Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Survey Shows That Fox News Makes You Less Informed

samzenpus posted more than 3 years ago | from the fair-balanced-and-simple dept.

News 1352

A survey of American voters by World Public Opinion shows that Fox News viewers are significantly more misinformed than consumers of news from other sources. One of the most interesting questions was about President Obama's birthplace. 63 percent of Fox viewers believe Obama was not born in the US (or that it is unclear). In 2003 a similar study about the Iraq war showed that Fox viewers were once again less knowledgeable on the subject than average. Let the flame war begin!

cancel ×

1352 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Seriously? (4, Insightful)

AnonGCB (1398517) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576200)

Correlation != Causation. This is basic guys, cmon.

Re:Seriously? (5, Insightful)

wjousts (1529427) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576234)

You are right, of course. It's not that Fox News makes people stupid, it's that stupid people watch Fox News.

Re:Seriously? (5, Insightful)

Pojut (1027544) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576272)

Remember folks, just because you agree with it doesn't make it unbiased!

Re:Seriously? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34576356)

Are you talking to the people who watch Fox News, or the people who watch the equally biased leftist news channels?

Re:Seriously? (1)

Pojut (1027544) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576378)

I'm talking to everybody.

Re:Seriously? (3, Insightful)

jayme0227 (1558821) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576576)

If by equally biased, you are talking about MSNBC, then sure. But if you're saying all the other news channels are equally biased than you are truly a special kind of person. CNN and the major network news organizations do have a bias. This is true. However none of them so heartily embrace one side of the aisle in their coverage as FOX News and MSNBC.

Re:Seriously? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34576634)

Are you talking to the people who watch Fox News, or the people who watch the equally biased leftist news channels?

Implying that the existence of bias in the opposite direction is somehow a justification of the hate mongering spewed by Fox News.

Not Stupid but #1 with Stupid People (2)

eldavojohn (898314) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576352)

You are right, of course. It's not that Fox News makes people stupid, it's that stupid people watch Fox News.

Reminds me of a recent Simpsons episode news helicopter [mediaite.com] for Fox.

Bad Science (0)

wonkavader (605434) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576428)

"You are right, of course. It's not that Fox News makes people stupid, it's that stupid people watch Fox News."

You are wrong, of course.

We don't know that Fox News makes people stupid or that stupid people watch Fox or BOTH. No one has done the study.

Let's not replace a lack of understanding of correlation vs. causation with a lack of understanding of logic. (Realising that you don't know for sure that A->B does not mean you now know that B->A.)

That is, unless you've seen a study which shows which way it goes. If you have PLEASE post the link. My money would be on both: Dumb people watch FOX, and then get dumber. (Which seems like it also might be true of CBS, based on one of the links and what I've seen of network news.) But I'm waiting on someone doing a study, before I assume that that's the case.

Re:Bad Science (1)

Net_fiend (811742) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576598)

If you want to fund this study I also have a bridge I'd like to show you...

and that stupid people AVOID news (2, Insightful)

swschrad (312009) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576532)

a large part of the Faux News audience is folks who think they know it all already, and are only seeking reassurance of their obvious superiority.

they won't be angered by this, because they are only good for words of one or two syllables. just nod at the rest.

Re:Seriously? (4, Insightful)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576298)

While I ordinarily find the "zOMG correlation != causation" brigade to be a trifle tiresome, there is a good bit of evidence from other studies that people find ideologically conformant information comfortable and ideologically nonconformant information uncomfortable(albeit to varying degrees: your fundamentalist of any stripe can barely restrain himself frothing at the mouth over the fact that nonconformant information even exists. Joe user just tends to change the channel).

Now that there is a media outlet for almost any political persuasion, it is quite reasonable to suspect that people are congregating around channels reporting from their preferred reality. Trouble is, of course, that there is only one reality actually out there, and it has numerous pitfalls and teeth. We ignore it at our peril.

Re:Seriously? (4, Interesting)

Nadaka (224565) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576538)

What news media outlet exists for a frustrated rational progressive with strong constitutional tendencies completely dissatisfied with every party?

