Fox News

[qmvsimp]

Syn kobiety:

• 57 percent thought that Iraq was either directly involved with the 9/11 attacks in the United States, or “gave substantial support to al-Qaeda.”
• 24 percent believed that weapons of mass destruction had been found in Iraq after the War. Twenty percent said that Iraq had used “chemical or biological weapons in the war just ended.”
• 56 percent thought either that most people around the world favored the US intervention in Iraq, or that world opinion was “evenly balanced.”

Of those who said that they obtained most of their news from the Fox network, 80 percent held at least one of the misconceptions described above.

I’ll leave that one alone.It seems that Fox’s reporting about those “communications” mislead people.
People who view Fox are more likely than others to not remember important details.

I wonder why Fox viewers thought those communications were significant.
I wonder if Fox viewers know the level of support from those countries.
The study was clear in stating that many people who rely on other news outlets had the same misperceptions as the majority of Fox viewers, just not as often.

There’s not much more to say. We disagree on cause and effect.

If a seventh grader doesn’t know math, I would say that his earlier teachers did a poor job or that the student didn’t pay attention. You would say that his earlier teachers either lied or misled him. I would say that to claim a lie or a mislead, I would need an example, not just the result. You would say it is sufficient to presume a lie or mislead with just the result.

One last question that you didn’t answer above. If a survey showed that people who watched other news outlets were less likely to be aware of Zarqawi’s connection to Saddam’s son and the countries that supported our action in Iraq, would you then think that that meant they were misled by those news outlets?

 

[qmvsimp]

Cathlicrat:

Why would someone laugh at a legitimate survey…cause the results arent those that fit what one wishes to accept despite the numbers posted?

Is this why the disconnect is so vast in America :crying:

The laugh is not so much the survey as much as using the results to prove that Fox is not news but propaganda. You can’t make a causal connection based on the results.

Besides, PIPA (Program on International Policy Attitudes), the survey taker, is a liberal think tank. Most conservative and liberal think tanks do surveys in a way to further their agenda. They are a liberal think tank first, and a survey taker second.

For example, they do surveys showing that people believe in global warming, including labor and environmental standards in trade agreements, and that abortion is not an issue in family planning matters.

They don’t do surveys showing people think their taxes are too high, that embryos shouldn’t be created to be destroyed, and that illegal immigration is a problem.

 

[Syn_kobiety]

qmvsimp:

There’s not much more to say. We disagree on cause and effect.

If a seventh grader doesn’t know math, I would say that his earlier teachers did a poor job or that the student didn’t pay attention. You would say that his earlier teachers either lied or misled him. I would say that to claim a lie or a mislead, I would need an example, not just the result. You would say it is sufficient to presume a lie or mislead with just the result.

In this case, 80% of the students who were taught by Mr. Fox in the sixth grade believe that 2+2=5. Only 23% of those taught by Ms. PBS make the same mistake. Even after allowing for differences in demographics, Mr. Fox’s students still fare worse. This tells me that Mr. Fox’s teaching is suspect.

qmvsimp:

One last question that you didn’t answer above. If a survey showed that people who watched other news outlets were less likely to be aware of Zarqawi’s connection to Saddam’s son and the countries that supported our action in Iraq, would you then think that that meant they were misled by those news outlets?

I don’t think I understand your question. Is there such a survey?

 

[Syn_kobiety]

qmvsimp:

The laugh is not so much the survey as much as using the results to prove that Fox is not news but propaganda. You can’t make a causal connection based on the results.

There was no claim that this proved that Fox is propaganda, but it does strongly suggest it.

qmvsimp:

Besides, PIPA (Program on International Policy Attitudes), the survey taker, is a liberal think tank. Most conservative and liberal think tanks do surveys in a way to further their agenda. They are a liberal think tank first, and a survey taker second.

ad hominem?
PIPA is a joint program of the Center on Policy Attitudes (COPA) and the Center for International and Security Studies at Maryland (CISSM), University of Maryland.

