The exit poll controversy in Hong Kong

Abstract

Direct democracy on a fairly extensive scale probably began in Hong Kong in 1991, when direct elections at the Legislative Council level first took place. On that same occasion, exit poll appeared in Hong Kong. However, as soon as it set in, controversies began. At the beginning, the government was worried that chaos of some sort might arise if exit poll results would be broadcast throughout the election day. There was, however, no legal ground to ban exit polls, so government officials just urged voters not to respond to exit poll interviews. Two years later, the government set up a Boundary and Election Commission to take charge of electoral matters. It then issued guidelines to “regulate” exit polls. It basically appealed to the media and research organizations concerned “to refrain from announcing the results of exit polls or making specific remarks or predictions on individual candidate’s performance until after the close of poll”, and if any organization failed to comply, it would “make a denunciation or censure in a public statement.” This means social pressure rather than legal sanction was the main tool. Over the years, a consensus based on self‐constraint and a mutual understanding of public justice has emerged in Hong Kong, whereby the government would not legislate against the release of the exit poll results, while the media would not publish the predictions before the close of poll. However, over the past 5 years or so, partisan exit polls have emerged in Hong Kong overshadowing all independent exit polls conducted by academics sponsored by the media. This created another wave of exit poll controversies, in which some political party’s complaint against the improper use of exit polls. The government, however, was reluctant to act because the partisan exit pollsters are generally considered to be pro‐establishment. Under these circumstances, in the Legislative Council election of 2008, some political parties called for voters to boycott all pollsters, some public commentators asked voters to lie. There were discussions at various levels after the election, but all fall short of establishing a code of ethics for exit polling. This paper gives a historical treatise of the exit poll controversy in Hong Kong, and discusses how various political forces have contributed to the controversy.