Re:Seriously? (4, Funny)

ray-auch (454705) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576684)

Wikileaks

Re:Seriously? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34576690)

The daily show

Re:Seriously? (1)

Obfuscant (592200) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576544)

there is a good bit of evidence from other studies that people find ideologically conformant information comfortable and ideologically nonconformant information uncomfortable(albeit to varying degrees:

Just as there is a tendency to assume that anyone who doesn't agree with you, or believes something you don't, is stupid. Obviously, people who believe conservative ideas are stupid or misinformed. There can be no other excuse.

Re:Seriously? (1)

jaymz666 (34050) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576688)

stupid, like a Fox

Fox Story + Slashdot Hivemind = Big Pageviews (1, Troll)

RobotRunAmok (595286) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576514)

It's not about correlation, causation, polls, or journalism. It's about shameless, mindless, easy click-whoring. Slashdot pageviews must be running a bit off-pace here at the mid-month mark, so Taco's decided to set that right with a quick snark-fest. Slashdot may make the Leftie noises tech-hipsters crave, but they gotta make a payroll just like any other right-wing capitalist organization.

Re:Seriously? (4, Interesting)

catchblue22 (1004569) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576574)

Since TV news is how most people become informed, I would argue that on the correlation to causation scale, this would lean towards the causation side.

Re:Seriously? (1)

Amorymeltzer (1213818) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576608)

Okay.

But people get the news, and if they make a choice to watch Fox News Channel they are actively not watching another service. There's no need to say that MSNBC or CNN are bastions of reporting, but if viewers of Fox News aren't getting better informed, which is clear from the survey, then yes, by watching Fox News instead of something else they are being made less informed.

I am of course assuming that news is a relatively zero-sum game, but the alternative, that people just like having their already-entrenched views repeated back to them, results in basically the same outcome.

Sheesh (4, Insightful)

mark72005 (1233572) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576212)

Can you mod an entire article "troll"?

Re:Sheesh (4, Insightful)

cream wobbly (1102689) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576258)

Can you mod an entire news agency "troll"?

Re:Sheesh (1)

alta (1263) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576364)

I wouldn't call /. a news agency, more of an aggregator... But yeah, this story is obviously a troll.

Re:Sheesh (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34576424)

I think he was referring to Fox News being a troll.

Re:Sheesh (0)

alta (1263) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576554)

Oh, I was fully aware of what he was referring to. But I think he may have actually read the article, and it's made him stupid.

Re:Sheesh (1)

unitron (5733) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576486)

What was that, more of an agravator? : - )

Re:Sheesh (1, Insightful)

Carewolf (581105) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576268)

Why Troll. The article is serious and fits perfectly with common observations. It is the editorial comments that is something wrong with, but it is not a troll, it is very literal (-1 flamebait).

Re:Sheesh (1, Troll)

Charliemopps (1157495) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576578)

You're right. It would be completely impossible for an intelligent person to have a differing opinion with someone as intelligent as yourself. We should just make a law that declares liberals right, republicans stupid and MSNBC as the national news network while banning all other channels so they stop misinforming people with these scandalous opinions that disagree with common sense.

Re:Sheesh (1)

timeOday (582209) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576294)

Sure, until the inflammatory assertion is backed up by hard data.

Re:Sheesh (4, Insightful)

MozeeToby (1163751) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576394)

Survey Shows That Fox News Makes You Less Informed

This title implies that people were tested on current events, randomly assigned a news source to watch or read, and after some period of time were tested again. Now that would actually be a good and interesting study to perform.

In reality, all the study did was take a survey/test that included current events and which news sources you view, there's no control group, there's no attempt to isolate which is the cause and which is the effect, and there's no meaningful result except to say that people go to the news source that agrees with their views, which isn't exactly ground breaking insight.

The study itself isn't flamebait or trolling, but the summary and title sure as hell are.

Re:Sheesh (2)

blueg3 (192743) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576490)

The summary is only wrong if your perspective has been influenced by the title. It doesn't suggest there was any causation testing, just that "ill-informed" and "watches Fox News" are correlated.

Re:Sheesh (5, Insightful)

Wonko the Sane (25252) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576552)

In reality, all the study did was take a survey/test that included current events and which news sources you view, there's no control group, there's no attempt to isolate which is the cause and which is the effect, and there's no meaningful result except to say that people go to the news source that agrees with their views, which isn't exactly ground breaking insight.

