Mangahas, Guerrero, Caron and Sandoval/WAPOR 2011 Amsterdam/page 1
THE PHILIPPINES’ FIRST OUTDOOR EXIT POLL
Mahar Mangahas, Linda Luz B. Guerrero, Germelita Caron and Gerardo A. Sandoval 1
Abstract
Prior to 2010, all Philippine exit polls were done on election-day in the homes of those who had already voted, rather than outside voting centers (VCs), to avoid security threats posed by political partisans. These polls were reported on television within 24 hours, and accurately anticipated the slow, manual, official count by two or more weeks.
The May 10, 2010 election, however, was the first nationwide trial for the Commission on Elections’ Automated Election System, which aimed to complete the count on election night itself. To deliver results faster, as well as cope with the security issue, SWS shifted to standard outdoor exit polling, with assistance from the National Movement for Free Elections (Namfrel), the Legal Network for Truthful Elections (Lente), and the School of Government of Ateneo de
Manila University. The exit poll, done for the TV5 network, ultimately obtained a sample of 52,
573 voters from 802 statistically chosen VCs.
The TV5-SWS exit poll’s average absolute differences from Comelec percentages were only 0.401 in the presidential race, and 0.399 in the vice-presidential race. The close match was widely cited as a factor behind highly favorable public opinion on the conduct of the elections.
1 President ( mahar.mangahas@sws.org.ph
), Vice-President/Chief Operating Officer
( guerrero@sws.org.ph
), Field Director ( g.caron@sws.org.ph
), and Director for Sampling, Processing and
Data Archiving ( jay.sandoval@sws.org.ph
), respectively, of Social Weather Stations.
1

Mangahas, Guerrero, Caron and Sandoval/WAPOR 2011 Amsterdam/page 2
THE PHILIPPINES’ FIRST OUTDOOR EXIT POLL
Mahar Mangahas, Linda Luz B. Guerrero, Germelita Caron and Gerardo A. Sandoval
The TV5-SWS Exit Poll of May 10, 2010, done by Social Weather Stations in cooperation with the Ateneo School of Government (ASoG), the National Citizens’ Movement for Free Elections (NAMFREL) and the Legal Network for Truthful Elections (LENTE), under sponsorship of the PLDT-SMART Foundation in behalf of the Associated Broadcasting
Company (ABC), 2 was a first in Philippine opinion research. It pioneered in surveying voters openly outdoors, upon leaving the voting centers (VCs), rather than in the privacy of their homes after returning from voting, which had been the previous practice (Mangahas and Sandoval,
2008).
Home-based exit polls.
Before 2010, all Philippine exit polls had been done on election day in the homes of those who had already voted (as indicated by indelible ink applied to a finger by a polling precinct official), rather than outside the voting centers (VCs; a VC usually houses
2 The project went from dream to reality thanks to the personal approval of Mr. Manuel V.
Pangilinan (“MVP”), a highly-acclaimed business tycoon, philanthropist, and sportsman: chairman of the
Philippine Long Distance Telephone Company (PLDT); owner of the ABC/TV5 network, Smart
Communications, and other giant businesses. MVP had just ended some years as chairman of the board of trustees of the Ateneo de Manila University, when the SWS proposal to do an exit poll for his new company TV5 was brought to him by the dean of the Ateneo School of Government, who happens to be an SWS board member.
2