 

[qmvsimp]

Here is some interesting facts:

Media and Public Beliefs Differ Dramatically

The data above are even more striking when represented in chart form:

http://secure.mediaresearch.org/lizs/MediaB24.gif
Source: Los Angeles Times, 1985

http://secure.mediaresearch.org/lizs/MediaB23.gif
Source: Gallup Organization, 2000

See complete link for info: secure.mediaresearch.org/news/MediaBiasBasics.html

Presuming the media are human and make mistakes, their mistakes are more likely to result in misleading liberal bias than misleading conservative bias.

 

[Syn_kobiety]

qmvsimp:

Here is some interesting facts:

Media and Public Beliefs Differ Dramatically

The data above are even more striking when represented in chart form:

Source: Los Angeles Times, 1985
Source: Gallup Organization, 2000

See complete link for info: secure.mediaresearch.org/news/MediaBiasBasics.html
Presuming the media are human and make mistakes, their mistakes are more likely to result in misleading liberal bias than misleading conservative bias.

Red herring. - This in no way refutes the fact that people who rely on Fox News are more likely to have certain misperceptions than other people who depend on more reliable sources. Are you saying that people exposed to news with liberal bias have a more accurate understanding of the facts than do people who are exposed to Fox News?

 

[qmvsimp]

Syn kobiety:

Red herring. - This in no way refutes the fact that people who rely on Fox News are more likely to have certain misperceptions than other people who depend on more reliable sources. Are you saying that people exposed to news with liberal bias have a more accurate understanding of the facts than do people who are exposed to Fox News?

No, I’m saying that people exposed to news with liberal bias are being misled. And I’m also saying that Fox News is more reliable than the other networks.

 

[Syn_kobiety]

qmvsimp:

No, I’m saying that people exposed to news with liberal bias are being misled. And I’m also saying that Fox News is more reliable than the other networks.

Do you have anything to back up those claims? You have seen good evidence that Fox is the least reliable of the news outlets. If Fox is less liberal, one can infer that less liberal=less reliable.

 

[qmvsimp]

Syn kobiety:

Do you have anything to back up those claims? You have seen good evidence that Fox is the least reliable of the news outlets. If Fox is less liberal, one can infer that less liberal=less reliable.

Fact: Liberals are overrepresented in the media.
Fact: Humans make mistakes.
Claim: When members of the media make mistakes, they will make them on the side of furthering their liberal beliefs.
Claim: This results in biased stories that mislead their viewers/readers/listeners.

 

[Syn_kobiety]

qmvsimp:

Fact: Liberals are overrepresented in the media.
Fact: Humans make mistakes.
Claim: When members of the media make mistakes, they will make them on the side of furthering their liberal beliefs.
Claim: This results in biased stories that mislead their viewers/readers/listeners.

Try this version:

• Reporters are more familiar than the general public with the facts of current events.
• Reporters indentify themselves as liberal with greater frequency than do members of the general public.
• Claim: Greater exposure to the facts of current events results in people developing liberal thinking.

 

[qmvsimp]

Syn kobiety:

Try this version:

• Reporters are more familiar than the general public with the facts of current events.
• Reporters indentify themselves as liberal with greater frequency than do members of the general public.
• Claim: Greater exposure to the facts of current events results in people developing liberal thinking.

You’re great!

I can see we both interpret information differently.

 

[Lizzie]

You’re great!

I can see we both interpret information differently.

Doesn’t anyone ever wonder why cities where liberals rule are so unlivable?

 

[MEP]

Syn kobiety:

Try this version:

• Reporters are more familiar than the general public with the facts of current events.
• Reporters indentify themselves as liberal with greater frequency than do members of the general public.
• Claim: Greater exposure to the facts of current events results in people developing liberal thinking.

Hahahahahahahahaha! Reporters are more familiar than the general public with the facts of current events? That’s a good one. Shouldn’t this be posted in the “Catholic Jokes” thread? :whacky: Exactly the opposite is true.

And I don’t see a liberal bias in the media so much as a socialist bias in the media (of a decidely anti-liberal nature, more in line with the anti-progressive, oppressive socialism common in places like China). I’m really tired of people getting liberalism and socialism confused. Real liberals hate what the Democrats have done to this country.

But at least I got a good laugh before going to bed tonight. Thanks man.

 

[Syn_kobiety]

You’re great!