They didn't even limit their questions to objectively provable facts.

Just to give one example: Has the US "lost jobs" or "gained jobs"? The way you word that question is going to greatly influence how people answer. If the number of jobs increased in absolute terms, but the increase was less than the number of people who entered working age due to population growth do you count this as a gain or a loss? Many of the other questions are similarly subjective and easily manipulated.

Between the institute that ran the survey and Fox News it's hard to tell who is the pot and who is the kettle.

Re:Sheesh (0)

SoupGuru (723634) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576412)

What's trollish about it? People that don't believe that evolution occurs are idiots. Morons. Dumbasses. Is this trolling as well?

Re:Sheesh (1)

Java Pimp (98454) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576622)

Yes, that is what the +/- buttons are for in Firehose...

So does the US government (1)

aliquis (678370) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576648)

So does the US government.

Thankfully there is Wikileaks.

*Yawn* (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34576218)

Slow news day? You have to resort to Fox-bashing? Seriously?

Somebody get the machine gun, there's some fish in this here barrel.

Re:*Yawn* (1)

unitron (5733) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576572)

Somebody get the machine gun, there's some fish in this here barrel.

Too bad you don't have a user account*, you've already got a great sig.

*666 doesn't really count.

Sure would be funny (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34576236)

If he wasn't born in the States....

Re:Sure would be funny (0)

klashn (1323433) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576362)

You have to be born in the USA in order to be eligible to be president. ROFLPUSA / ROFLMAYOR

Re:Sure would be funny (1)

unitron (5733) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576638)

You're being sarcastic, right?

You do know that since his mother was a citizen he could have been born off-planet and would still be a "natural-born citizen", and therefore eligible for the office upon reaching the 35th anniversary of his day of birth.

That is the purpose of mass media (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34576238)

Catching your attention where it isn't important. Making you focus on non-issues in order to prevent you from being aware of real issues, etc.

Re:That is the purpose of mass media (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34576588)

Is it also the mass media's fault you don't know what the purpose of a title is?

Observation Bias (1)

KublaiKhan (522918) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576242)

Perhaps it's just a case that people who want their observational biases pandered to are more likely to watch Fox?

Consider the MSNBC viewers; aren't they about the same in bias?

(O'course, there's no helping those who insist that CNN/BBC/PBS are "hopelessly liberal", but that's life.)

Re:Observation Bias (1, Interesting)

twoallbeefpatties (615632) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576376)

Consider the MSNBC viewers; aren't they about the same in bias?

MSNBC isn't an institution with liberals like it is many for hardline conservatives, though. The very partisan left tends to resonate with certain trawls of the blogosphere rather than tie themselves to the radio or TV, I think. A lot of liberals like Olbermann and Maddow but seem most likely to watch them when someone links a clip of their shows on the HuffPo, rather than actually tuning in to watch those programs on a real television. That's also not counting some of the station's moderate conservatives, like Joe Scarborough.

If there's any show that really draws a constant audience of liberals to live broadcast, it's probably Stewart and Colbert.

Re:Observation Bias (3, Informative)

wygit (696674) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576584)

Probably.
The difference is that MSNBC management hasn't, (or at least hasn't been caught) sending orders to staff to:

"refrain from asserting that the planet has warmed (or cooled) in any given period without IMMEDIATELY pointing out that such theories are based upon data that critics have called into question."
http://mediamatters.org/blog/201012150004 [mediamatters.org]

or to use the phrase "government option" instead of "public option" when reporting about the health care plan, because more people react negatively to the former.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2010-12-09/how-fox-news-spun-the-health-care-debate/ [thedailybeast.com]

While quite a few people compare Keith Olbermann to Glenn Beck or Bill O'Reilly, I don't think there's any comparison over how much news bias is shown at the two networks overall.

Liberal Media (2)

feedayeen (1322473) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576282)

The Mainstream Liberal Media(TM) just doesn't respect the in depth reporting that News Corp uses to expose the Truth(TM).

