Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Hahaha (on Fox News)

  1. Oct 27, 2003 #1
    hahahaha (on Fox News)

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A27061-2003Oct14.html

    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.
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Oct 27, 2003 #2

    Njorl

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    Fox News - the more you watch, the less you know!

    It could be their new slogan.

    Njorl
     
  4. Oct 27, 2003 #3
    Yeah, Fox "News" is just a mouthpiece for the Bush administration, we all know that.
     
  5. Oct 27, 2003 #4
    I love watching the factor...
     
  6. Oct 27, 2003 #5
    Creative lying is rather entertaining, isn't it?
     
  7. Oct 27, 2003 #6
    It is very entertaining
     
  8. Oct 27, 2003 #7

    Njorl

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

  9. Oct 27, 2003 #8
    Yeah, because all those facts are so boring!!! Plus, I'm sure it helps Fox's bottom line when they eliminate fact-checking from the costs of putting together a broadcast.
     
  10. Oct 27, 2003 #9
    Im buying that t-shirt with my next paycheck!
     
  11. Oct 27, 2003 #10
    "Educating America's Moron Majority Since 2002"

    LMAO!!
     
  12. Oct 27, 2003 #11

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Wow, a commentary in a liberal media source thats critical of a conservative one. Shocking.

    In any case, I skimmed through the report - not the news commentary, the report on which it was commenting. Interesting.
     
    Last edited: Oct 27, 2003
  13. Oct 28, 2003 #12
    Russ, the liberal media is a myth.
     
  14. Oct 28, 2003 #13
    The idea that liberals control the media is a myth. There are liberal news sources (The San Fransisco Chronical, The Nation). The Washington Post is certaintly a lot more liberal than Fox News.
     
  15. Oct 28, 2003 #14
    That's not saying much...the only thing further to the right than Faux News, is ...thinking, thinking...probably in jail for murdering an abortion provider? I know that there is a liberal media, but CNN ain't it.
     
    Last edited: Oct 28, 2003
  16. Oct 29, 2003 #15

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Did anyone catch the new Fox commentator used a few times during the Iraq invasion: Mark Furman - the bad, radical-right wing cop who went to Idaho to live with skin head types after being disgraced at the OJ trial for tampering with evidence?

    That was it for me.

    If we consider Jessie Helms a moderate, then the media is liberal.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?



Similar Discussions: Hahaha (on Fox News)
  1. Fox News? President? Duh (Replies: 57)

  2. Should Fox News be banned (Replies: 325)

  3. Fox News (Replies: 76)

  4. Fox News: Whoops Again (Replies: 64)

Loading...