Fabricated polling disguises deception as research, leaving voters and campaigns to absorb damage that retractions cannot fully reverse.
Median Strategies fabricated surveys and presented invented results as legitimate research in the Los Angeles mayoral race and Wisconsin governor’s race. Those false claims entered news coverage and campaign messaging before questions from the Los Angeles Times forced an admission and withdrawal. Describing this deception as a “social experiment” does not change what occurred because voters, journalists, and campaigns were deliberately given false information under the appearance of professional polling. No educational label can excuse conduct that borrowed the credibility of legitimate researchers while refusing named accountability.
American Association of Political Consultants (AAPC) responded with the necessary clarity by calling the episode a deception against voters, the press, and campaigns. Its statement also emphasized that Median Strategies is not an AAPC member, an important distinction when fabricated work borrows credibility from an entire profession. As members of AAPC and the American Association for Public Opinion Research (AAPOR), we believe professional polling must rest on transparent methods, identifiable responsibility, and standards that apply before publication.
Fabricated polling works because it imitates signals that readers associate with real research. A polished website, sample description, methodology language, and confident toplines can create an appearance of authority even when no genuine interviews occurred. That imitation transfers the reputation earned by accountable researchers to claims that have not earned public trust.
Mary Losch, President of American Association for Public Opinion Research.
In AAPOR’s official response, AAPOR President Mary Losch said:
“Professional polling organizations are transparent, ethical, and work hard to provide critical information to the public and other stakeholders.”
Losch’s distinction is essential because fabricated polling is not simply an extreme example of ordinary survey error. Genuine research can miss changing opinion or produce an imperfect estimate while still documenting real interviews and defensible methods. Fabrication creates a counterfeit product that appropriates the visual language and credibility of legitimate research.
Median released at least three fabricated surveys across California, Wisconsin, and Nevada. Its Los Angeles poll showed Karen Bass ahead by nearly 12 percentage points, while its Wisconsin poll placed Francesca Hong ahead by more than 20 points before she lost the primary. Guardian reporting found that Median’s X account had only about 20 followers, yet its claims still reached campaign messaging, news coverage, and larger polling accounts.
Bass campaign graphic citing fabricated polling, taken from Politics and Poll Tracker.
Associated Press reporting on the incident shows how quickly that borrowed authority traveled. A campaign shared the Los Angeles findings, news coverage repeated them, and polling accounts circulated them before the fabrication became public. Major independent aggregators withheld the surveys because basic information about the firm and its methods was missing, demonstrating that verification can interrupt deception when professional standards are applied early.
Guardian reporting later identified the creator, who said he acted alone and built the website using artificial intelligence. His account makes the lesson sharper because a professional appearance allowed fabricated numbers to travel without an accountable organization behind them. Accountability arrived only after outside scrutiny, not when the purported research was released or anonymously withdrawn.
Campaign decisions happen on deadlines that do not pause while questionable data is investigated. Polling can influence where a campaign spends money, which voters it targets, what message it emphasizes, and how supporters understand the race. A fabricated result therefore enters an operational environment where even temporary misinformation can alter real choices.
Retractions cannot undo strategic decisions made on fake data. Created via Gemini
Retraction is necessary, but it is not restitution. Removing a release cannot retrieve every impression, restore lost strategic time, or reverse decisions made while the numbers appeared credible. Public confidence also absorbs the cost because each fabricated poll makes voters more suspicious of legitimate research produced by accountable professionals.
Professional standards provide a practical defense against this kind of manipulation. AAPOR’s disclosure standards identify 11 immediate disclosure items needed for independent review and verification. AAPC’s Code of Ethics likewise connects membership with integrity, honest communication, and responsibility to the democratic process.
6 disclosures distinguish accountable polling from anonymous and unsupported claims, Created via Gemini
Every publicly released survey should identify who conducted and paid for the research, how respondents were reached, when interviews occurred, the sample size, and the weighting methodology. Journalists and platforms can enforce that baseline by declining to amplify findings until those disclosures are available, while campaigns should apply the same gate before using outside polling in messaging or strategy. Disclosure alone cannot prove that every response is genuine, but missing principals, missing methods, and evasive answers are sufficient reasons to withhold credibility.
Median Strategies exposed a vulnerability that reaches beyond one firm or one election cycle. Professional presentation can move false information faster than verification when audiences assume that anything resembling a poll deserves attention. Stronger scrutiny is therefore not hostility toward polling but protection for the research voters and decision makers genuinely need.
Named accountability should exist before a survey is released, not arrive only after outside scrutiny. Every unfamiliar polling entity must earn credibility through verifiable methods, identifiable principals, and a record that can be examined. Convenience is never a substitute for verification, even when the numbers support a preferred narrative.
Polling earns influence through evidence, openness, and responsibility for the work. We will continue to support standards that let campaigns, journalists, platforms, and voters examine who produced a survey and how its claims were built. Fabrication should never receive the presumption of credibility that ethical researchers spend their careers earning.