quote:

---

The extent of Americans’ misperceptions
vary significantly depending on their
source of news. Those who receive most
of their news from Fox News are more
likely than average to have
misperceptions. Those who receive most
of their news from NPR or PBS are less
likely to have misperceptions. These
variations cannot simply be explained as
a result of differences in the demographic
characteristics of each audience, because
these variations can also be found when
comparing the demographic subgroups of
each audience.

---

I don't normally bust out with an Ornery type post, but what the heck. Here's a little mud slinging for ya.
 

---

Posted by Ryan Hart (Member # 5513) on :
 
For the record I prefer NPR and CNN to Fox.
 

---

Posted by Eruve Nandiriel (Member # 5677) on :
 
did you mean "loose"?
 

---

Posted by Pat (Member # 879) on :
 
A quick search on the guy's background shows he's a pretty neutral guy, although he does do a lot of NPR interviews.
 

---

Posted by Storm Saxon (Member # 3101) on :
 
Ryan, good grief. That's not the way the game is played. You have to disparage the source as biased, sniff at the source, ask if they asked x, y, z, etc.

Edit: wrote that before seeing Pat's post. Was not a sarcastic jab at Pat.

[ October 16, 2003, 10:23 PM: Message edited by: Storm Saxon ]
 

---

Posted by Ryan Hart (Member # 5513) on :
 
I was just expressing my love for the liberal media.
 

---

Posted by Storm Saxon (Member # 3101) on :
 
Have a scooby snack.
 

---

Posted by Pat (Member # 879) on :
 
I fully expected the guy to be a liberal hack, but he's not. He has some studies supporting a lot of Conservative viewpoints.
 

---

Posted by docmagik (Member # 1131) on :
 
Here let me edit the article:

quote:

---

The extent of Americans’ misperceptions
vary significantly depending on their
source of news. Those who receive most
of their news from Fox News are more
likely than average to have
misperceptions about the stuff that NPR
and PBS preach. Those who receive most
of their news from NPR or PBS are less
likely to have misperceptions about the
stuff that NPR and PBS preach. These
variations cannot simply be explained as
a result of differences in the demographic
characteristics of each audience, because
these variations can also be found when
comparing the demographic subgroups of
each audience.

On the other hand, people who get thier news
from NPR and PBS also had misperceptions about
certain other things--they believe no one else
has any friends, either, and that Garrison Keillor is wild good fun.

---

 

---

Posted by Storm Saxon (Member # 3101) on :
 
What's kind of fascinating/horrible is Garrison Keillor was giving sexual advice on Salon for a while.


 

---

Posted by Ryan Hart (Member # 5513) on :
 
I like Garrison Keilor thank you very much.
 

---

Posted by Storm Saxon (Member # 3101) on :
 


(Me, too)
 

---

Posted by Kayla (Member # 2403) on :
 
The really frightening thing is that the book title Blinded By The Right doesn't seem to be that far off the mark.

quote:

---

Average frequency of key misperceptions among those who plan to vote for:

President George Bush 45%
Democratic nominee 17%

Looking at just the Republicans, the average rate for the three key misperceptions was 43%. For Republican Fox viewers, however the rate was 54% while Republicans who get their news from PBS-NPR the average rate is 32%. This same pattern obtains from with Democrats and independents.

---

(Though, it should be noted that while the pattern is intact with Democrats and independents, the percentages are lower. )
 

---

Posted by Kayla (Member # 2403) on :
 
What does the title mean? FOX viewers are losers? FOX viewers lose? (Surely, they are too uptight to be loose. )
 

---

Posted by Storm Saxon (Member # 3101) on :
 
Kayla, it's just my way of poking fun at the subject and myself--'dumb' grammar', dumb poster, dumb subject, see?-- so that the conservatives on the site will understand that I don't take the study as a definitive potrayal of them by any stretch of the imagination. As doc mentioned, I'm sure there is lots of stuff liberals are not really seeing truthfully--assuming that the things the study present as the right viewpoints are really the correct viewpoints.

[ October 16, 2003, 11:25 PM: Message edited by: Storm Saxon ]
 

---

Posted by Donny Osmond (Member # 5349) on :
 
So who decided what these "key" misperceptions are?
 

---

Posted by Kayla (Member # 2403) on :
 
That would have been me. I e-mailed the the things that come up the most often here at Hatrack.
 

