Solemn faces all round. We will listen. We will learn. We will hone and improve. Yes, it’s time for the latest bout of profound soul-searching in the UK polling industry following the allegations raised by the recent Channel 4 investigation that a polling firm reportedly failed to declare that three polls it published before the local elections in May were commissioned by Reform.(没错，继第四频道近期调查揭露一家民调公司据称未申报其五月地方选举前发布的三项民调实为改革党委托之后，英国民调行业又迎来了最新一轮深刻的自我反省。) By now these reckonings are becoming a regular occurrence in the wake of(在……之后) big elections: pollsters gather in a room, nibble biscuits, ritually self-flagellate(自我鞭挞), and pledge to learn all the right lessons from the electorate they’ve just catastrophically misread(误读).
人人一脸严肃。我们会倾听。我们会学习。我们会打磨改进。没错，继第四频道近期调查揭露一家民调公司据称未申报其五月地方选举前发布的三项民调实为改革党委托之后，英国民调行业又迎来了最新一轮深刻的自我反省。如今，每逢重大选举之后，这类清算已成常态：民调人士聚在一间屋子里，啃着饼干，例行公事般自我鞭挞，并承诺从他们刚刚灾难性误读的选民身上吸取所有正确的教训。
Yet for all its very public ignominies(耻辱、不光彩), political polling is one of those rare and precious industries that somehow manages to keep failing upwards(越失败越升迁). You might think that after botching the 2015 and 2017 general elections, the 2016 Brexit vote and the 2021 London mayoral poll, we might have learned better than to trust in the mystical magic graph.(你或许以为，在搞砸了2015年和2017年大选、2016年脱欧公投以及2021年伦敦市长选举民调之后，我们本该学乖，不再迷信那张神秘莫测的魔法图表。) In this parallel universe Keir Starmer is now sitting on a colossal(巨大的) 318-seat majority, as forecast by Survation in its final MRP poll(多层级回归后分层民调) on the eve of the 2024 general election, overstating(高估、夸大) the actual result by a mere 144 parliamentary seats.
然而，尽管屡屡当众出丑，政治民调却是那种罕见而“宝贵”的行业——总能一路失败却越爬越高。你或许以为，在搞砸了2015年和2017年大选、2016年脱欧公投以及2021年伦敦市长选举民调之后，我们本该学乖，不再迷信那张神秘莫测的魔法图表。在那个平行宇宙里，基尔·斯塔默如今坐拥318席的压倒性多数，正如Survation在2024年大选前夕的最终MRP民调所预测的那样——仅仅把实际结果高估了144个议会席位。
I am, of course, being slightly unfair. Most of the reputable(声誉良好的) pollsters enjoy just as many hits as misses – and are, by and large(总的来说), staffed by smart and diligent(勤勉的) people who genuinely care about their craft. Doubtless many among their number would object to any suggestion that the apparent misbehaviour of one firm – JL Partners, who were secretly filmed agreeing to carry out a poll favourable to Reform without disclosing who was commissioning it – can somehow be extrapolated to the wider profession as a whole.(他们中无疑有许多人会反对这样一种说法：一家公司——JL Partners，被秘密拍摄到同意进行一项有利于改革党的民调，却未披露委托方是谁——的明显不当行为，竟能以某种方式被推及整个行业。) To which the only reasonable response is: well, let’s see how you like it.
当然，我这话有点不公平。多数声誉良好的民调机构命中与失手一样多，而且总体而言，其员工都是聪明勤勉、真心在乎本行的人。他们中无疑有许多人会反对这样一种说法：一家公司——JL Partners，被秘密拍摄到同意进行一项有利于改革党的民调，却未披露委托方是谁——的明显不当行为，竟能以某种方式被推及整个行业。对此唯一合理的回应是：那好，看看你们自己受不受得了。