Home | Community | Message Board
You are not signed in.
Sign In New Account
Forum Index Search Posts Trusted Vendors Highlights Galleries FAQ User List Chat Store Random Growery

Magic-Mushrooms-Shop.com
This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.

General Interest > Political Discussion
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Sporeworks.EU Spores for European Microscopy

Jump to first unread post Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |  [ show all ]
Fox Viewers Most Misinformed * 1
    #2010052 -

This one is a no-brainer to anyone with a brain, but for those on this forum without brains it'll probably be a no-go.

The Washington Post

Fact-Free News

By Harold Meyerson

Wednesday, October 15, 2003; Page A23

Ever worry that millions of your fellow Americans are walking around knowing things that you don't? That your prospects for advancement may depend on your mastery of such arcana as who won the Iraqi war or where exactly Europe is?

Then don't watch Fox News. The more you watch, the more you'll get things wrong.

Researchers from the Program on International Policy Attitudes (a joint project of several academic centers, some of them based at the University of Maryland) and Knowledge Networks, a California-based polling firm, have spent the better part of the year tracking the public's misperceptions of major news events and polling people to find out just where they go to get things so balled up. This month they released their findings, which go a long way toward explaining why there's so little common ground in American politics today: People are proceeding from radically different sets of facts, some so different that they're altogether fiction.

In a series of polls from May through September, the researchers discovered that large minorities of Americans entertained some highly fanciful beliefs about the facts of the Iraqi war. Fully 48 percent of Americans believed that the United States had uncovered evidence demonstrating a close working relationship between Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda. Another 22 percent thought that we had found the weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. And 25 percent said that most people in other countries had backed the U.S. war against Saddam Hussein. Sixty percent of all respondents entertained at least one of these bits of dubious knowledge; 8 percent believed all three.

The researchers then asked where the respondents most commonly went to get their news. The fair and balanced folks at Fox, the survey concludes, were "the news source whose viewers had the most misperceptions." Eighty percent of Fox viewers believed at least one of these un-facts; 45 percent believed all three. Over at CBS, 71 percent of viewers fell for one of these mistakes, but just 15 percent bought into the full trifecta. And in the daintier precincts of PBS viewers and NPR listeners, just 23 percent adhered to one of these misperceptions, while a scant 4 percent entertained all three.

Now, this could just be pre-sorting by ideology: Conservatives watch O'Reilly, liberals look at Lehrer, and everyone finds his belief system confirmed. But the Knowledge Network nudniks took that into account, and found that even among people of like mind, where they got their news still shaped their sense of the real. Among respondents who said they would vote for George W. Bush in next year's presidential race, for instance, more than three-quarters of the Fox watchers thought we'd uncovered a working relationship between Hussein and al Qaeda, while just half of those who watch PBS believed this to be the case.

Misperceptions can also be the result of inattention, of course. If you nod off for just a nanosecond in the middle of Tom Brokaw intoning, "U.S. inspectors did not find weapons of mass destruction today," you could think we'd just uncovered Hussein's nuclear arsenal. So the wily researchers also controlled for intensity of viewership, and concluded that, "in the case of those who primarily watched Fox News, greater attention to news modestly increases the likelihood of misperceptions." Particularly when that news includes hyping every false lead in Iraq as the certain prelude to uncovering a massive WMD cache.

One question inevitably raised by these findings is whether Fox News is failing or succeeding. Over at CBS, the news that 71 percent of viewers hold one of these mistaken notions should be cause for concern, but whether such should be the case at Fox because 80 percent of their viewers are similarly mistaken is not at all clear. Rupert Murdoch, Roger Ailes and the other guys at Fox have long demonstrated a clearer commitment to changing public policy than to reporting it, and an even clearer commitment to reporting it in such a way as to change it.

Take a wild flight of fancy with me and assume for just a moment that one major goal over at Fox is to ensure Bush's reelection. Surely, anyone who believes that Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda were in cahoots, that we've found the WMD and that Bush is revered among the peoples of the world -- all of these known facts to nearly half the Fox viewers -- is a good bet to be a Bush voter in next year's contest. By this standard -- moving votes into Bush's column and keeping them there -- Fox has to be judged a stunning success. It's not so hot on conveying information as such, but mere empiricism must seem so terribly vulgar to such creatures of refinement as Murdoch and Ailes.