Mangahas, Guerrero, Caron and Sandoval/WAPOR 2011 Amsterdam/page 3 many precincts), where security threats could be posed by political partisans to both the (allfemale) pollsters and the respondents.
A home-based exit poll has the advantage of being inconspicuous and thus avoiding harassment by partisans, but the disadvantages of needing to move around among the dwellings of a sample spot, and then to wait for voters to get home, perhaps hours after voting.
Interviewing thus lasts until early evening, even though voting closes at 3 p.m., of election-day.
The basic findings of these polls, reported on television within 24 hours after the close of voting, accurately anticipated the slow, manual, official Commission on Elections (Comelec) count by two or more weeks (Mangahas and Sandoval, 2008).
The 2004 Social Weather Stations exit poll, for instance, was done in about 900 random sample spots, and managed to complete 5-8 interviews per spot (with only one interview per dwelling). It qualified as an exit poll under WAPOR guidelines: “Exit polls are polls of voters, interviewed after they have voted, and no later than election day. They may include the interviewing before election day of postal, absentee and other early voters. In some countries election day polls can not be conducted at the polling place, but in most cases, interviewing takes place at the polling location.” (WAPOR, 2006; also on p. 215 in Scheuren and Alvey,
2008; italics ours).
The 2010 election, however, was the first time for the Comelec’s Automated Election
System, using Precinct Count Optical Scanners (PCOS) and electronic data transmission, to be applied nationwide. This time, the Comelec expected to substantially complete its voting count during election night itself. Therefore the only way an exit poll could be done quickly enough to be newsworthy, and thus hope for funding by private television, would be to conduct the interviews as in the more developed countries, as soon as the voters left the VCs.
3

Mangahas, Guerrero, Caron and Sandoval/WAPOR 2011 Amsterdam/page 4
To handle the issue of security for the pollsters, SWS obtained active assistance from the
National Movement for Free Elections (Namfrel) and the Legal Network for Truthful Elections
(Lente), two civil society groups with much experience in election-day security problems, and a widespread force of election-watchers and lawyers in the field. The key role of Namfrel and
Lente in the TV5-SWS Exit Poll was to instruct the field pollsters, prior to deployment, on how to cope with potential harassments and security problems in the vicinity of VCs, and to link them by mobile phones to Namfrel/Lente volunteers for help in case of emergency. All the partners agreed not to publicly announce the exit poll project until May 10 th itself.
Exit polling in the Philippines is subject to Section 5.5 of the Fair Election Act (Republic
Act 9006, of 2001), which states:
“5.5. Exit polls may only be taken subject to the following requirements:
(a) Pollsters shall not conduct their surveys within fifty (50) meters from the polling place, whether said survey is taken in a home, dwelling place and other places;
(b) Pollsters shall wear distinctive clothing;
(c) Pollsters shall inform the voters that they may refuse to answer; and
(d) The result of the exit polls may be announced after the closing of the polls on election day, and must clearly identify the total number of respondents, and the places where they were taken. Said announcement shall state that the same is unofficial and does not represent a trend.”
Preparations. The TV5-SWS exit poll used a national sample of 802 VCs, distributed by region as follows: NCR, 96; CAR, 15; I, 45; II, 31; III, 88; IV-A, 107; IV-B, 23; V, 44; VI,
62; VII, 62; VIII, 38: IX, 29; X, 38; XI, 40; XII, 32; ARMM, 30; and CARAGA, 22. In provinces/cities of a region, the number of VCs was allotted in proportion to registered voters
(RVs), and sample-VCs were chosen with probability proportional to RVs. The interviews of a
4

Mangahas, Guerrero, Caron and Sandoval/WAPOR 2011 Amsterdam/page 5
VC were weighted by its 2010 number of RVs, multiplied by the province’s voting turnout rate in 2004, the last previous presidential election year.
SWS did the TV5-SWS Exit Poll without outsourcing any operations. It fielded over
1,800 persons, and had 110 encoding stations in its office to accommodate incoming data. The time-line was extremely tight: March 16 – concept discussion by SWS and ASoG; March 29 – interest signaled by MVP; April 13 – approval of scaled-down budget; April 19 – initial core group meeting of SWS, ASoG, Namfrel, Lente, and TV5; April 21 – start of training with
Namfrel and Lente; May 9 – exchange of confidential mobile phone numbers of SWS, Namfrel and Lente field people; May 10, 7 a.m. – pollsters are ready, at their assigned VC sites (Annex
1).
The TV5-SWS pollsters were taught that exit polling is legal, and part of freedom of speech, per ruling of the Supreme Court (Panganiban, 2000; Mangahas, 2004). They were trained to be strictly non-partisan, to approach voters at a steady pace during voting hours, and not to accept voters volunteering to be interviewed. It helped that this was the first election when the Comelec included the legality of exit polling in its pre-election public information efforts.
The questionnaire of the TV5-SWS Exit Poll was jointly designed by SWS and ASoG.
In addition to asking about votes for national candidates, and standard demographics (gender, age, education, social class, religion, etc.), it asked (a) if “platform” or else “personality” was the basis for choice of president, (b) for the time when the choice of president was made, (c) whether voting was easier or harder now than before, and about expectations regarding (d) governance,
(e) personal quality of life, and (f) the national economy. A soft copy of the raw data will be available for public use in due course.
5

