声称聘用的一家数据提供商的数据进行比对，从而确认了伪造行为。) Mismatched identification numbers gave the scammers away(让骗子露了馅). When FiftyPlusOne requested a comment from Wedgewood, the firm claimed it had forged the polls to “demonstrate the vulnerabilities(脆弱性、漏洞)” of the industry.
Wedgewood在中期选举前发布了15份公开民调。随后，由《经济学人》前记者G. Elliott Morris领导的FiftyPlusOne收到线报，称这些数据是假的。Morris及其同事将Wedgewood的数据与该公司声称聘用的一家数据提供商的数据进行比对，从而确认了伪造行为。对不上的识别号码让骗子露了馅。当FiftyPlusOne向Wedgewood请求置评时，该公司声称伪造民调是为了“展示”行业的“脆弱性”。