I can see we both interpret information differently.

Of course, I don’t actually believe my little “example,” For one thing, I don’t believe accurate definitions of “liberal” and “conservative” exist. This just shows that your misapplication of logic can work both ways.

But back to the topic, claiming that there are more “liberal” reporters than in the general population can’t refute that Fox News viewers are more likely to misperceive facts.

 

[qmvsimp]

Syn kobiety:

Of course, I don’t actually believe my little “example,” For one thing, I don’t believe accurate definitions of “liberal” and “conservative” exist. This just shows that your misapplication of logic can work both ways.

But back to the topic, claiming that there are more “liberal” reporters than in the general population can’t refute that Fox News viewers are more likely to misperceive facts.

I knew you didn’t mean it seriously. But just as you think I misapply logic. I think you do.

We’ve already hashed this out earlier. You’re claiming misleading without supplying misleading quotes. I posit that those who are told about connections between Al Qaeda and Saddam, and who are told about the multitude of other countries who supported us in Iraq, are more likely to be confused about it than those who were not told anything. Further, I posit that those who were not told about these things, and who were told over and over that Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11 and that France, Germany and Russia were not supporting us, are more likely to be confused about pre-9/11 connections and Iraq war support.

Your source is a liberal think-tank that chose to ask only the questions that the untrained eye might interpret as misleading coverage. Had they chose to ask about pre-9/11 connections and number of countries supporting us in the Iraq war, the untrained eye might interpret that as misleading as well.

 

[lukefan]

If Fox is required to identify themselves as conservative, then ABC, NBC, CBS, MSNBC, CNN need to come clean with their liberal bias also!

 

[Syn_kobiety]

qmvsimp:

I knew you didn’t mean it seriously. But just as you think I misapply logic. I think you do.

We’ve already hashed this out earlier. You’re claiming misleading without supplying misleading quotes. I posit that those who are told about connections between Al Qaeda and Saddam, and who are told about the multitude of other countries who supported us in Iraq, are more likely to be confused about it than those who were not told anything. Further, I posit that those who were not told about these things, and who were told over and over that Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11 and that France, Germany and Russia were not supporting us, are more likely to be confused about pre-9/11 connections and Iraq war support.

I am not a FoxNews viewer. Can you tell me how to search transcripts of their telecasts?

qmvsimp:

Your source is a liberal think-tank that chose to ask only the questions that the untrained eye might interpret as misleading coverage. Had they chose to ask about pre-9/11 connections and number of countries supporting us in the Iraq war, the untrained eye might interpret that as misleading as well.

You have apparently not read the study.

 

[qmvsimp]

Syn kobiety:

I am not a FoxNews viewer. Can you tell me how to search transcripts of their telecasts?

I’m not sure. Try their website, it has transcripts of a whole lot of their programs, but they’re not all-encompassing.
Syn kobiety:

You have apparently not read the study.

I read everything they had on their website about the study as well as some other studies they’ve done. To me it seems clear that their surveys are to further a liberal point of view. They don’t make mistakes, but the questions they ask and don’t ask are very telling.

 

[Syn_kobiety]

qmvsimp:

I read everything they had on their website about the study as well as some other studies they’ve done. To me it seems clear that their surveys are to further a liberal point of view. They don’t make mistakes, but the questions they ask and don’t ask are very telling.

What do you mean?

 

[qmvsimp]

Syn kobiety:

What do you mean?

I’ve pointed out above the topics of their surveys and the topics they don’t cover. Clearly the topics they cover are interests of the left. They exclude topics from the right.

But specifically with regards to the poll in question here. Asking questions about Saddam being responsible for 9-11 and WMD’s is important. When they separated the respondents by where they get their information, it was to make a point. The point being that Fox News viewers were more confused on these points than the others.

But by not asking questions such as if the respondents knew about meetings between Saddam’s government and Al-Qaeda, and if the respondants knew about support from Spain, Japan, Italy, Australia, et.al. before the war, they missed an opportunity to show that Fox viewers were less confused about these issues and the viewers of other outlets were more confused.

They were only interested in showing that Fox viewers were more confused than other outlet viewers, leaving some, yourself included, to believe they were misled.