Mangahas, Guerrero, Caron and Sandoval/WAPOR 2011 Amsterdam/page 6
Commonalities. The operations of outdoor and indoor exit polling are similar in certain respects, and different in others. Selection of sample points and respondents should be random.
Respondents, if chosen, must participate voluntarily; they are even reminded of their right to refuse. Those who volunteer to be interviewed are rejected; self-selection is forbidden.
Problems of transportation and communications are similar, except that VCs, being public elementary school buildings, tend to be centrally located in the villages, whereas dwellings tend to be dispersed. Extremes in outdoor weather are more straining to outdoor pollsters. Heavy rains occurred in Regions VI, XII, ARMM and Caraga.
Differences. Exiting voters might have multiple routes out of a VC, out of the building itself, and also along roads or paths; fifty meters is farther away than most car-owners like to park, so it’s fortunate for exit polling that they are only a minority. Interviewers may have to change locations during the day.
Delays in the voting process, due to long lines of voters unable to locate their exact precinct, or to breakdowns in the voting machines (Precinct Count Optical Scanners) can make voters irritable, and less cooperative. Malfunctioning machines were observed in Regions III,
IV-B, VI, VII, IX, XI, XII and ARMM.
Ferrying or “hakot”.
It is common for local political handlers to hire transportation to ferry their own voters in batches to the polling places, and back home again. Such batches of voters, being within sight of the handlers, tend to be unwilling to be interviewed. This was observed in Regions IV-B, VI, and VII.
In general, many of the refusals to be interviewed were for fear of being identified by watchers of local candidates. This was observed in Regions VI, VII, and XI. Some voters in
Regions III and CAR thought that being interviewed might even land them in jail.
6

Mangahas, Guerrero, Caron and Sandoval/WAPOR 2011 Amsterdam/page 7
Danger zones.
In some places, the intense political rivalries involve armed groups. This occurred in parts of Regions IX, X, XII, CAR, ARMM, and Caraga. In Region I, the field interviewers refused to work in Abra province until personally accompanied by their supervisor.
In Tawi-Tawi, two village captains had an quarrel which only stopped when a policeman fired a warning shot. In Maguindanao, interviewers heard gunshots; there also was a bomb explosion in an elementary school. Interviewers were verbally harangued in Cotabato City; some were suspected of being secret agents.
The worst case of harassment was in Sultan Kudarat, Region XII, where two interviewers were forcibly taken by armed men to the house of the village captain, per instruction of the mayor, and their cellphones confiscated. After questioning for four hours, they were fed and released unharmed, but forbidden to do exit polling; so they worked in an adjacent village instead.
Luckily, none of the exit poll field staff came to serious physical harm.
The outcome. The great surprise of the TV5-SWS Exit Poll was that the response of
Filipino voters to being polled at the voting centers was much more than we had bargained for.
The exit poll had aimed for a ratio of 40 interviews completed during voting hours per voting center (VC), from 802 sample-VCs, or a total of some 32,000 interviews.
SWS was agog at the inundation of interview worksheets spewing out of its fax machines in the afternoon of May 10th, and throughout the night. A number of reports were dictated by phone; some came via courier, and a few by email. Most of the supplementary encoding staff worked non-stop for 12 hours, though some even stayed up to 4 a.m. But we had to return 70 rented computers on May 11 th
, after which the regular SWS encoders took over. By 9 p.m. of
May 11, exit poll results had been computed from an unprecedented total of 35,825 interviews,
7