The writer will answer questions about this column during a Live Online discussion at 4 p.m. today at www.washingtonpost.com.

meyersonh@washpost.com


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Fox Viewers Most Misinformed [Re: EchoVortex] * 1
    #2010080 -

So FoxNews, the most notoriosly conservative news station, also happens to (doh!) have more straightup MISINFORMATION (as in they misinform people!), PBS and NPR have the least, but ask any of the cocksmoking conservative (and wannabe libertatian) retards here and they'll tell you that PBS and NPR are so liberal they're full of shit?

Obviously they paint a more accurate portrait of reality than some other stations, at least if you're concerned with inane points such as the difference between fact and fantasy.

Good article but I'm sure it will fall on deaf ears once again.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Fox Viewers Most Misinformed [Re: EchoVortex] * 1
    #2010146 -

Wingnutx posted this already in the thread "The Liberal Media", where this poll was first discussed, but I'm sure he won't mind me reposting it.

From Andrew Sullivan:

Quote:
EMAIL OF THE DAY: "I read with interest your post today, Fri 10th Oct, on the poll purporting to show that Fox News viewers are more likely to hold false beliefs. The poll and its associated reporting are evidence of leftist bias, but I disagree with you about how the poll is biased. Notice, all three questions have a false pro-war answer and a true anti-war answer, so that the results are obviously conflating being mis-informed with being pro-war. This is probably not even intentional on the poll authors' part.

Imagine an opposite kind of poll asking, for example:

Did President Bush claim before the war that the threat to the US from Iraq's WMD was imminent?
Do a majority of Iraqis support the US invasion?
Did the US sell significant amounts of arms to Saddam Hussein?
Was the toppling of the Saddam statue at the end of the war staged?
A poll asking these or similar questions would doubtless find that Fox News viewers have the most accurate grasp of reality and NPR listeners the least."


pinky


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Fox Viewers Most Misinformed [Re: Phred] * 1
    #2010167 -

So basically, FoxNews is all about portraying the war in the most positive way possible, whether it be with actual facts (like the kind that are really true), or when they run out of those, with who cares what, cause they've still got public opinion to shape, right?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Fox Viewers Most Misinformed [Re: Phred] * 1
    #2010211 -

pinksharkmark said:
Wingnutx posted this already in the thread "The Liberal Media", where this poll was first discussed, but I'm sure he won't mind me reposting it.

From Andrew Sullivan:

Quote:
EMAIL OF THE DAY: "I read with interest your post today, Fri 10th Oct, on the poll purporting to show that Fox News viewers are more likely to hold false beliefs. The poll and its associated reporting are evidence of leftist bias, but I disagree with you about how the poll is biased. Notice, all three questions have a false pro-war answer and a true anti-war answer, so that the results are obviously conflating being mis-informed with being pro-war. This is probably not even intentional on the poll authors' part.

Imagine an opposite kind of poll asking, for example:

Did President Bush claim before the war that the threat to the US from Iraq's WMD was imminent?
Do a majority of Iraqis support the US invasion?
Did the US sell significant amounts of arms to Saddam Hussein?
Was the toppling of the Saddam statue at the end of the war staged?
A poll asking these or similar questions would doubtless find that Fox News viewers have the most accurate grasp of reality and NPR listeners the least."


pinky



This is a totally meaningless post, pinky.

It's not a matter of the true answers being "anti-war" or the false answers being "pro-war" at all. It's a question of what the facts support or do not support. Fox viewers believe that facts or evidence exist WHICH DO NOT. Period. End of story.

Second of all, the author of the e-mail to Andrew Sullivan assumes with no evidence whatsoever other than his biased opinions that a poll would "doubtless" find that Fox News viewers have a better grasp of reality with regard to certain questions. One of those questions: "Do the majority of Iraqis support the invasion?" has not and CAN not even properly be gauged and proven, yet this person seems to think it is HAS been proven beyond a doubt, thereby displaying his OWN ignorance and misinformation.

Empty verbiage, all of it. Better luck next time.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Fox Viewers Most Misinformed [Re: EchoVortex] * 1
    #2010269 -

EchoVortex writes:

It's not a matter of the true answers being "anti-war" or the false answers being "pro-war" at all. It's a question of what the facts support or do not support.

