The issue of banning the publication of poll results during elections is a controversial one, with proponents concerned about the impact of polls on voter behavior and the fairness of elections, and opponents concerned about the public’s right to know and freedom of expression.
The issue of banning the publication of poll results during elections has become a hotly debated social issue. This is because it is argued that the publication of poll results can influence voters’ voting decisions and undermine the fairness of elections, and conversely, it is argued that the ban limits media access to election information, violating the public’s right to know. In the modern world, polls play an important role in the electoral process, and their influence has only grown over time. Polls don’t just measure support for candidates; they also have a profound impact on voters’ attitudes and behaviors toward elections. In this context, the question of whether to ban the publication of polling results is more than just a regulatory issue; it is a complex one that requires consideration of both the fairness of elections and the rights of the people.
Proponents emphasize the negative impact of publicizing polls based on the “bandwagon effect” and the “underdog effect”. According to the bandwagon effect, the release of poll results before Election Day can lead to anti-surrender sentiment, which favors the candidate with the highest approval ratings. This explains the tendency for voters to vote for the frontrunner in their political camp to avoid abandonment if they believe their favorite candidate is unlikely to win. The underdog effect, on the other hand, describes the phenomenon of sympathy for an underdog candidate that translates into votes, which can lead to a favorable outcome for the underdog. They argue that the publication of poll results should be banned because it has a strong influence on voting behavior, especially as it gets closer to election day, when these negative effects are maximized. They also point out the possibility that poll results can distort reality, given that the conditions for fair polling are not yet mature. Indeed, errors in survey methodology or sample selection can undermine the reliability of the results, which in turn can negatively affect voters’ judgment. Furthermore, the past experience of fraudulent elections and overheated electoral campaigns, as well as the harmful effects of monopolies and authorities, are also cited as reasons to support the need to ban the publication of opinion polls.
Opponents emphasize the importance of the right to know as a means of realizing freedom of expression. The right to know is a prerequisite for people to form their own opinions, and it is the right to freely obtain the information, ideas, and opinions necessary to participate in the exercise of national sovereignty. It is considered essential to the exercise of people’s sovereignty in a democratic society and is closely linked to freedom of the press. This right is exercised by the media on the basis of the “public trust theory,” and can only be fulfilled if media access to information is guaranteed. Public opinion trends, such as a candidate’s popularity or electability, fall within the scope of this right to know, and it is therefore argued that banning the publication of poll results is an unconstitutional violation of freedom of expression. In particular, the role of the media is crucial in addressing information asymmetries, and banning the publication of poll results could deprive voters of the opportunity to be fully informed about elections. They also emphasize that it has not been conclusively proven that publication of poll results negatively affects elections, as no clear evidence has been presented that it interferes with the fairness of elections. For example, empirical studies of the impact of poll results on voter turnout or outcomes are inconsistent, or show different results in different regions or contexts. Therefore, a blanket ban on the publication of poll results in these circumstances could be criticized as over-regulation.
South Korea’s current election law prohibits the publication of poll results from six days prior to election day until election day. This represents a significant reduction in the timeframe compared to the past, when publication was restricted throughout the election period, and this change has important implications for the debate for and against publication bans. In particular, the shorter ban reflects a changing social consensus about the role that the publication of polling results should play in the electoral process. Despite these changes, however, the debate over banning the publication of poll results persists, requiring deep consideration of how to balance the fairness of elections and the public’s right to know in a democratic society.