Re:Liberal Media (1)

Rakshasa Taisab (244699) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576508)

True, but while News Corp has in-depth and factual reporting there is just the unfortunate fact that it is all based on events from an alternate evil-twin universe.

Motives of respondents (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34576290)

I think some people may answer in this way because they view such responses as inflammatory rather than holding an actual belief.

Fox News Makes You Stupid (1)

Rary (566291) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576302)

Hey samzenpus, if you're going to post a flamebait article anyway, why bother toning it down? The summary headline says "Fox News Makes You Less Informed", but the actual article comes right out and says "Fox News Makes You Stupid".

Now let the flames begin.

Surprised? (3, Insightful)

fructose (948996) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576306)

FOX also makes sure to point out any 'controversy' in science stories.

http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/12/fox_news_bureau_chief_told_staff_to_cast_doubt_on_climate_change.php?ref=fpb [talkingpointsmemo.com]

This is just the result of their policies. They probably designed it this way to make people want to watch/read more FOX news. If you are unsure about something going on today you try to learn more, and you learn what's going on in the world by watching the news, right?

Re:Surprised? (1)

benthalus (584472) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576600)

I'm still waiting for them to point out the controversy in the theories of electromagnetic radiation and electron particles in the transmission of electricity. Fox News doesn't broadcast via the predictions of science and how the world works, they broadcast directly through the power of God!

Re:Surprised? (3, Insightful)

0123456 (636235) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576606)

FOX also makes sure to point out any 'controversy' in science stories.

Are you claiming that news shows giving both sides of a story is a _bad_ thing?

But...But... (1)

Haedrian (1676506) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576310)

Fox news said that it makes me more informed than other news stations. This article must therefore be wrong. *Sticks cottonwool into his ears*

Speaking of flame war (1, Troll)

baresi (950718) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576322)

I am sure I will lose some of my positive karma on this one but nevertheless...Are those not watching Fox News doing that much of a better job? Looking at the world that's highly questionable in my opinion

Re:Speaking of flame war (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34576540)

I am sure I will lose some of my positive karma on this one but nevertheless...Are those not watching Fox News doing that much of a better job? Looking at the world that's highly questionable in my opinion

How can anyone? No matter how many "grass roots" protests or how vocal people are, Washington just does the same old -same old. No matter how you vote, you get one of two flavors of Vanilla. In the end, whatever is done in DC, we the little people get it up the ass. Sure, they throw us a bone now and then, but even those bones have had their marrow cooked out of them.

We will see in 2011 - after all those Teabaggers got in and with the Teabagger influence - nothing will really change. Sure the rhetoric will have a "small Government lower taxes" bent from the Republicans but the debt will increase, spending will increase, and things will continue to get worse for the average American.

Now, there's going to be some pseudo arm-chair economist who is going to spew "stats" about how the economy is getting "better". How special.

Retail vacancies are increasing (sign of small business), I'm seeing more and more empty houses, apartment vacancies are just pathetic - some landlords are going bust - and things are just staying shitty.

Retirees are freaking out because the interest they're getting on their retirements are the crappiest in decades and their Social Security hasn't gone up in 2 years.

Fuck the poor!

-- Mel Brooks: History of the World, Part I

Re:Speaking of flame war (1)

bluefoxlucid (723572) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576614)

Exactly what I wanted to say. People watching Fox are "less informed" about the majority opinion. Obama's birth certificate is a good example: there is a lot of garbage surrounding the issue, including that the image given was modified (parts were blacked over i.e. redacted) and such. The debate is largely over Obama's exact birth date, which is argued to be in some 2 month range that includes both a point in time when Hawaii was not a US state (a territory though!) and a period when Hawaii was a state. My question of course is ... if it was a US territory at the time, doesn't that still make Obama a US citizen? Besides, Hawaii was added to the union, thus all Hawaiians are US citizens.

You see, I'm not saying that Obama's birth certificate is clear. I don't even like the guy; he strikes me as a car salesman (lying self-deluded uninformed jackass with a good people-personality), and I dislike his political policies. But I don't think the whole issue much matters when it comes to Obama's citizenship. He was born in Hawaii, either as a US territory or a US state; and he was born very close to the annexing of Hawaii in one way or another. He's a US citizen as much as every other Hawaiian his age.