Exactly. What do the facts support? The author then goes on to ask four questions on which a large number of people also hold erroneous beliefs (as we have seen illustrated amply in this very forum). It would indeed be interesting to do a study using exactly the same methodology as the one dissected in your first post, but with those questions substituted and see what the results would be.

Fox viewers believe that facts or evidence exist WHICH DO NOT. Period. End of story.

As do NPR listeners and PBS viewers. All the author of the e-mail is pointing out (correctly) is by selecting the proper questions, one can make FOX viewers look bad or PBS viewers look bad.

One of those questions: "Do the majority of Iraqis support the invasion?" has not and CAN not even properly be gauged and proven...

Really? Do polls not count? If they don't, then by what method can the assertion "most people in other countries opposed the U.S. war against Saddam Hussein" be properly gauged and proven?

pinky


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Fox Viewers Most Misinformed [Re: EchoVortex] * 1
    #2010282 -

You hurt inside don't you?


This poll proves that people tend to believe what they want to believe. Perhaps they should have conducted a poll as to whether water is wet or not.


--------------------
https://www.gofundme.com/f/support-for-renee-goods-wife-and-son

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Fox Viewers Most Misinformed [Re: Baby_Hitler] * 1
    #2010456 -

Yup, I have to agree with Mark. The article oozes bias, and so does the fact that all of the questions have real anti-war answers and fake pro-war answers.



--------------------
"America: Fuck yeah!" -- Alexthegreat

“Nothing can now be believed which is seen in a newspaper. Truth itself becomes suspicious by being put into that polluted vehicle. The real extent of this state of misinformation is known only to those who are in situations to confront facts within their knowledge with the lies of the day.”  -- Thomas Jefferson

The greatest sin of mankind is ignorance.

The press takes [Trump] literally, but not seriously; his supporters take him seriously, but not literally. --Salena Zeto (9/23/16)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Fox Viewers Most Misinformed [Re: Phred] * 1
    #2010584 -

Quote:
Did President Bush claim before the war that the threat to the US from Iraq's WMD was imminent?



He never used the word imminent but somehow that idea was definitely pushed forward. I find these kind of semantic gymnastics fairly tedious though. The Bush administration wrongly portrayed Iraq as a serious threat to world security. Thats all you have to know really.

Quote:
Do a majority of Iraqis support the US invasion?




Undetermined.

Quote:
Did the US sell significant amounts of arms to Saddam Hussein?




I would say Yes. Especially if you include the precursors to WMDS as arms. Its a shame the US took thousands of pages out of the Iraqi weapons declaration. Then we might have known exactly what was sold.

Quote:
Was the toppling of the Saddam statue at the end of the war staged?



Havent seen proof either way. From what I have seen I would tend to say yes it was staged.



--------------------
Always Smi2le

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Fox Viewers Most Misinformed [Re: Phred] * 1
    #2010585 -

Exactly. What do the facts support? The author then goes on to ask four questions on which a large number of people also hold erroneous beliefs (as we have seen illustrated amply in this very forum). It would indeed be interesting to do a study using exactly the same methodology as the one dissected in your first post, but with those questions substituted and see what the results would be.

It would be interesting, yes. Such a study has yet to be conducted, but the author claims to know what the results would "doubtlessly" be. That claim is baseless. Whether you think it is "correct" or not is of absolutely zero interest to me.

As do NPR listeners and PBS viewers. All the author of the e-mail is pointing out (correctly) is by selecting the proper questions, one can make FOX viewers look bad or PBS viewers look bad.

And which facts do PBS viewers and NPR listeners take to exist which do not in fact exist? Give me a specific example, and show proof to back it up. You're conflating the PBS/NPR audience with a few members of this forum, I suppose because they're all supposedly "liberal" and therefore supposedly share precisely the same beliefs.

Really? Do polls not count? If they don't, then by what method can the assertion "most people in other countries opposed the U.S. war against Saddam Hussein" be properly gauged and proven?

