Are You Well Informed? Take the Pew Poll

[GannonFan]

11 out of 11 here. Really didn't think it was all that hard, either.

[native]

Goddamn! Only 5% of the country got all 11 correct? This country is populated by a bunch of morons!! Who the hell didn't know all these answers?

Aw, c'mon, DD! Most folks do not take these quizzes seriously. Anybody can be distracted for a coupla questions. Who among us has never stumbled?

[OSBF]

... I just took the "How Millenial are you quiz", I don't belong in my generation, which is something I knew before I took the quiz. ...

I took your Millennial Quiz, Clenz, and scored a 36, which makes me a "Gen Xer," even though I am a boomer.

i scored a 69, almost a millennial, but i'm waaaay older than that

did i mention that 69 is one of my favorite numbers

[mebison]

Missed the two I second-guessed myself on. The children of illegal immigrants one I thought "yes" right away, and then thought, "wait, maybe that's an urban legend or the answer is more complicated and they are trying to trick me".

Health care reform for some reason I was thinking had gone through at the end of 2009. That I should have known.

Anyone else think the twitter question was kind of random and didn't fit?

[uofmman1122]

11.

Rather easily, too. Not surprising that only 19% got the new British PM question right. Even worse that only 11% of my age demographic knew it. lol

[native]

...Anyone else think the twitter question [on the Millennia Quiz] was kind of random and didn't fit?

Naw! I figured the twitter and social media profile questions were the most heavily weighted!

[CitadelGrad]

11

[Pwns]

10 of 11...couldn't recall the name of the British PM, and I honestly don't feel all that bad about it. I wish I could say I had gotten the World Cup question wrong, but I just couldn't filter out the constant news and chatter about it in this country.

[travelinman67]

Goddamn! Only 5% of the country got all 11 correct? This country is populated by a bunch of morons!! Who the hell didn't know all these answers?

...turn on the television some evening and look what's on...


...they'll tell you Lady Gaga's shoe size, and what she wore that day...

...but when China's Ag Bank does the single largest dual IPO in almost a decade, or that China has surpassed the U.S. in energy consumption, or Hungary flipped IMF the bird, or Venezuela issued a blanket request (contract) for all available drilling rigs within hours of Obama's drilling moratorium, you'll be lucky to find it anywhere except WSJ, IBD or Bloomberg.

People are ignorant because:
1) They are apathetic.
2) They do not live by the sage: Only believe half of what you read and none of what you hear.

[Grizalltheway]

10 of 11...couldn't recall the name of the British PM, and I honestly don't feel all that bad about it. I wish I could say I had gotten the World Cup question wrong, but I just couldn't filter out the constant news and chatter about it in this country.

I know, right? How DARE the US media cover the single biggest sporting event on the planet.

[Grizalltheway]

Goddamn! Only 5% of the country got all 11 correct? This country is populated by a bunch of morons!! Who the hell didn't know all these answers?

...turn on the television some evening and look what's on...


...they'll tell you Lady Gaga's shoe size, and what she wore that day...

...but when China's Ag Bank does the single largest dual IPO in almost a decade, or that China has surpassed the U.S. in energy consumption, or Hungary flipped IMF the bird, or Venezuela issued a blanket request (contract) for all available drilling rigs within hours of Obama's drilling moratorium, you'll be lucky to find it anywhere except WSJ, IBD, The Economist, NYT, Washington Post, BBC, NPR or Bloomberg.

People are ignorant because:
1) They are apathetic.
2) They do not live by the sage: Only believe half of what you read and none of what you hear.

You missed a couple, but I suppose those liberal fart-smellers don't really offer proper coverage of such things.

[hank scorpio]

11

The David Cameron question was a guess though.

[native]

Goddamn! Only 5% of the country got all 11 correct? This country is populated by a bunch of morons!! Who the hell didn't know all these answers?

...turn on the television some evening and look what's on...


...they'll tell you Lady Gaga's shoe size, and what she wore that day...