To my knowledge, the exact details of the birth certificate thing have never been resolved. Likely because the courts have never bothered to get the official records shipped from Hawaii as evidence, because it doesn't really matter.

Also realize that a study like this would count people who don't believe in human-caused global warming as "uninformed" because the mainstream view is that humans are massively responsible for the current climate change issues and that the issues are massive. The pollsters probably believe that, sans-fossil-fuels, the global temperature would have stayed stable for all eternity, and would consider anyone believing anything different "uninformed."

All modern "news" is bullshit.

In other news; (4, Funny)

fridaynightsmoke (1589903) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576324)

Slashdot readers are shown by a recent survey to have significantly higher IQ scores than average, yet with higher rates of social anxiety. What is it about Slashdot that makes its readers so smart, yet so awkward?

THIS JUST IN- people who buy the most gas/petrol also tend to have larger cars than average. Scientists are trying to find out why putting more gas in a car's tank causes the car to grow.

Fun times (1)

rwa2 (4391) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576334)

Meh, just about all news (and politics, for that matter) is entertainment. I've started listening to some of the conservative AM talk stations, like Savage Nation and the Laura Ingram show. I thought it was pretty hard to believe that people could fail to see the satire in the Colbert Report, but now I'm not so sure... Mike and Laura are every bit as funny! Stephen Colbert has the easiest job in comedy, he just needs to listen to people like them and repeat the same thing to a different audience.

Re:Fun times (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576534)

I too have made that mistake. I heard some right wing radio after having seen colbert show and thought someone was ripping off his shtick.

Birthplace? Seriously? (2)

alta (1263) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576336)

Perhaps people who believe that Obama was not born in the US are more likely to be watchers of fox news, not the other way around?

The flame war should be towards you for posting such drivel! This is neither news, or for nerds. Here's an idea, why don't you just replace your news feed with one from Huffington/Politico, since it appears that's the way you want to go.

Re:Birthplace? Seriously? (1)

MobyDisk (75490) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576530)

are more likely to be watchers of fox news, not the other way around?

That was my first thought too, but they actually address this in the first survey, and it turns out that it really is the news:

Variations in misperceptions according to news source cannot simply be explained as a result of differences in the demographics of each audience, because these variations can also be found when comparing the rate of misperceptions within demographic subgroups of each audience.

Re:Birthplace? Seriously? (1)

Lakitu (136170) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576604)

Perhaps people who believe that Obama was not born in the US are more likely to be watchers of fox news, not the other way around?

If you're a viewer of Fox News, and you can't even get past a slashdot headline:

"Survey Shows that Fox News Makes You Less Informed"

to the short summary directly below it:

"One of the most interesting questions was about President Obama's birthplace. 63 percent of Fox viewers believe Obama was not born in the US (or that it is unclear)"

then you're probably made more misinformed by almost anything you trust (in this case, Fox News).

Re:Birthplace? Seriously? (1)

oh_my_080980980 (773867) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576654)

Sounds like a FoxNews watcher / Birther...

You seem to ignore the obvious point that Fox News lies and makes things up. That's the big point here.

The article title should have read... (2)

Bovius (1243040) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576340)

"Study Confirms That Fox News, CNN, MSNBC, etc. Makes You Stupid".

No, really, that's what the article says.

Re:The article title should have read... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34576386)

Yes but Fox news makes you more stupid than any other network.

Both sides are bad.

Both sides are NOT the same.

Or more likely... (1)

hellkyng (1920978) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576344)

Clinging too strongly to one ideology or another without using your head leads to you being less informed! Fox is just a great outlet for individuals matching this characteristic, but there are others...

Fox News is fine...for news (2)

metrix007 (200091) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576366)

People have to separate the channel as a whole from the actual news shows. Their actual news is fairly decent and objective. The rest of the shows on that channel are pure columnist style speculation and opinion however.

Re:Fox News is fine...for news (2)

HBI (604924) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576496)

Shhh, you're making sense and being fair. The leftists here can't handle that.