Which polls are you referring to? No polls have been conducted outside of Baghdad, and the handful carried out in Baghdad were not conducted according to the same standards possible in countries with functioning communications systems. If a poll conducted in New York were taken to represent the views of all Americans, people in California, Texas, the Midwest, the Deep South, and elsewhere would be howling in protest. Polls conducted in developed nations must be representative in terms of age, sex, income, political affiliation, AND region. But I suppose the assumption of those who take such limited polls to be definitive must be that Iraqis are somehow more backward and therefore have less variation in viewpoints.

Furthermore, the three questions addressed in the original study are far, far more relevant than the ones the author proposes because they cut straight to the heart of the justifications given for the war in the first place. If Bush had said, "We're doing this solely for the benefit of the Iraqi people, at a tremendous cost to ourselves in lives and money, with no real national defense purposes served" and the Congress and American people agreed to that, those questions might carry importance. Those are NOT the terms, however, upon which the American people agreed to sanction the war.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Fox Viewers Most Misinformed [Re: Phred] * 1
    #2010586 -

Quote:
The author then goes on to ask four questions on which a large number of people also hold erroneous beliefs (as we have seen illustrated amply in this very forum).



Im calling you on that one. Please prove these beliefs are erroneous.


--------------------
Always Smi2le

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Fox Viewers Most Misinformed [Re: Baby_Hitler] * 1
    #2010591 -

You hurt inside don't you?

Hahahaa, not when I'm laughing heartily at lame, completely off-target, ad hominem non sequiters like that one.

This poll proves that people tend to believe what they want to believe. Perhaps they should have conducted a poll as to whether water is wet or not.

Nope, it proves simply that Fox is not a news organization but a propaganda organ, and that people who rely on it as their main source of news are dupes.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Fox Viewers Most Misinformed [Re: GazzBut] * 1
    #2010599 -

Havent seen proof either way. From what I have seen I would tend to say yes it was staged.

I don't know if it was literally staged or not (i.e., the people there were rounded up and/or paid to participate) but what I do know is that the footage shown in the US was taken close up to make the crowd appear larger than it actually was. Footage shown in other parts of the world included wide-angle shots that demonstrated that the square was rather barren of people.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Fox Viewers Most Misinformed [Re: EchoVortex] * 1
    #2010800 -

Nope, it proves simply that Fox is not a news organization but a propaganda organ, and that people who rely on it as their main source of news are dupes.

Care to explain exactly how it proves this?


--------------------
https://www.gofundme.com/f/support-for-renee-goods-wife-and-son

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Fox Viewers Most Misinformed [Re: EchoVortex] * 1
    #2010864 -

There seems to be alot of evidence suggesting it was staged but how reliable this is, who knows? Its hard to believe anything these days relating to Iraq!


--------------------
Always Smi2le

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Fox Viewers Most Misinformed [Re: GazzBut] * 1
    #2010866 -

Quote:
Nope, it proves simply that Fox is not a news organization but a propaganda organ, and that people who rely on it as their main source of news are dupes.


I'd say anyone that relies on one source is a dupe....

*cough* Guardian *cough*


--------------------
The punishment which the wise suffer, who refuse to take part in government, is to live under the government of worse men.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Fox Viewers Most Misinformed [Re: st0nedphucker] * 1
    #2010874 -

Who exactly are you directing that comment at?


--------------------
Always Smi2le

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Fox Viewers Most Misinformed [Re: Baby_Hitler] * 1
    #2010924 -

Care to explain exactly how it proves this?

Fox viewers were in error about certain key facts by a greater percentage than people who get their news elsewhere. They were in error by a FAR greater percentage than the audience for PBS/NPR.

The purpose of a news organization is to disseminate facts. We may therefore conclude that Fox either a) broadcasts incorrect information, b) broadcasts information with a distorted emphasis, or c) broadcasts correct information but their viewers either don't understand the English language or are too mentally incompetent to make sense of what is being said.

I was simply trying to give Fox viewers the benefit of the doubt and therefore eliminated answer c), which only leaves a) and b) as possibilities. To disseminate false or distorted information for political or ideological aims is commonly known as "propaganda." The ideological bent of Fox News management and staff is well known. A quick primer on the subject can be found here .

Additionally, as stonedphucker pointed out, anybody who gets all of their news from one source, right OR left, is a dupe.

