I don't like spam and junk phone calls. I have an unlisted telephone number (I was once plagued by phone solicitors). I'm now signed up on the national "do not call" list. I get all my snail mail through a P.O. box (all junk mail goes straight in the trash without being opened). I have a deliberately unusual e-mail address that is not on any of the spam dictionaries. I have been careful to protect my e-mail address from Internet robots. I never reply to spam e-mail which I now seldom receive (I abandoned an earlier e-mail address because it was rendered unusable by spam).

I think broadcast television is harmful to children. There is no television antenna on the roof of my house and I don't have cable (my kids only watch videos and DVDs that my wife and I have selected for them). Long ago, I concluded the MSM were a bunch of partisan liars. I now get most of my news from the Interent and feel I'm better informed than most people who get their news only from television.

Although I've gone to great lengths to protect my privacy, I don't think I'm that far from the center of the bell curve. I suspect most people are tired of spam, junk e-mail and phone calls. Like myself, I think most people have made efforts to insure their privacy.

What effect does all of this have on political polls? If the only people that pollsters can access are the ones too stupid to get unlisted telephone numbers and protect themselves against spam then surely there must be systematic bias in the pollster's sample? Comments?

Gary