Wedgewood Polling Admits Fabricating Data; NYT Pulls 15 Polls, Decision Desk HQ 17

4.8 · 10d ago · US

The Facts

  • Wedgewood Polling released a statement Tuesday night admitting it used "fabricated numbers" in an "experimental project" to demonstrate vulnerabilities and low barriers to entry in political polling. Fox News only
  • The New York Times said it removed 15 Wedgewood polls released between June and October. Fox News only
  • Decision Desk HQ said it removed 17 Wedgewood polls from its projections and that its projected seat totals and chamber control probabilities for the Senate and House did not change. Fox News only
  • Wedgewood polls were cited by Abdul El-Sayed's campaign in Michigan's Democratic Senate primary, and by the aggregator Political Polls in the Wisconsin governor's race, where they showed Francesca Hong ahead of Rep. Tom Tiffany. Fox News only
  • El-Sayed advanced from Michigan's Democratic Senate primary; Hong lost Wisconsin's Democratic gubernatorial primary. Fox News only
Dive deeper · 3 more factsShow less
  • Mallory McMorrow said Wedgewood's numbers dried up her donations and led reporters to press her to drop out; strategist Jennifer Holdsworth, who ran a pro-McMorrow super PAC, said donors used the poll to pull back funding. Fox News only
  • FiftyPlusOne co-founder G. Elliott Morris said the outlet was investigating Wedgewood for faking data and had emailed the firm for comment before the statement was released. Fox News only
  • Wedgewood said the project was never intended to sway an election but was a wake-up call on data integrity and vetting. Fox News only

Context

Wedgewood Polling, a firm whose surveys were cited in several 2026 Democratic primaries, admitted its data was fabricated. Major forecasters and media outlets have removed its polls from their models.

Candidates and strategists say the polls affected fundraising and media coverage. Democratic strategist Mike Nellis called for prosecution; Wedgewood described the project as an experiment. No legal action was reported in the source.

How the Agent Panel Scored This

Independent AI personas each scored importance 1–10; the story's score is a trimmed mean (highest and lowest votes dropped). Vote spread: 2.

6 Policy Expert A polling firm admitted fabricating data that influenced primaries, fundraising, and media coverage, and major outlets like the NYT and Decision Desk HQ concretely removed its polls, but there is no government action, law, or court ruling, so impact is significant yet moderate.
6 News Editor A polling firm admitted fabricating data, prompting concrete actions by NYT and Decision Desk HQ to remove polls, with alleged effects on campaign fundraising and coverage, though the scope is mainly political-media niche rather than widespread public impact.
5 Informed Citizen A polling firm admitted fabricating data that influenced donations and some primary coverage, and major outlets pulled the polls, but the concrete impact is limited to a specific niche of election-polling and no legal action or broad public effect has been reported.
5 Critical Reader A polling firm admitted fabricating data that was used by campaigns, media, and forecasters, with concrete actions (NYT removing 15 polls, DDHQ removing 17), but the impact on election outcomes was limited and no legal action or verified measurable change was reported, so it is moderately newsworthy.
4 Global Affairs Analyst A polling firm admitted fabricating data and outlets removed its polls, a notable media-integrity scandal with some electoral and fundraising effects, but it is a niche media story without new government, legal, or diplomatic action.
4 Business Analyst A polling firm admitted fabricating data and major outlets pulled its polls, a notable media-integrity story with some campaign fundraising effects, but the concrete impact is limited to a niche sector with no legal action, market effects, or broad public harm reported.
4 Science & Tech Analyst A polling firm admitted fabricating data, prompting NYT and Decision Desk HQ to pull polls, but the impact is limited to a niche media-polling integrity issue with no confirmed election outcome change or legal action.

Source

← All stories