To say that this poll merely shows that people "believe what they want to believe" is patently incorrect and a copout. There are facts and there are untruths, and Fox viewers believe untruths to a higher degree than others. This is either because Fox distorts the news or because their viewers are inherently stupid. Take your pick.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Fox Viewers Most Misinformed [Re: EchoVortex] * 1
    #2010939 -

All news is biased to a certain extent. Facts are constantly distorted reworded, omitted or even made up to boost a particular case or stance.

Quote:
To say that this poll merely shows that people "believe what they want to believe" is patently incorrect and a copout.


I'd agree that people do indeed believe what they want to believe, for instance an anti-war protestor isn't going to accept stories praising amercian troops for their bravery in the face of such adversity whereas he would openly embrace a story that details the civilian deaths caused by US troops and the barabraic treatment the Iraqis are recieving....

All in all though i'd say the majority of people are stupid, in the sense that they have no real understanding of the situation.




--------------------
The punishment which the wise suffer, who refuse to take part in government, is to live under the government of worse men.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Fox Viewers Most Misinformed [Re: st0nedphucker] * 1
    #2010981 -

Yes, all news is biased to a certain extent but that doesn't mean that all news is biased to the same extent. Some news is clearly more biased than others.

There are plenty of people who opposed the war who have no trouble accepting that American soldiers were brave in the execution of their duties. Anybody who does his or her job and does it effectively in the face of death is brave, but saying that somebody is courageous in the face of danger doesn't necessarily mean that what they are doing is correct.

Facts are facts. People CHOOSE either to accept or ignore them. Let's say for a second that the tables were turned and that US Forces had found a nuclear suitcase bomb in Iraq that could have been smuggled into the United States and used to decimate an entire city, or biological weapons that could effectively be employed to accomplish the same thing. I, for one, would NOT be claiming that they were planted there by US forces, because such a conspiracy would require the cooperation of too many people to stay a secret for long. I would accept that I was wrong, I would admit it, and declare publicly that George Bush knew something that I didn't and made the right decision given the information he had at his disposal. I certainly don't want myself and the people I care about to be killed in some act of terrorist mass murder. To paraphrase Aldous Huxley, I would "sit like a child before the facts" and change my thinking to fit the facts, rather than the other way around. It's easy to do once you realize that it is more important to be correct NOW than it is to maintain some fantasy that you were ALWAYS correct and were never wrong. Many people, conservatives included, who supported Bush's war did just that once they came around the accepting the FACT that Saddam did not pose the threat to the world that Bush said and implied he did, and accepting the FACT that this war is going to cost much, much more money and grief than Bush made it seem it would. Survival is a matter of adapting oneself to changing circumstances, which also means adapting oneself to new information and new facts. People who are incapable of doing so ARE, by definition, STUPID. They live in denial and make one mistake after another until finally their mistakes catch up with them and result in disaster.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |  [ show all ]

Shop: Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Sporeworks.EU Spores for European Microscopy

General Interest > Political Discussion
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Protesters confront Fox News Reporter at Obama's Denver Convention
( 1 2 3 4 5 all )		 lonestar2004 5,704 86 08/27/08 08:15 PM
by ScavengerType
* Fox News is FUCKING CRAZY
( 1 2 all )		 KingOftheThing 2,585 23 07/05/08 01:58 AM
by Libertine
* i hate how fox news
( 1 2 all )		 KingOftheThing 1,598 20 08/24/04 11:45 PM
by z@z.com
* FOX News Ratings Plummet zorbman 708 4 10/12/06 11:13 AM
by StroFun
* Canada and Fox News. - freedom of speech?
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 all )		 Innvertigo 7,257 102 02/07/05 02:26 PM
by Phred
* CNN seeks new ways to Battle FOX News. lonestar2004 579 1 03/24/05 01:37 AM
by lonestar2004
* Fox nearly sued itself over 'Simpsons' parody: Matt Groening monoamine 1,564 10 10/30/03 04:17 PM
by Noviseer
* fox news bias
( 1 2 all )		 Vex 2,593 37 08/03/05 12:40 PM
by shatt

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Enlil, ballsalsa
13,311 topic views. 3 members, 32 guests and 7 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2026 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.034 seconds spending 0.007 seconds on 16 queries.