...but when China's Ag Bank does the single largest dual IPO in almost a decade, or that China has surpassed the U.S. in energy consumption, or Hungary flipped IMF the bird, or Venezuela issued a blanket request (contract) for all available drilling rigs within hours of Obama's drilling moratorium, you'll be lucky to find it anywhere except WSJ, IBD or Bloomberg.

People are ignorant because:
1) They are apathetic.
2) They do not live by the sage: Only believe half of what you read and none of what you hear.

Well said, as usual, T-man!

[BlueHen86]

Here's Your Score: You correctly answered 11 out of the 11 possible questions, which means you did better on the quiz than 95% of the general public.

I didn't know the name of GB's Prime Minister until last night when I heard it on the news.

[travelinman67]

...turn on the television some evening and look what's on...


...they'll tell you Lady Gaga's shoe size, and what she wore that day...

...but when China's Ag Bank does the single largest dual IPO in almost a decade, or that China has surpassed the U.S. in energy consumption, or Hungary flipped IMF the bird, or Venezuela issued a blanket request (contract) for all available drilling rigs within hours of Obama's drilling moratorium, you'll be lucky to find it anywhere except WSJ, IBD, The Economist, NYT, Washington Post, BBC, NPR or Bloomberg.

People are ignorant because:
1) They are apathetic.
2) They do not live by the sage: Only believe half of what you read and none of what you hear.

You missed a couple, but I suppose those liberal fart-smellers don't really offer proper coverage of such things.

Please, Grazzle...

...the Times, BBC, NPR and Wapo???

Just this past weekend Wapo's ombudsman plead mia culpa re: failure to publish ANYTHING about the King Shabaz/New Black Panther story until this past week. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 81_pf.html
The lefty's penchant for omission/censorship has been one of their most debilitating faults: The Bible Thumpers/Fox folks spin it, but at least discuss the issue.

...and btw...

...I read NYT several times each week...

...and Sulzberger's audacity (utter lack of awareness) continually amazes me. Last week, I forgot I was reading the Times, then stopped a few sentences into this editorial http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/15/opini ... editorials remembering that few papers but the Times could imply Interior Secretary Salazar was acting to irrepairably harm the environment by opening up sections of Alaska's National Petroleum Reserve...

...and in doing so, channel former Secty. Babbit as a harbinger of reasonable "protectionist" judgement.

Only Sulzberger (or his proteges), could cite Babbitt, one of the leading abusers of environmental law as means to politically control land use application, as a "model" of good judgement.

Very disingenuous...

...or (seriously) mentally ill.

[JohnStOnge]

The only one that gave me some pause was who the prime minister of Great Britian is. I just saw a news story with him prominently featured about an hour ago but for some reason his name just didn't register. But, perhaps partially by luck, I got that one right so I got all 11. The rest of the questions were really easy.

Pretty frightening that 60% in the telephone survey (i.e., the scientific sample that provides an estimate pertaining to the general public) got 6 or fewer correct.

[death dealer]

The only one that gave me some pause was who the prime minister of Great Britian is. I just saw a news story with him prominently featured about an hour ago but for some reason his name just didn't register. But, perhaps partially by luck, I got that one right so I got all 11. The rest of the questions were really easy.

Pretty frightening that 60% in the telephone survey (i.e., the scientific sample that provides an estimate pertaining to the general public) got 6 or fewer correct.

The British PM question should be easy to answer simply by process of elimination. Even if you don't know the guys name, anyone not living under a rock should know the other names don't fit.

[death dealer]

If you can find the right plce to click, they break down your response to every question. After completing the quiz, click on "How you did, question by question" in blue in the middle of the left side of the page.

Found that. I just took the "How Millenial are you quiz", I don't belong in my generation, which is something I knew before I took the quiz.

I scored a 78 on that one.

[Pwns]

If you can find the right plce to click, they break down your response to every question. After completing the quiz, click on "How you did, question by question" in blue in the middle of the left side of the page.

Found that. I just took the "How Millenial are you quiz", I don't belong in my generation, which is something I knew before I took the quiz.