Mangahas, Guerrero, Caron and Sandoval/WAPOR 2011 Amsterdam/page 8 from 731 sample VCs. Ultimately, the exit poll achieved a massive sample of 52,573 completions from the full set of 802 VCs, or an average of 66 per VC.
The sample amounted to 60 percent of the 87,885 voters approached by the SWS pollsters on election-day. I think that is a high response rate, considering that the law requires exit pollsters to inform respondents beforehand that their participation is voluntary and that they may refuse to answer. The gender distribution of the exit poll respondents was 45 percent males and 52 percent females (the rest being unrecorded).
3
The equally surprising rapidity of the Comelec’s releases of vote counts on election night put pressure on SWS to produce preliminary data tables as fast as possible, from the data that had already arrived.
The first TV5-SWS Exit Poll broadcast of election race scores, just before 7 a.m. on May
11, was based on an initial batch of 22,398 encoded interviews. In the presidential race, it reported Aquino at 43.9 percent, followed by Estrada at 24.6 percent, of the interviews, of which
98.0 percent were valid votes, i.e. excluding votes for the disqualified candidate Acosta, and non-answers. Division by 0.980 put the Aquino vote at 44.8 percent and the Estrada vote at 25.1 percent of the valid votes. As the exit poll’s sample size grew, the big Aquino lead was
3 For comparison, the 2004 U.S. national exit poll by Edison Media Research and Mitofsky
International, designed to cover all 50 state-races, obtained a sample of 114,559 voters from 1,460 voting precincts, or a ratio of 78 voters per precinct. Interestingly, the ratio of completions to completions-plusrefusals was also about 60 percent, and the ratio of males to females among the respondents was 46:54.
Thus it appears that Filipinos and Americans are equally willing to reveal their votes to exit pollsters, and that Filipino women, like American women, are slightly more willing than men to do so.
8

Mangahas, Guerrero, Caron and Sandoval/WAPOR 2011 Amsterdam/page 9 maintained. This was widely expected, since Aquino had led all the pre-election surveys since
November 2009 (Chart 1).
It was in the tight vice-presidential race that the massiveness of the exit poll sample really mattered. Chart 2 shows that Binay was still in third place in March, but moved up to second in
April, then was tied for the lead by the first week of May, and kept up the momentum to win on
May 10 th
.
The 7 a.m. May 11 exit poll report had the Binay votes at 40.4 percent and the Roxas votes at 39.5 percent of the interviews, of which 96.8 percent were valid votes, i.e., excluding stray votes. Division by 0.968 put the Binay vote at 41.7 percent and the Roxas vote at 40.8 percent of the valid votes of the preliminary sample, or only a 0.9 point lead for Binay.
As of 9 p.m. of May 11, the number of encoded interviews had reached 35,825.
At that point, the Binay votes were 40.7 percent and the Roxas votes were 38.3 percent of the interviews, of which 96.4 percent were valid votes. Division by 0.964 put the Binay vote as 42.2 percent, and the Roxas vote at 39.7 percent, of the valid votes of the 9 p.m. sample, raising the estimate of Binay’s lead to 2.5 points.
Ultimately, in the TV5-SWS Exit Poll’s final sample size of 52,573 , reached at 6 p.m. on
May 17, the Binay votes were 42.5 percent, and the Roxas votes were 39.2 percent, of the valid votes of the full sample, or a 3.3 point lead for Binay. That the data arriving later, from more remote or poorer areas, were relatively pro-Binay is consistent with the class-pattern of his voters.
The TV5-SWS exit poll’s average absolute difference from Comelec percentages was only 0.401 in the presidential vote counts for the nine candidates (Table 1), and only 0.399 in the
9