Re:Fox News is fine...for news (3, Insightful)

spun (1352) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576522)

People have to separate the channel as a whole from the actual news shows. Their actual news is fairly decent and objective. The rest of the shows on that channel are pure columnist style speculation and opinion however.

Bullshit. [talkingpointsmemo.com] The "News" shows are just as bad as the "editorials." It is all propaganda.

Re:Fox News is fine...for news (4, Informative)

99BottlesOfBeerInMyF (813746) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576612)

People have to separate the channel as a whole from the actual news shows. Their actual news is fairly decent and objective. The rest of the shows on that channel are pure columnist style speculation and opinion however.

There have been numerous instances that make me disagree with this. The Newscorp organization pushes disinformation for profit. For example, the news program regularly reports that there are "reports of..." reports which are simply quoting what the lunatics in Fox News talk shows say. They don't bother to look into it or debunk, it, they just report it like it is credible news. And then there is corporate ethics. As far as I know, Fox is the only news corporation that went to court and argued that it was their first amendment right to fire reporters for refusing to knowingly lie about the dangers of drugs produced by one of their advertisers. And they're right, they do have the right to fire those reporters and lie to the public or bury the story... but that completely destroys their credibility as a news channel and that of any program they carry.

Basically, while there is a lot of bias and poor research going on in US media today, Fox is actually worse than all the others and this study reflects some of that. Frankly I think the only reason to anyone would trust anything seen on the Fox news channel is ignorance about what kind of an organization is running the show.

Re:Fox News is fine...for news (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34576700)

People have to separate the channel as a whole from the actual news shows. Their actual news is fairly decent and objective. The rest of the shows on that channel are pure columnist style speculation and opinion however.

That would *almost* be true, but for the "news" section's tendency to run stories like "Some people say that..." when the "some people" are the opinion hosts that immediately preceded the news segment. The "news" shows also play along with the Faux Newspeak bandwagon - "homicide bombers", "government takeover", "job-killing X" - and have been caught out more than once repeating RNC press releases (typos and all) without citing their source.

Jon Stewart (2)

novakom (1667041) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576374)

Where's the survey of Daily Show/Colbert Report viewers? I doubt we score much better than MSNBC on politics but our marks on puns are sky high.

Re:Jon Stewart (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34576594)

For satire to be funny it has to contain truth. The news is under no such constraint.

Brilliant Post!/The triumph of capitalism: (0)

Hartree (191324) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576380)

This will go to hundreds of comments, as people write: "I watch something else, so logically that means I are smart."

The hospitals should prepare for an onslaught of shoulder strains from the liberals all attempting to pat themselves on the back.

And the pure gold, is that you can come back tomorrow with a study saying that liberals are disloyal by nature, or some such.

Then all the conservatives will have similar rates of commenting and shoulder injuries as their deepest beliefs are confirmed.

And what does this accumplish? Why, confirmation of eyes on pages, so ad revenues go up. Slashdot is a business, after all. Yay!

Of course Obama was born in the US! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34576426)

It's just that his Grandmother is a telling a DAMN LIE! Just because she was actually there when he was born.
She MUST BE STOPPED!

63% of viewers think Obama was not born in the US. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34576440)

What the fuck.

We (The US of A) are screwed.

AlterNet - Really? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34576442)

Sorry, but anything having to do with DoucheNet can be roundly ignored.

Yawn (0)

afabbro (33948) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576448)

Left-wing think-tank criticizes Fox news. I'm shocked, shocked!

bias maybe? (5, Insightful)

Charliemopps (1157495) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576450)

Worldpublicopinion.org founded by Pipa.org
http://www.pipa.org/sponsors.htm

Their sponsors are a who's who of liberal politics.

Sponsors

PIPA's activities have been supported by:

        * Rockefeller Foundation
        * Rockefeller Brothers Fund
        * Tides Foundation
        * Ford Foundation
        * German Marshall Fund of the United States
        * Compton Foundation
        * Carnegie Corporation
        * Benton Foundation
        * Ben and Jerry's Foundation
        * University of Maryland Foundation
        * Circle Foundation
        * JEHT Foundation
        * Stanley Foundation
        * Ploughshares Fund
        * Calvert Foundation
        * Secure World Foundation
        * Oak Foundation
        * United States Institute of Peace

Re:bias maybe? (1)

PhxBlue (562201) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576658)

Actually, the original article from the World Public Opinion Foundation doesn't pull punches on anybody -- Fox News, MSNBC, NPR, etc. The problem is that the submission links to a blog post on Alternet, which leans just a little left of center ... and by a little, I mean a lot.

