Fake Polling Firm Admits Fabricated Data, Exposing Industry Vulnerabilities

A polling firm, Wedgewood Polls, admitted this week to fabricating data for its surveys, characterizing the act as an "experimental project" designed to expose "vulnerabilities" within the polling industry. This revelation has cast a shadow over the reliability of polling data and its influence on electoral campaigns, particularly as candidates claim their efforts were negatively impacted by the false numbers.

Following an inquiry from election analysis website FiftyPlusOne regarding its data and methodologies, Wedgewood Polls issued a statement on social media, asserting the project's aim was to demonstrate "how easy it is for an entirely fabricated polling firm to gain traction, be taken seriously, and expose how little scrutinization exists in media and public commentary?" The deleted statement further claimed that distributing false data was "far too easy" and pointed to a "systemic breakdown in media vetting and data aggregation."

Wedgewood's fabricated polls had been cited in reporting by national outlets including The New York Times, Newsweek, MS NOW, and POLITICO. The New York Times, which had referenced approximately 15 Wedgewood polls between June and October, has since removed the data from its published stories. In an editor's note, the publication outlined its poll verification process, stating that Wedgewood had provided answers to its inquiries concerning pollster identities, sampling methods, and funding sources prior to publication.

This incident follows a similar case in August where a company named Median Strategies was found to have fabricated polls for races in Wisconsin, Nevada, and California, also describing its actions as a "social experiment" to the Los Angeles Times.

"It's very troubling that we've had two examples of this within a very short period of time during election campaigns, creating a lot of problems for legitimate polling," said Michael Traugott, a professor emeritus of political science at the University of Michigan and former president of the American Association for Public Opinion Research.

Wedgewood Polls described itself as a "fictional entity run by a small group of industry veterans" on its now-defunct X account. G. Elliot Morris, a pollster and journalist with FiftyPlusOne, stated that his team became suspicious of a rise in new, anonymous polling firms and that an anonymous tip led them to investigate Wedgewood. FiftyPlusOne noted that Wedgewood operated like a legitimate firm, collecting funds for crowd-funded polls and sharing data.

According to FiftyPlusOne, Wedgewood identified Jack Sims and Andrew Prater in connection with the company. Sims reportedly had previous experience in the polling industry. SoCal Strategies, another polling firm, confirmed that Sims had worked with them but was no longer employed there. TIME has been unable to reach Sims for comment.

"This event does not help what is a decades-long trend of declining confidence in the polling industry," Morris commented on Sims' involvement.

Democratic Michigan state Sen. Mallory McMorrow stated that a fabricated poll from Wedgewood, which showed her support at only 9%, contributed to the collapse of her campaign. She suspended her campaign on July 5, shortly after the poll's release and after donations reportedly ceased. Jennifer Holdsworth, a strategist who supported McMorrow, claimed the fake poll was used by donors to withdraw funding during a period of significant financial disadvantage.

FCC Chair Brendan Carr noted a "significant surge" in fake polls, criticizing news outlets for amplifying them without adequate verification. Democratic FCC Commissioner Anna Gomez responded that fraudulent pollsters should be held accountable, but broadcasters reporting publicly available data in good faith should not be penalized.

While rare, polls generally play a substantial role in shaping electoral narratives. Traugott explained that polls can influence voting behavior, financial contributions, and campaign efforts, citing the "bandwagon effect" where voters are more likely to support candidates perceived as winners. Research indicates that polls can demobilize minority support and mobilize the majority, with moderate voters being particularly susceptible to polling influence.

Michael Dimock, president of the Pew Research Center, advised caution in over-interpreting pre-election polls, especially in close races. He highlighted that polls often struggle to accurately capture voter turnout or "enthusiasm differences," which are crucial but immeasurable factors in predicting election outcomes.