Mangahas, Guerrero, Caron and Sandoval/WAPOR 2011 Amsterdam/page 10 vice-presidential vote counts for the eight candidates (Table 2). For the leading six candidates, in either race, the rank-orders in the exit poll and the Comelec count are the same
If an exit poll is generally accurate on the election outcome, then its other findings are of commensurate quality.
* For instance, the TV5-SWS Exit Poll founf the Aquino votes strongly related to education. The Aquino lead over Estrada was 17 points nationally, but was 32 points among college graduates. The second choice of college graduates was Teodoro, not Estrada.
* Aquino got 77 percent of the Iglesia ni Cristo (INC) vote, which its hierarchy had promised to him. Evidence of the solidity of the INC vote comes only from exit polls.
Why did Aquino win the race for president, with Estrada in second place, and yet see his running mate Roxas lose the race for vice-president to Binay, the running mate of Estrada?
* In the TV5-SWS Exit Poll, only 65 percent of Aquino-voters voted for Roxas, while 27 percent of them voted for Binay. However, 73 percent of Estrada-voters voted for Binay, and only 13 percent voted for Roxas. Binay was the top VP choice of voters for all presidential candidates, except those who voted for Aquino. (Table 3)
* Binay appealled to the youth. He topped Roxas by 9 points in ages 18-24, by 6-7 points in ages 25-44, and by 2 point in ages 45-54; whereas Roxas topped Binay by 8 points among seniors aged 55 up.
* Roxas topped Binay by 5 points among college graduates, but Binay topped him by 4-6 points among the far greater number with partial college or partial high school.
* Binay’s lead among Catholics (+4), other Christians (+13), and Muslims (+28) was enough to offset Roxas’ +56 lead among the relatively few INC voters.
10

Mangahas, Guerrero, Caron and Sandoval/WAPOR 2011 Amsterdam/page 11
In the senatorial race, the TV5-SWS Exit Poll correctly identified all of the first twelve, who officially won. The ranks of the first seven in the exit poll were identical to their official ranks: 1. Revilla, 2. Estrada, 3. Defensor-Santiago, 4. Drilon, 5. Enrile, 6. Cayetano, and 7.
Marcos. The next five winners, with their exit poll ranks in parentheses, were: 8. Recto (10), 9.
Sotto (8), 10. Osmeña (9), 11. Lapid (12), and 12. Guingona (11). The next three, who barely lost, with their exit poll ranks in parentheses, are: 13. Hontiveros-Baraquel (14), 14. Biazon (13), and 15. de Venecia (15). In the entire field of 60 candidates, the correlation of the TV5-SWS exit poll ranks with Comelec ranks was .992.
The close matching of the TV5-SWS exit poll results and the official Comelec results was widely cited as one factor behind highly favorable public opinion on the conduct of the 2010 elections, one example being the formal assessment by a highly-respected former chairman of
Comelec: “We all know how the elections turned out. It was a step forward for our democracy and a cause of celebration for the country.. There was no failure of elections, no catastrophic failure of technology or logistics, no outrage over its conduct or results. President Aquino won by the largest margin in history which was accurately tracked by the surveys and exit polls. As accurately tracked were the vice-presidential and senatorial elections. And there was a peaceful transfer of power on June 30, 2010.” (Monsod, 2010, p.2)
11

Mangahas, Guerrero, Caron and Sandoval/WAPOR 2011 Amsterdam/page 12
References
Edison Media Research and Mitofsky International, “Evaluation of Edison/Mitofsky
Election System 2004 for the National Election Pool (NEP),” January 19, 2005, http://www.electionintegrity.org/documents/edison-mitofsky-050119.pdf
Guerrero, Linda Luz B. and Mahar Mangahas. “Public Opinion Polling in the
Philippines” in John G. Geer, ed.
Public Opinion and Polling Around the World: A Historical
Encyclopedia . California, 2004.
Mangahas, Mahar, SWS Surveys on the 1998 National Elections , Social Weather Stations,
Quezon City, 1998.
Mangahas, Mahar. “Election Survey Freedom in the Philippines,” paper for the WAPOR
Regional Seminar, Hong Kong, December 8-10, 2005 (25 November 2005 update of article with the same title in International Journal of Market Research, Vol. 48, Quarter 1, 2004).
Mangahas, Mahar, Linda Luz Guerrero, and Gerardo A. Sandoval. Opinion Polling and
National Elections in the Philippines, 1992-2001 . SWS Occasional Paper, September 2001.
Mangahas, Mahar, Linda Luz Guerrero, and Gerardo A. Sandoval. “Role of Opinion
Polls in the 2004 Philippine Elections,” paper presented at the 60th AAPOR Annual Conference,
Session on Political Issues II, Miami Beach, Florida, May 12-15, 2005.
Mangahas, Mahar and Gerardo A. Sandoval, “Day-of-election polls in the Philippines,” paper presented at the International Conference Methods in Multinational, Multiregional, and
Multicultural Contexts, June 25-28, 2008, Berlin-Brandenburg Academy of Sciences and
Humanities, Berlin, Germany.
12