Big news (1)

allcoolnameswheretak (1102727) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576476)

Everybody except people who watch Fox News already know this.

I think the title should be... (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34576480)

Posting this anonymously just because the liberal schmucks will think I actually care to hear them call me an idiot.

Fox News informs their viewers with facts believed to be moronic by nose in the air liberal democrats with their heads stuck so far up their backside that they think CNN and MSNBC aren't a mouthpiece for OBama, who also think that Government run Healthcare isn't socialism, giving lawbreaking illegal aliens (NOT immigrants) and their children should be given amnesty over the people legally entering the country and thay deserve free cars, houses, healthcare, food and educations at taxpayers expense, thing the government hasn't blown enough of taxpayer money and think the French have it right when it comes to foreign policy.
Oh yeah, and OBama isn't a US citizen, he wasn't born in the U.S. he wasn't properly vetted, he has frozen and hidden all the documentation that would prove otherwise at a significant cost to the taxpayers and he really is a socialist, black power advocate who believes everything espoused by his pastor of 20+ years.

NOW let the flamewar begin.

The only real suprise is.... (1)

Tangential (266113) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576488)

No real surprise that Fox promotes a POV and slants its reporting (a lot) to pander to specific demographic.

The big surprise is that MSNBC came out as the most accurate. Based on the obvious slant that they put on their reporting it just means that their viewers agreed with more of the answers to the questions that the survey's designers picked.

What we need now is a study to determine how the questions in the survey biased the results.

Say what you mean. (5, Insightful)

clone52431 (1805862) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576494)

There is a difference, and a significant one at that, between all of the following statements:

1) Fox News makes its viewers less informed. (What headline said, which is impossible.)
2) Viewers of Fox News tend to be less informed. (What headline meant.)
3) Fox News makes its viewers more mis-informed. (What summary said.)
4) Viewers of Fox News tend to be more mis-informed. (What summary should have said.)
5) Viewers of Fox News tend to believe stuff that I think is hogwash. (What summary meant.)

18 times the speed of light (1)

Wyatt Earp (1029) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576498)

That graphic when Fox was covering the Columbia was the last straw for my watching them for even breaking news coverage.

During the Iraq Invasion CNN had the best video in the middle of the night, Fox had the best military analysts during the day, but since '03-04 Fox got way worse.

Fox's coverage of John Paul II's death, funeral and the election of the new Pope was also godawful, I ended up watching the Catholic Channel for that, they had real historians and would shut up during speeches in English and explain what people were saying in Latin. Fox, CNN just blathered on and on.

Fox was also able to junk up the memorial of Reagan and the funeral too.

CNN now is a shell, MSNBC is just as partisan as Fox, TV news really has died off for me personally.

I am sure (2, Insightful)

das3cr (780388) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576504)

That a survey designed year after year to bash Fox News isn't at all biased in design, intent, delivery, execution and conclusion.

Good job liberals .. more FUD for the fodder. Mixing cool aid is Fun !!

Not Explicitly Flamey (1)

damn_registrars (1103043) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576512)

A fair number of conservatives denounce Fox News anyways. Granted, some of those who declare that they don't get their news from Fox will in the same breath declare that all liberals get 130% of their news from MSNBC and NPR; but nonetheless, uninformed Fox News viewers are not indicative of all conservatives.

A more interesting question at this point would be to ask how relevant Fox News is. I didn't see any information on there as to what the actual market share is; has Fox News actually grown in terms of viewers over the past 5 or more years, or has it been retracting (as many have)? A lot of people now claim to get a large portion of their news from blogs and other online sources; if that is true than the correlation of poor information with Fox News viewership is not necessarily that significant with regards to the American public at large.

neither (1)

nimbius (983462) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576518)

fox news, its target demographics, or their metrics constitute news for nerds or stuff that really matters...