I got a 30. Never thought I was much of a black sheep in this generation.

[clenz]

Found that. I just took the "How Millenial are you quiz", I don't belong in my generation, which is something I knew before I took the quiz.

I got a 30. Never thought I was much of a black sheep in this generation.

What year were you born?

I never really felt like a "black sheep" in the generation until the last 2 or 3 years. I see the way the freshman/sophomores in college act/think, and see it in the high schools now and I know I don't fit in

[death dealer]

I got a 30. Never thought I was much of a black sheep in this generation.

What year were you born?

I never really felt like a "black sheep" in the generation until the last 2 or 3 years. I see the way the freshman/sophomores in college act/think, and see it in the high schools now and I know I don't fit in

I was born in '68.

[Skjellyfetti]

I scored a 24 on the Millenial quiz. I probably could have predicted that.

One answer I thought was interesting was... "Being successful in a high-paying career or profession is not important to you personally." The responses went the opposite direction than I would have guessed.

10% of 1981+
17% 1965-1980
25% 1946-1964
32% 1928-1945

My generation sucks.
[youtube][/youtube]

[Grizalltheway]

You missed a couple, but I suppose those liberal fart-smellers don't really offer proper coverage of such things.

Please, Grazzle...

...the Times, BBC, NPR and Wapo???

Just this past weekend Wapo's ombudsman plead mia culpa re: failure to publish ANYTHING about the King Shabaz/New Black Panther story until this past week. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 81_pf.html
The lefty's penchant for omission/censorship has been one of their most debilitating faults: The Bible Thumpers/Fox folks spin it, but at least discuss the issue.

...and btw...

...I read NYT several times each week...

...and Sulzberger's audacity (utter lack of awareness) continually amazes me. Last week, I forgot I was reading the Times, then stopped a few sentences into this editorial http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/15/opini ... editorials remembering that few papers but the Times could imply Interior Secretary Salazar was acting to irrepairably harm the environment by opening up sections of Alaska's National Petroleum Reserve...

...and in doing so, channel former Secty. Babbit as a harbinger of reasonable "protectionist" judgement.

Only Sulzberger (or his proteges), could cite Babbitt, one of the leading abusers of environmental law as means to politically control land use application, as a "model" of good judgement.

Very disingenuous...

...or (seriously) mentally ill.

If you have a beef with their editorial content and their perceived political agendas, that's fine. But they're still good sources for in-depth international coverage, as are the ones you mentioned.

[uofmman1122]

I answered 11 correctly, but I ended up getting 94 on the Millennial Quiz.

Does that mean I can't post in this section anymore?

[travelinman67]

If you have a beef with their editorial content and their perceived political agendas, that's fine. But they're still good sources for in-depth international coverage, as are the ones you mentioned.

This may come as a surprise to you, Grazzle, but I'm a news junkie ( ) that reads/watches/listens to 4 newspapers/6-8 TV and 2-3 radio broadcast news programs every day: Including BBC, NPR, NYT, and Wapo.

You are incorrect that they provide as "in-depth" coverage as WSJ, IBD or Bloomberg. While those three also have bias, they typically provide the most diverse coverage of the major networks.

I'm a big boy and can filter out the bias BS, so regardless of the publisher's agenda, I am looking to "glean" bits of information not found in competitor's coverage. BBC's social engineering bias results in "matter of fact" exclusion of relevant information. NPR misses numerous topics which are non-grata within their agenda (...when was the last time NPR did a piece on declining industry?). NYT, as I mentioned, has become incestuously unaware of mainstream America's concerns and attitudes. And Wapo, under Graham, redefined yellow journalism: A practice which has now become their institutional jacket. All in all, their coverages are lacking.

To be fair, you may wish to question why you would defend news agencies that selectively decline to present discussion regarding the "Global Warming/Climate Change" controversy. It's hard to imagine any news service concluding that topic is not newsworthy...

...unless, of course, their "agenda" is to keep the topic out of public domain and inhibit discussion.

What does that say about their journalistic "integrity" which you apparently feel is sound?