Mangahas, Guerrero, Caron and Sandoval/WAPOR 2011 Amsterdam/page 13
Monsod, Christian S., “The 2010 Automated Elections – An Assessment,” Jaime V.
Ongpin Foundation Lecture, given at Ateneo de Manila, Rockwell, Makati City, November 9,
2010.
Panganiban, Artemio V. Transparency, Unanimity, and Diversity . Manila: Supreme
Court Press, 2000.
Scheuren, Fritz J. and Wendy Alvey, eds., Elections and Exit Polling, Hoboken, New
Jersey: John Wiley & Sons. Inc., 2008.
WAPOR Exit Poll Committee, “WAPOR Guidelines for Exit Polls and Election
Forecasts,” approved by the WAPOR Council on October 12, 2006.
13

Mangahas, Guerrero, Caron and Sandoval/WAPOR 2011 Amsterdam/page 14
Chart 1 The 2010 Presidential Race, Philippines
Source: Social Weather Stations
Chart 2 The 2010 Vice-Presidential Race, Philippines
Source: Social Weather Stations
14

Mangahas, Guerrero, Caron and Sandoval/WAPOR 2011 Amsterdam/page 15
Table 1 Presidential Votes: Comparison of TV5-SWS Exit Poll Results and Final Official
COMELEC Tally, May 10, 2010*
COMELEC TV5-SWS
TV5-SWS
Exit Poll minus
Absolute
Final Tally % Difference
(%)
COMELEC
Aquino, Benigno III
Estrada, Joseph
Villar, Manuel Jr.
Teodoro, Gilberto Jr.
Villanueva, Eduardo
Gordon, Richard
Perlas, Nicanor
Madrigal, Jamby
De Los Reyes, John Carlos
15,208,678
9,487,837
5,573,835
4,095,839
1,125,878
501,727
54,575
46,489
44,244
42.08
26.25
15.42
11.33
3.12
1.39
0.15
0.13
0.12
43.34
26.38
14.73
10.25
3.40
1.40
0.13
0.23
0.15
+1.25
+0.12
-0.69
-1.08
+0.28
+0.01
-0.02
+0.1
+0.03
Average Absolute Difference:
1.25
0.12
0.69
1.08
0.28
0.01
0.02
0.1
0.03
0.401
*COMELEC Final Tally is based on 238 Certificates of Canvass as of June 8, 2010, 3:17 pm;
TV5-SWS Exit Poll is based on sample size of 52,573 but excludes Can’t Answer/Refused.
Both sources exclude votes for the disqualified candidate Acosta.
15

Mangahas, Guerrero, Caron and Sandoval/WAPOR 2011 Amsterdam/page 16
Table 2 Vice-Presidential Votes: Comparison of TV5-SWS Exit Poll Results and Final
Official COMELEC Tally, May 10, 2010*
COMELEC
TV5-SWS
Exit Poll
Final Tally %
(%)
TV5-SWS minus
COMELEC
Absolute
Difference
Binay, Jejomar
Roxas, Manuel
Legarda, Loren
Fernando, Bayani
Manzano, Eduardo
Yasay, Perfecto
Sonza, Jose
Chipeco, Dominador
14,645,574
13,918,490
4,294,664
1,017,631
807,728
364,652
64,230
52,562
41.65
39.58
12.21
2.89
2.30
1.04
0.18
0.15
42.52
39.17
11.51
2.92
1.81
1.43
0.20
0.43
+0.87
-0.41
-0.70
+0.03
-0.48
+0.40
+0.02
+0.28
Average Absolute Difference:
0.87
0.41
0.70
0.03
0.48
0.40
0.02
0.28
0.399
*COMELEC Final Tally is based on 238 Certificates of Canvass as of June 8, 2010, 3:17 pm;
TV5-SWS Exit Poll is based on sample size of 52,573, but excludes Can’t Answer/Refused
Table 3 Votes for Vice-President, by Choice for President, Philippines, May 10, 2010
VP candidate
Binay, Jejomar
Roxas, Manuel
Legarda, Loren
Others
TOTAL
Total votes for VP candidate
42.5%
39.2
11.5
6.8
100%
AQUINO voters
26.9%
65.5
5.6
2.0
100%
ESTRADA voters
73.5%
12.8
10.2
100%
VILLAR voters
38.4%
23.5
33.5
4.6
100%
TEODORO voters
39.8%
29.5
9.7
21.0
100%
Voters for other
Pres. candidates
35.7%
18.3
10.3
35.7
100%
Source: TV5-SWS Exit Poll, based on sample size of 52,573
16