Sensational Reporting (1)

alta (1263) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576520)

Study Confirms That Fox News Makes You Stupid

A new survey of American voters shows that Fox News viewers are significantly more misinformed than consumers of news from other sources.

Come on, give me a break.

misinformed, nor mislead, does not mean your LITERALLY STUPID. It doesn't even necessarily mean your naive. It just means that you've been misinformed. Many of the designers for the first atomic bombs were mislead by the govermnent about their exact purpose, does that make these guys LITERALLY STUPID? No, it doesn't. People are misinformed every time you turn around, all day long. It doesn't make them stupid.

Survey says anyone who reads the article is Stupid (1)

alta (1263) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576592)

I've taken a survey of everyone who appeared to have read the article and came back to post. My scientific observation is that it has made you all Stupid.

with postings like this i find i'm visiting (1)

bagboy (630125) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576596)

slashdot less and less. Over the past 10 years that I've visited, the stories are becoming less technical and more biased/political. This site would be better off returning to its roots. Its why endgadget is now my place to go for tech/gadget news.

Take a peek behind he curtain.... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34576610)

Let's take a peek behind the curtain for a moment...

Who did this survey and who are they funded by...

If you follow the $$ you will find the Tides Foundation is one of the principle donors to the organization who did the survey,

Who is the Tides Foundation? This is one of George Soros funding arms.

Who hates Fox News.. George Soros.

Worthless (1)

wholestrawpenny (1809456) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576632)

What does this have anything to do with "News for Nerds?" It would be swell if Slashdot would be a bastion of apolitical discourse... Too much to hope for, it seems.

Plusgood Groupthink! (-1, Troll)

Garrett Fox (970174) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576640)

Survey-makers, your groupthink is plusgood! Having already decided that Fox News is a terrible thing (and that that's why people watch it more than rival networks), you made the double error of asking rigged questions and then inferring a cause-and-effect relationship. Good job at reinforcing your own beliefs.

"63 percent of Fox viewers believe Obama was not born in the US (or that it is unclear)." And having decided that there's absolutely no ambiguity (perhaps you've seen the original, more-closely-guarded-than-military-secrets BC rather than the summary?), you decided that anyone who questions the official story is "uninformed". You could probably do the same thing with global warming too, or the assertion that the Constitution's "commerce clause" means Congress can force people to buy things. In other words, your ideal citizen doesn't question the official story of things.

Think that this study will be used to push for forcible shutting down of this opposition network, Chavez-style, as various people on the socialist left have actually grumbled about? Or just used for traditional media to console themselves with?

I'm glad that's settled (1)

istartedi (132515) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576670)

I'm glad that's settled. Now we can all get on with our lives.

To paraphrase a FoxNews commentator.. (5, Insightful)

s0litaire (1205168) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576686)

I'm not saying all the viewers of Fox news are moronic idiots...
It's just that a lot of moronic idiots watch Fox News.

try this poll on slashdot posters (1)

peter303 (12292) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576692)

I;d think you get similar results. They are a pretty insular much I surmise from the quality of replies.

People don't watch Fox News to become informed... (5, Insightful)

unitron (5733) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576710)

...having already made up their minds and not wishing to be confused with the facts, they go there to have their preconceptions re-enforced.

Oh brother (1, Flamebait)

jav1231 (539129) | more than 3 years ago | (#34576718)

This is so stupid. Fox doesn't even profess Obama was not born in the US. And people confuse Fox's news segments with say pundit commentary. Fox get's a much of its stories the same place everyone else does, the wire services. I recall being on a forum where someone was ranting about a Foxnews story, how bad and biased it was etc. Turns out it was an AP story posted on Foxnews. Some of those questions are clearly slanted. "72 percent believe the economy is getting worse" things like that are relative. You can come up with a pundit or someone to throw out numbers to say as a comparison to this or that the economy is up but no one in their right mind thinks the economy is in good shape. So if I, regardless of where I get me news, live in a state that is losing jobs at a higher rate than another state those figures mean nothing. My observation is that the economy is getting worse. It doesn't make me "stupid" because I'm going by what I observe. I find it interesting that most of those questions are politically charged. Ask them math questions then come see me.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>