A new poll claims to show that a majority of registered voters would support holding energy companies liable “if it could be proven that they misled the public about the consequences of climate change.” However, the survey, which was conducted by progressive pollster YouGov Blue and commissioned by “left-leaning think tank” Data for Progress, lacks any semblance of transparency and relies on a clearly leading question. Taken together, it’s obvious that the only thing misleading the public is this poll.

Zero Transparency

The poll, which was published by HuffPost, fails to share key information such as demographic data and lead-in and follow-up questions. The only information published about the poll is the question referenced above and a graphic breaking down voter responses by political ideology. Nowhere in the HuffPost article, nor the websites of each group, are these necessary details disclosed.

Typically, credible polls disclose this supplemental data in order to provide greater context to the findings, yet no such information was shared here. What makes this lack of data even more curious is the fact that these groups – YouGov and Data for Progress – have frequently shared this information on past surveys, making the lack of transparency here immediately apparent and questionable.

Say, for example, someone publishes a report saying that they found out Bigfoot is real, but they don’t share any evidence to support their claim and instead say, Just trust me.” This is just like that. Because Data for Progress and YouGov didn’t publish any data showing how they reached the conclusions of their survey, for all the public knows, they could have just pulled these numbers out of thin air. No supporting data, no proven findings.

Leading Question

Compounding the issue of transparency is the wording used for the poll’s only disclosed question on climate liability. While the full question was not made public – again, a confounding decision for any credible poll – HuffPost states:

“Nearly 62% of voters said they’d support legal liability for energy companies or utilities “if it could be proven that they misled the public about the consequences of climate change.’” (emphasis added)

Key to this question is the phase “if it could be proven.” Frankly, one would expect support for climate lawsuits – or anything that can be “proven,” for that matter – to be higher than 62%. Left unreported, and likely unmeasured, are voters’ reactions to learning about the significant costs and risks for municipalities that choose to pursue climate liability litigation.

In fact, one study has shown that even if a climate liability lawsuit were successful, millions of dollars awarded to the plaintiffs would go straight into the pockets of the trial lawyers bringing these cases – and that’s before lawyer’s fees are subtracted.

There would also likely be a significant drop in voters’ support for climate lawsuits if the survey had noted that no climate liability lawsuit has been successful to date, with judges dismissing cases filed by San Francisco, Oakland, and New York City.

Of course, Data for Progress disclosed their bias – not in their polling materials, but in a quote provided to HuffPost. Referencing presidential candidate Bernie Sanders’ plan to “criminally prosecute” energy executives, Data for Progress co-founder Sean McElwee said:

“Sanders’ plan to hold corporations accountable for climate change is not only morally urgent, it is politically effective…Democrats should target the corporate polluters that voters overwhelming despise.”

That’s a lot of confidence coming from a guy who has eschewed standard operating procedure and withheld all evidence to support his claim.