---

Posted by Kayla (Member # 2403) on :
 
Actually, they gave the answer in the analysis.

quote:

---

From January through September 2003, PIPA/Knowledge Networks conducted seven different polls that dealt with the conflict with Iraq. Among other things, PIPA/KN probed respondents for key perceptions and beliefs as well as for their attitudes on what US policy should be. In the course of doing this, it was discovered that a substantial portion of the public had a number of misconceptions that were demonstrably false, or were at odds with the dominate view in the intelligence community.

---

It's on page three.

[ October 16, 2003, 11:34 PM: Message edited by: Kayla ]
 

---

Posted by A Rat Named Dog (Member # 699) on :
 
I wonder if the data shifts at all if you add in "misconceptions" whose benefits fall on the other side of the partisan lines. A list of things recently said by Michael Moore would do.

It seems, to my mind, that Fox News has the most of these particular misconceptions because they have a decided conservative slant, and it helps their cause to let those misconceptions linger. It seems reasonable to me that a more liberal news source might engender a whole different set of misconceptions.

I think that once a news source passes tests on BOTH sides of the partisan lines, THEN we can use this kind of data to hold it up as being unusually reliable.

[ October 17, 2003, 04:31 AM: Message edited by: A Rat Named Dog ]
 

---

Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :
 
That's a good point Geoff.

So, where do most Hatrackers get their news? My primary sources of news are NPR, The BBC News website, and the Weekly World News, or as I like to call it, "The Paper".

For science news my primary source is New Scientist, both in print and online.
 

---

Posted by Robespierre (Member # 5779) on :
 

quote:

---

So, where do most Hatrackers get their news?

---

Some of my news sources.

Liberal Slant:

New York Times
CNN
NPR
Salon.com

Nuetral:

Scientific American
Slashdot
MSNBC

Conservative:

Fox News
Capitalism Magazine
Media Research Center mediaresearch.org
 

---

Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :
 
Oh, yeah, I forgot about Salon.com. I hit it most days. I also usually watch a half hour or so of FOX news when I go to the gym, simply because it's usually either that or sports.

I usually visit Slate.com about once a day too, and occasionally go to www.bangkokpost.com. Their print newspaper is much better than their site though.

[ October 17, 2003, 09:22 AM: Message edited by: Noemon ]
 

---

Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
 
Heh, I'd call Slashdot "all over the place" or "inscrutable" before I'd call it neutral .
 

---

Posted by Robespierre (Member # 5779) on :
 

quote:

---

Heh, I'd call Slashdot "all over the place" or "inscrutable" before I'd call it neutral

---

quote:

---

This "study," however, turns out to be pure propaganda. (It's here, in PDF form.) The "untrue positions" the survey measured are these:

"Saddam Hussein has been directly linked with the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks."

"Weapons of mass destruction have already been found in Iraq."

"World opinion favored the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq."

Here are some demonstrable untruths the survey didn't ask its subjects about:

President Bush said Iraq posed an "imminent" threat.

Bush claimed Iraq had bought uranium from Niger.

America's intervention in Iraq was unilateral.

Would not a fair survey have included examples of the misperceptions on both sides?

---

quote:

---

And I think that you should add to your conservatve slanted organizations,

---

quote:

---

Some of my news sources.

---

I agree that EIB(Rush Limbaugh) and the others you mentioned are conservative, however they are not news sources to me.

As for MSNBC, why do you think they are conservative? They have Scarborough on who is conservative himself, but Chris Matthiews and others seem to balance him out. As for their news reporting, I cannot see a political slant, only the slant of wanting to be sensationalistic about everything.
 

---

Posted by Storm Saxon (Member # 3101) on :
 
Personally, I find both CNN and FOX to be wretched and sensationalistic.
 

---

Posted by Storm Saxon (Member # 3101) on :
 
Rob, I don't know that MSNBC is 'conservative'. I do think they make more of an effort to reach out to conservative viewers than CNN. I mean, they had Michael Savage there for a while....


 

---

Posted by Storm Saxon (Member # 3101) on :
 
Now that I think of it, they did let Phil Donahue's show go, despite the fact that it was their most popular show. So....
 

---

Posted by Rhaegar The Fool (Member # 5811) on :
 
You missunderstand me. When I said that MSNBC is slanted, I meant that they are slanted to the left.

-Rhaegar
 

---

Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
 
My therapist told me to avoid the news because it was making me anxious and people would tell me if anything really important happened. Now and then I ask Survivor if anything worth knowing about has happened.
 

---

Posted by JonnyNotSoBravo (Member # 5715) on :
 
pooka: you really shouldn't get your news from "reality" TV shows about people on a site out in the middle of nowhere. They're all about isolationism, and never include world opinions.
 

---