Quote:
Originally Posted by MTK
The WP poll said only 10% of NA were offended by the name, the UC Berkeley study said it's closer to 50%. Even if you split the difference that's 30%. To me that's enough to say a change is justified.
|
The Washington Post study roughly matched the findings of earlier surveys done by Sports Illustrated and the Annenberg Foundation. The two periodicals have stellar reputations as does the latter non-profit.
The UC Berkeley study used different methodology. Not surprising considered it likely had an agenda. The authors themselves admitted theirs was not a truly national sample while the others were. For details, you can glance at a not entirely sympathetic (to the Skins' name) article on today's National Review entitled
Hail (and Farewell) to the Redskins.
In any case, the 30% variance is dubious and does not even total one-third. But history shows that small, energized groups often win. It's all moot now.