Mangahas, Guerrero, Caron and Sandoval/WAPOR 2011 Amsterdam/page 17
Annex 1: Letter to SWS Exit Poll Field Staff
May 5, 2010/CONFIDENTIAL
Subject: TV5-SWS May 10, 2010 Exit Poll
Dear field staff of SWS:
For a democracy, during election time, the work of exit polling is very important.
Because of this, many will help you, but many may also try to interfere, with your work in the field
For the success of your work, including your personal security, please keep the following in mind:
1. Know your rights.
Exit polling is completely legal. The Supreme Court has specifically ruled that exit polling is covered by the constitutional right to freedom of speech.
2. Know the law.
Carefully follow the legal requirements about your uniform, ID, and distance from the voting center. Inform the respondents that their cooperation is purely voluntary, and that they have the right to refuse.
3. Do not attract attention to yourselves.
Before election day, keep your exit poll location a secret. After completion of interviews, leave the exit poll site quickly and quietly.
4. Be neutral.
SWS is strictly non-partisan. We are not for or against any candidate.
We are only for democracy and the free expression of the people’s will.
5. Be honest . Follow the instructions for sampling from those exiting the voting center.
Be faithful to whatever the respondents tell you, and do not betray their trust.
6. Be safe. Take all precautions so as to avoid any harm to yourselves. Call upon our friends in civil society who have pledged to help us in the field.
God be with us all in this important pioneering work!
Sincerely,
Mahar Mangahas,
President
17

Mangahas, Guerrero, Caron and Sandoval/WAPOR 2011 Amsterdam/page 18
Annex 2: SWS Acknowledgement of Namfrel and Lente
May 11, 2010 Announcement: The TV5-SWS Exit Poll Included Namfrel and Lente
Social Weather Stations gratefully acknowledges the participation of the National
Movement for Free Elections (Namfrel) and the Legal Network for Truthful Elections (LENTE) in yesterday’s highly successful TV5-SWS Exit Poll.
The TV5-SWS Exit Poll was a pioneering project to survey voters leaving a random national sample of 802 voting centers, rather than in the homes of people who had already voted, as had been done in earlier exit polls. The practice of doing an exit poll in the privacy of people’s homes has the advantage of posing no threat to the security of the field interviewers, but the disadvantage of taking much longer to complete since it involves waiting for the voters to return home from the voting centers. Considering the introduction of the Automated Election
System on a national basis in 2010, it was decided that the TV5-SWS Exit Poll should adopt the intercept-system of surveying voters at voting centers, as practiced in advanced democracies, in order to speed up its completion and reporting to the public.
The important role of Namfrel and Lente in the TV5-SWS Exit Poll was to instruct the exit pollsters (directly and/or through trainors), prior to deployment to their field assignments, on how to cope with possible security problems in the neighborhoods of voting centers, and to provide the exit pollsters with linkages to pertinent volunteers of Namfrel and Lente who could assist them in case of any untoward event.
Namfrel and Lente were involved in the TV5-SWS Exit Poll from inception, by arrangement with their respective chairmen Mr. Jose “Joey” Cuisia and Atty. Carlos “Chochoy”
Medina. However, by mutual agreement with other team members PLDT-Smart Foundation, the
18

Mangahas, Guerrero, Caron and Sandoval/WAPOR 2011 Amsterdam/page 19
Associated Broadcasting Company and the Ateneo School of Government, Namfrel and Lente were not publicly identified beforehand, so as to give the exit poll a low profile and thereby lessen risks of harassment or sabotage by anti-democratic elements. The TV5-SWS Exit Poll having been completed, it is but proper to cite the special participation of Namfrel and Lente already.
19