Back in August, 2004, MSNBC had a poll that the only way to answer it was to buy into Republican talking points. To which, I created my own poll asking ' What are the journalistic implications of MSNBC's recent poll?’

This poll came to mind for me this evening when WTNH asked, “Should students be held accountable for what they post online?”

That is sort of like asking, “should people eat cheese?” It completely depends on the context. Many people probably should eat cheese, but people with severe lactose intolerance probably shouldn’t.

The problem, of course, is that this question was asked in the context of Avery Doninger being punished for what she posted online from home, by the school administration.

Perhaps an better analogy would be, “Should advertisers abandon WTNH when it posts polls that lead to a lack of understanding of the story they are trying to cover?”

Other people have suggested other polls like
"Should students be monitored 24-7 by the government?"
Should school administrator's be allowed to trample student's protected speech?"
"Is it okay with you if government officials usurp your parenting authority in your home at 9PM?"
“Should administrators be able to punish citizens for exercising constitutionally-protected free speech?”
And my favorite,
“Should school administrators be able to hold former students accountable for poorly worded polls that they post online, including having such students rights to speak on television removed?”

These questions, with the possible exception of the last, would get more closely to the real issues of the Avery Doninger case.

What questions do you think WTNH should have asked, or should we be asking of WTNH and their advertisers?