Analysis: Over Half of ALL Statements Made On Fox News Are F

[JohnStOnge]

Just a little side note about the Public Mind thing about this quote from their article:

By contrast, some media sources have a positive effect on political knowledge. For example, people who report reading a national newspaper like The New York Times or USA Today are 12-points more likely to know that Egyptians have overthrown their government than those who have not looked at any news source.

The Pew study I linked earlier actually had Fox News viewers rated slightly higher (one spot) higher than USA Today readers in their ranked array of how well consumers of news from various studies did on questions about current events.

The Public Mind people adjusted results for demographics such as education and income while Pew did not. However, Pew did report demographics and reported that USA Today readers tend be be more educated and have higher income than Fox News viewers. That means it's very likely that adjusting the Pew Data for demographics would have increased the extent to which Fox News viewers "looked" to have higher knowledge of current events than USA Today readers.

So it can kind of depend on who you ask and maybe also who you survey (like New Jersey vs. the entire US).

[JohnStOnge]

One last thing because the stuff with Public Mind vs. Pew caused me to notice something. Pew looked at 24 news sources. They have the Fox News audience rated 23rd…second from last…in both Education and Income (Daytime Talk audience is rated last in both areas). I have no doubt that I can make a simple model looking just where all the audiences are ranked in terms of education and income vs. where they are ranked in terms of knowledge of current events and there will be strong associations. In other words, I expect that I'll be able to show that there is a general association between being more educated/higher income and higher knowledge of current events. Then, based on looking at where Fox News falls on the ranking of knowledge, I expect that the model will show that the Fox News audience "over performed." By that I mean that audience will be higher than in the rankings than one would expect based on its overall income and education levels.

Apparently it didn't work that way with the Public Mind data. But, then again, they were only looking at New Jersey.

[kalm]

One last thing because the stuff with Public Mind vs. Pew caused me to notice something. Pew looked at 24 news sources. They have the Fox News audience rated 23rd…second from last…in both Education and Income (Daytime Talk audience is rated last in both areas). I have no doubt that I can make a simple model looking just where all the audiences are ranked in terms of education and income vs. where they are ranked in terms of knowledge of current events and there will be strong associations. In other words, I expect that I'll be able to show that there is a general association between being more educated/higher income and higher knowledge of current events. Then, based on looking at where Fox News falls on the ranking of knowledge, I expect that the model will show that the Fox News audience "over performed." By that I mean that audience will be higher than in the rankings than one would expect based on its overall income and education levels.

Apparently it didn't work that way with the Public Mind data. But, then again, they were only looking at New Jersey.

There's an old Chinese proverb that says he who attempts to justify often does not convince (or something like that). Keep on posting and I'm sure you'll eventually prove that Fox is a good source for news.

[houndawg]

No, that's not possible. A more likely scenario is that your backwoods, **** redneck radio station is playing shows from 10 years ago.

Next question.

Christ, you're obtuse. I may have some hearing loss, but i'm not that **** deaf. The only thing that can explain it is a change in the promo's. Either way, it's a **** observation, you pretentious, know-it-all jackoff.

You gonna let him get away with that, Z?

[JohnStOnge]

There's an old Chinese proverb that says he who attempts to justify often does not convince (or something like that). Keep on posting and I'm sure you'll eventually prove that Fox is a good source for news.

It's as good as any.

It's just the truth. Yes Fox News has a "conservative" slant. But this stuff of saying stuff like you're going to know less about what's going on in the world than someone who doesn't watch or read news at all BECAUSE you watch Fox News is utter nonsense. And that becomes especially apparent when the people who say that use Hosni Mubarak stepping down as an example of something people didn't know. When that happened you couldn't MISS knowing that watching Fox News or any OTHER News channel. If somebody didn't know that their choice of what News Channel they watched wasn't the reason and suggesting that is was is ridiculous.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c_9ho8111V0[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3VWc3IO0P8E[/youtube]

[JohnStOnge]

To refresh memories let's go back to a statement made in the article at the start of this thread:

How do Fox News viewers know less than people who literally don’t know anything about current events? If you would allow me to hazard a guess, it could be because unlike people who didn’t bother to watch any news programs, Fox viewers thought they were watching informational content – instead they were being lied to under a carefully constructed veneer of responsible journalism. Later, when someone asks them about what’s going on, they feel like they know the answer when they haven’t a clue.

That Statement was made after referencing a PublicMind survey. I looked up an article on the results of that survey. Here's the link to it again: http://publicmind.fdu.edu/2011/knowless/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;. The world events they cited in talking about what Fox News viewers didn't know about are Hosni Mubarak no longer being in charge in Egypt and the status of the Syrian uprising. Now, just how is it that you propose that the process postulated in the quote above would have contributed to that? Like, when Fox News had "MUBARAK STEPS DOWN" in big white all caps at the bottom of the screen as documented in one of the videos I posted above, how exactly did the process through which "Fox viewers thought they were watching informational content" but were instead "being lied to under a carefully constructed veneer of responsible journalism" result in those Fox Viewers not understanding that Mubarak stepped down?

Look, this is the deal with Fox News: Fox News has a conservative bent and it emphasizes stories that hurt the cause of the Left. The Left knows that and so the Left has put a lot of effort into discrediting Fox News. The Left wants to create a situation in which people will not believe something if it is reported on Fox News because they know Fox News will report things that ARE true that other outlets typically won't report or emphasize.

The article at the start of this thread is another example of that and it's a bunch of crap.