Texsox Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 http://news.yahoo.com/fox-news-viewers-uni...-212037725.html "Because of the controls for partisanship, we know these results are not just driven by Republicans or other groups being more likely to watch Fox News," said Dan Cassino, a professor of political science at Fairleigh Dickinson and an analyst for the PublicMind Poll. "Rather, the results show us that there is something about watching Fox News that leads people to do worse on these questions than those who don’t watch any news at all." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G&T Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 The kicker is that MSNBC didn't do all that much better. In one question, some 11% of MSNBC viewers actually believed that Occupy Wall Street protesters were Republicans compared to just 3% of Fox viewers. Truth is that partisan news isn't news. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 QUOTE (G&T @ Nov 23, 2011 -> 07:58 AM) Truth is that partisan news isn't news. That's the part the struck me as the most bizarre. How does anyone who watches news confuse #ows with a Republican movement? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2HH Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 QUOTE (Tex @ Nov 23, 2011 -> 07:37 AM) http://news.yahoo.com/fox-news-viewers-uni...-212037725.html That's a pretty flawed/ridiculous argument at best. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 QUOTE (Y2HH @ Nov 23, 2011 -> 08:31 AM) That's a pretty flawed/ridiculous argument at best. Here's the actual methodology if you're curious. Full disclosure I haven't read anything beyond "lol Fox News viewers are dumb!" headlines and the strange MSNBC/#OWS results http://publicmind.fdu.edu/2011/knowless/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2HH Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 (edited) QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 23, 2011 -> 08:34 AM) Here's the actual methodology if you're curious. Full disclosure I haven't read anything beyond "lol Fox News viewers are dumb!" headlines and the strange MSNBC/#OWS results http://publicmind.fdu.edu/2011/knowless/ I don't need to know the methodology to realize it's a purposefully biased poll. It's probably related to a single subject, so in that case Fox news viewers were uninformed -- on that SINGLE subject. Edit: I was right. They're cherry picking certain "stories" or "events" and saying that on that specific story, Fox viewers were less informed than those that watched no news at all. I find this claim highly dubious because it doesn't make any logical sense. If someone watched no news, how would they know these events happened unless they heard them from someone else? If that's the case, the Fox viewer could have just as easily known that had they had the same exact conversation with someone that told them. This is just flat out stupid. It's like they're TRYING to be biased, and know that the only people that will like the story are the ones that ALREADY THINK that Fox viewers are stupid. It's of my personal belief that MOST people are uninformed, regardless of what news they watch or do not watch. Most people tend to believe what they WANT to believe, and that's whatever they heard that jives with their beliefs. I don't "watch" any news program with regularity, but I'll watch Bill O's, and other various videos from time to time. I used to like watching Olbermann from time to time, too. I enjoy listening to opinion pieces. But that doesn't mean I take their word as gospel. If a story interests me, I usually go to multiple sources to see what it's about, and draw from that my own opinion of the "facts", which is often hard, because nobody reports facts anymore, regardless of what organization they work for. Final Edit: I watch Fox news -- and I bet I'm more informed than anyone they polled. Edited November 23, 2011 by Y2HH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 QUOTE (Y2HH @ Nov 23, 2011 -> 08:49 AM) I don't need to know the methodology to realize it's a purposefully biased poll. It's probably related to a single subject, so in that case Fox news viewers were uninformed. Most people tend to believe what they WANT to believe, and that's whatever they heard that jives with their beliefs. These sentences work well together. You're saying you don't need to understand what the poll is about, making an assumption as to its intentions and construction in order to get a biased result. Then you explain why you believe that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 QUOTE (Y2HH @ Nov 23, 2011 -> 08:49 AM) Edit: I was right. They're cherry picking certain "stories" or "events" and saying that on that specific story, Fox viewers were less informed than those that watched no news at all. I find this claim highly dubious because it doesn't make any logical sense. If someone watched no news, how would they know these events happened unless they heard them from someone else? If that's the case, the Fox viewer could have just as easily known that had they had the same exact conversation with someone that told them. This is just flat out stupid. Do they distinguish between watching cable news and consuming any news at all? I watch exactly 0 minutes of cable news a month, what with not having cable television, but I get plenty of information in other places. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2HH Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 23, 2011 -> 08:52 AM) These sentences work well together. You're saying you don't need to understand what the poll is about, making an assumption as to its intentions and construction in order to get a biased result. Then you explain why you believe that. I made an assumption on the "poll" and after reading the methodology you posted, it turns out I was right to make that assumption. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2HH Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 23, 2011 -> 08:53 AM) Do they distinguish between watching cable news and consuming any news at all? I watch exactly 0 minutes of cable news a month, what with not having cable television, but I get plenty of information in other places. The problem is, the headline tends to read that regardless of subject matter, Fox news viewers are less informed than people who watch no news at all. Their methodology, which you posted, then shows very SPECIFIC events in which Fox news viewers were less informed. The headline is misleading. To be fair, it SHOULD read -- "Depending on the subject, Fox news viewers CAN be less informed than those that don't watch news at all." So, in essence, I was right from the get go. The poll is f***ing stupid and their "methodology" was nothing more than cherry picking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 QUOTE (Y2HH @ Nov 23, 2011 -> 08:56 AM) I made an assumption on the "poll" and after reading the methodology you posted, it turns out I was right to make that assumption. Well I think my follow-up question on that is pretty important. When they say "watched no news at all," do they literally mean watched no news or consumed no news? Because I don't see a break-out of a "no news consumption" group in the results. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrimsonWeltall Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 QUOTE (Y2HH @ Nov 23, 2011 -> 03:56 PM) I made an assumption on the "poll" and after reading the methodology you posted, it turns out I was right to make that assumption. How was your assumption right? You guessed that they polled on a single subject that Fox News viewers would be less likely to know. They polled on 4 separate subjects which have all been big news as of late. How do any of those four questions give a disadvantage to Fox? Hell, one of them (leading Rep candidate) arguably favors Fox News. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2HH Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 (edited) QUOTE (CrimsonWeltall @ Nov 23, 2011 -> 08:59 AM) How was your assumption right? You guessed that they polled on a single subject that Fox News viewers would be less likely to know. They polled on 4 separate subjects which have all been big news as of late. How do any of those four questions give a disadvantage to Fox? Hell, one of them (leading Rep candidate) arguably favors Fox News. It was right because the headline reads that Fox news viewers are less informed than NPR listeners. Period. Then they go on to list specific subjects in which they were less informed. This is counter to the headline which is a pure generalization. If that doesn't clear up why my assumption was right, then it's because you don't want it to be...even though it is. Edited November 23, 2011 by Y2HH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrimsonWeltall Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 QUOTE (Y2HH @ Nov 23, 2011 -> 03:58 PM) So, in essence, I was right from the get go. The poll is f***ing stupid and their "methodology" was nothing more than cherry picking. Unless they (a) asked more than 4 knowledge questions and dumped the ones with results they didn't like or (b) purposefully asked questions which Fox News viewers were somehow less likely to know, how is it cherry picking? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 QUOTE (Y2HH @ Nov 23, 2011 -> 08:58 AM) The problem is, the headline tends to read that regardless of subject matter, Fox news viewers are less informed than people who watch no news at all. Their methodology, which you posted, then shows very SPECIFIC events in which Fox news viewers were less informed. The headline is misleading. To be fair, it SHOULD read -- "Depending on the subject, Fox news viewers CAN be less informed than those that don't watch news at all." So, in essence, I was right from the get go. The poll is f***ing stupid and their "methodology" was nothing more than cherry picking. If you want to check the accuracy and proficiency of a news outlet's ability to convey accurate information, you can't poll every single subject ever. You're forced to "cherry-pick" certain major current events. And unless you have some reason to believe ahead of time that Fox News viewers are less likely to know what happened in Egypt, it's not deliberate cherry-picking to make Fox News look bad. I don't see how you were right that the poll is "f***ing stupid" because it asked basic questions on major current events or how their selection of questions was deliberately designed to make Fox News look bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2HH Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 (edited) QUOTE (CrimsonWeltall @ Nov 23, 2011 -> 09:02 AM) Unless they (a) asked more than 4 knowledge questions and dumped the ones with results they didn't like or (b) purposefully asked questions which Fox News viewers were somehow less likely to know, how is it cherry picking? How is it NOT cherry picking? They used 4 questions. Why did they use THOSE 4 questions? The headline is pretty general. It says Fox news viewers are dumb, and NRP listeners are not. Turns out it's only in relation to 4 specific subjects. Also, who did they poll? Had they asked me, a Fox viewer, I would have answered every last one of them. Edited November 23, 2011 by Y2HH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrimsonWeltall Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 QUOTE (Y2HH @ Nov 23, 2011 -> 04:01 PM) It was right because the headline reads that Fox news viewers are less informed than NPR listeners. Well, that's the Yahoo headline, not the study title. But so what? That's what the results showed. Fox News watching correlated with the most inaccurate answers for 3/4 questions (and second worst for the fourth). Period. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 QUOTE (CrimsonWeltall @ Nov 23, 2011 -> 09:02 AM) Unless they (a) asked more than 4 knowledge questions and dumped the ones with results they didn't like or (b) purposefully asked questions which Fox News viewers were somehow less likely to know, how is it cherry picking? Right, and if they had a good inclination that Fox viewers really didn't know the basic outcomes of a major event like the uprising in Egypt, well, that's still an indictment of Fox. But where Y2HH does have a valid point is in the overgeneralization and overstatement of the results. This is a pretty limited range of topics, and making broad pronouncements based on four questions is pretty weak. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 QUOTE (Y2HH @ Nov 23, 2011 -> 09:04 AM) How is it NOT cherry picking? They used 4 questions. Why did they use THOSE 4 questions? Unless they knew ahead of time that Fox viewers were less likely to know the correct answers, I don't see how you can possibly accuse them of cherry-picking. They're not policy-oriented questions but simple knowledge-of-events questions. Why would they have a reason to assume Fox viewers knew less about those topics? If they did have a good reason, doesn't that still say something about Fox? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2HH Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 23, 2011 -> 09:05 AM) Right, and if they had a good inclination that Fox viewers really didn't know the basic outcomes of a major event like the uprising in Egypt, well, that's still an indictment of Fox. But where Y2HH does have a valid point is in the overgeneralization and overstatement of the results. This is a pretty limited range of topics, and making broad pronouncements based on four questions is pretty weak. This is exactly what I'm saying. Also, he highlights exactly what I said about this poll and who it's intended for. This poll was tailor made for HIM, and people like him. He already believes Fox viewers are dumb/uninformed. So of course he's here defending the poll. He's even going out of his way to accept the generalization of it's results based on 4 questions. Like I said, people believe what they want to believe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 QUOTE (CrimsonWeltall @ Nov 23, 2011 -> 09:05 AM) Well, that's the Yahoo headline Also headlines are going to be short generalizations. That's the point of a headline. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrimsonWeltall Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 QUOTE (Y2HH @ Nov 23, 2011 -> 04:04 PM) How is it NOT cherry picking? How IS it? I just listed the two cherry picking scenarios and neither applies. Why did they use THOSE 4 questions? Because they're the major current events? What about those questions is biased against Fox News viewers? It's not like they asked "What joke did Jon Stewart make about so-and-so?" or "What color was Rachel Maddow's suit?" The headline is pretty general. It says Fox news viewers are dumb, and NRP listeners are not. Turns out it's only in relation to 4 specific subjects. Also, who did they poll? Had they asked me, a Fox viewer, I would have answered every last one of them. They polled 612 New Jersey residents on the phone. It's nice that you would have gotten all 4, but the point is, that Fox News watchers as a whole are less likely to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 QUOTE (Y2HH @ Nov 23, 2011 -> 09:09 AM) This is exactly what I'm saying. Also, he highlights exactly what I said about this poll and who it's intended for. This poll was tailor made for HIM, and people like him. He already believes Fox viewers are dumb/uninformed. So of course he's here defending the poll. He's even going out of his way to accept the generalization of it's results based on 4 questions. Like I said, people believe what they want to believe. What articles are being written or what people say doesn't actually make the poll "f***ing stupid" or mean that they intentionally constructed it to make Fox look bad. Again, they'd have to have had precognition of the answers to those questions to do so. In which case they're really burying the lead. So, you're right in the sense that the headline is an overstatement but wrong in the sense that it was an intentionally biased poll. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2HH Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 23, 2011 -> 09:07 AM) Unless they knew ahead of time that Fox viewers were less likely to know the correct answers, I don't see how you can possibly accuse them of cherry-picking. They're not policy-oriented questions but simple knowledge-of-events questions. Why would they have a reason to assume Fox viewers knew less about those topics? If they did have a good reason, doesn't that still say something about Fox? You already know how I feel about polls, so why bother getting into this again? There are so many questions about such studies. Who did they ask, again, I ask this because I watch Fox, and I could have answered all 4. How did they get these people? Did they look for the most retarded looking schleps on the street and ask, hey, do you watch Fox news?! Great, answer these 4 questions then!!!! This is dumb. The fact you guys want it to be true again, highlights exactly what I said earlier. This poll was tailored to you. So was the story/headline. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 QUOTE (CrimsonWeltall @ Nov 23, 2011 -> 09:09 AM) They polled 612 New Jersey residents on the phone. This is not exactly a representative sample of media consumers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts