Fox News Viewers Know Less Than People Who Don't Watch Any News: Study

  • metta

    Posts: 39165

    Nov 22, 2011 12:50 AM GMT


    Fox News Viewers Know Less Than People Who Don't Watch Any News: Study


    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/21/fox-news-viewers-less-informed-people-fairleigh-dickinson_n_1106305.html?ncid=edlinkusaolp00000003


    The Science of Fox News: Why Its Viewers are the Most Misinformed

    Authoritarian people have a stronger emotional need for an outlet like Fox, where they can find affirmation and escape factual challenges to their beliefs.

    http://digg.com/newsbar/Politics/the_science_of_fox_news_why_its_viewers_are_the_most_misinformed
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 22, 2011 12:57 AM GMT
    Bwahahahahaaaa....... So now there is credible research saying Republicans are idiots. Lol
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 22, 2011 12:59 AM GMT
    That is scary, regardless of the network.
  • JP85257

    Posts: 3284

    Nov 22, 2011 12:59 AM GMT
    According to the Huffington post?

    Thats lol-able its self.
  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19138

    Nov 22, 2011 1:07 AM GMT
    JP85257 saidAccording to the Huffington post?

    Thats lol-able its self.



    You beat me to it icon_lol.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 22, 2011 1:10 AM GMT
    CuriousJockAZ said
    JP85257 saidAccording to the Huffington post?

    Thats lol-able its self.



    You beat me to it icon_lol.gif


    Link to your research proving HP is not a credible source?
  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19138

    Nov 22, 2011 1:15 AM GMT
    catfish5 said
    CuriousJockAZ said
    JP85257 saidAccording to the Huffington post?

    Thats lol-able its self.



    You beat me to it icon_lol.gif


    Link to your research proving HP is not a credible source?



    That's like asking to find links that YOU are a credible source icon_wink.gif
  • JP85257

    Posts: 3284

    Nov 22, 2011 1:16 AM GMT
    CuriousJockAZ said
    catfish5 said
    CuriousJockAZ said
    JP85257 saidAccording to the Huffington post?

    Thats lol-able its self.



    You beat me to it icon_lol.gif


    Link to your research proving HP is not a credible source?



    That's like asking to find links that YOU are a credible source icon_wink.gif

    YOU beat ME this time.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 22, 2011 1:40 AM GMT
    The dialogue between tweedle dee and tweedle dum here is nothing short of amazing. Two obvious devoted Faux News watchers.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 22, 2011 1:46 AM GMT
    HuffPo is not the source of the poll, Farleigh Dickinson University is.

    And this is the second university study in a year to find that Faux News watchers are misinformed on even basic, indisputable historical facts.

    You do know that Faux News' defense is that it is "entertainment" and not news, right? Consider that the next time you're watching Neil Cavuto read from the RNC's talking points. icon_lol.gif
  • commoncoll

    Posts: 1222

    Nov 22, 2011 2:09 AM GMT
    Did you see how high Jon Stewart viewers scored?
    Now that is funny.
  • GQjock

    Posts: 11649

    Nov 22, 2011 2:12 AM GMT
    JP85257 saidAccording to the Huffington post?

    Thats lol-able its self.


    Ummm ... Like Dude?

    It was reported by Huffington Post

    The Umm ....... actual Study was done by Fairliegh Dickenson College
    Which Verified a previous study which found the same conclusions by the University of Maryland
    http://publicmind.fdu.edu/2011/knowless/

    icon_rolleyes.gif
  • JP85257

    Posts: 3284

    Nov 22, 2011 2:57 AM GMT
    catfish5 saidThe dialogue between tweedle dee and tweedle dum here is nothing short of amazing. Two obvious devoted Faux News watchers.

    I dont even have cable nor do I dedicate myself to one source of news, HOWEVER the Huffington Post is not one of those resources.
  • JP85257

    Posts: 3284

    Nov 22, 2011 2:59 AM GMT
    Christian73 saidHuffPo is not the source of the poll, Farleigh Dickinson University is.

    And this is the second university study in a year to find that Faux News watchers are misinformed on even basic, indisputable historical facts.

    You do know that Faux News' defense is that it is "entertainment" and not news, right? Consider that the next time you're watching Neil Cavuto read from the RNC's talking points. icon_lol.gif

    I always refer back to my History teacher Mr LeClaire when I was a junior in HS. He had the best perspective of anyone I remember. I think I hated New Mexico History the most. ick.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 22, 2011 3:29 AM GMT
    I took a very quick look at the study from Fairleigh Dickinson, mainly to see if the results were skewed by less educated people watching Fox. The study stated they controlled for level of education.

    My assessment is there are many people who watch Fox who are not worldly or especially sophisticated, and traditionally conservative. You know, the simple people who live in the part of the country the sophisticated elites on either coast fly over. These are the simple people who cling to their guns and religion (per Obama).

    There are also those, as myself, who do watch Fox, but also many other sources across the political spectrum, both domestic and international. I think there are extremes in sophistication who watch Fox, and I grant that the unsophisticated impact the study results.

    But the interesting thing is this: While Fox may have many who are not as sophisticated, and let's say it, not as intelligent as viewers of other sources, Fox also has the best and brightest. The comparison on Real Jock tells part of the story. The great majority of guys who are conservative on Real Jock are informed, and generally quite bright. Some of the liberals are bright, but the majority are neither bright nor informed. They rely on gimmicks (e.g. inappropriate use of caps), emoticons instead of responses, snide remarks instead of intelligent discussion, and increasingly dispensing of false statements. Could be deliberate, but I suspect often based on ignorance. On the whole, very average. So you guys can feel superior to the simple people who cling to their guns and religion. That's all you've got.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 22, 2011 3:42 AM GMT
    socalfitness said The great majority of guys who are conservative on Real Jock are informed, and generally quite bright.


    *choking on my food*

    Making up statistics, then conspiring together to ban the people who expose the lies is not the type of behavior that bright and informed people engage in.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 22, 2011 3:56 AM GMT
    TroyAthlete said
    socalfitness said The great majority of guys who are conservative on Real Jock are informed, and generally quite bright.


    *choking on my food*

    Making up statistics, then banning together to ban the people who expose the conspiracy is not the type of behavior that bright and informed people engage in.

    Didn't fault the study. Not "banning" anyone, whatever that means. I provided a reasonable interpretation of the study results. As far as RJ, if you look at the quality of discussion from both sides, the gimmicks, the crap, the BS, there is a difference. I noted that, but did not make up any statistics to back it up.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 22, 2011 1:56 PM GMT
    socalfitness saidI took a very quick look at the study from Fairleigh Dickinson, mainly to see if the results were skewed by less educated people watching Fox. The study stated they controlled for level of education.

    My assessment is there are many people who watch Fox who are not worldly or especially sophisticated, and traditionally conservative. You know, the simple people who live in the part of the country the sophisticated elites on either coast fly over. These are the simple people who cling to their guns and religion (per Obama).

    There are also those, as myself, who do watch Fox, but also many other sources across the political spectrum, both domestic and international. I think there are extremes in sophistication who watch Fox, and I grant that the unsophisticated impact the study results.

    But the interesting thing is this: While Fox may have many who are not as sophisticated, and let's say it, not as intelligent as viewers of other sources, Fox also has the best and brightest. The comparison on Real Jock tells part of the story. The great majority of guys who are conservative on Real Jock are informed, and generally quite bright. Some of the liberals are bright, but the majority are neither bright nor informed. They rely on gimmicks (e.g. inappropriate use of caps), emoticons instead of responses, snide remarks instead of intelligent discussion, and increasingly dispensing of false statements. Could be deliberate, but I suspect often based on ignorance. On the whole, very average. So you guys can feel superior to the simple people who cling to their guns and religion. That's all you've got.
    Trust me, it IS deliberate.............. and you 'know' why, Or are you that 'uninformed'?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 22, 2011 2:00 PM GMT
    socalfitness saidI took a very quick look at the study from Fairleigh Dickinson, mainly to see if the results were skewed by less educated people watching Fox. The study stated they controlled for level of education.

    My assessment is there are many people who watch Fox who are not worldly or especially sophisticated, and traditionally conservative. You know, the simple people who live in the part of the country the sophisticated elites on either coast fly over. These are the simple people who cling to their guns and religion (per Obama).

    There are also those, as myself, who do watch Fox, but also many other sources across the political spectrum, both domestic and international. I think there are extremes in sophistication who watch Fox, and I grant that the unsophisticated impact the study results.

    But the interesting thing is this: While Fox may have many who are not as sophisticated, and let's say it, not as intelligent as viewers of other sources, Fox also has the best and brightest. The comparison on Real Jock tells part of the story. The great majority of guys who are conservative on Real Jock are informed, and generally quite bright. Some of the liberals are bright, but the majority are neither bright nor informed. They rely on gimmicks (e.g. inappropriate use of caps), emoticons instead of responses, snide remarks instead of intelligent discussion, and increasingly dispensing of false statements. Could be deliberate, but I suspect often based on ignorance. On the whole, very average. So you guys can feel superior to the simple people who cling to their guns and religion. That's all you've got.


    That's the silliest attempt at spin you've ever engaged in, John.

    Even if Fox's viewers were "unsophisticated", isn't it the job of a news organization to help them become sophisticated? icon_rolleyes.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 22, 2011 2:03 PM GMT
    TropicalMark said
    socalfitness saidI took a very quick look at the study from Fairleigh Dickinson, mainly to see if the results were skewed by less educated people watching Fox. The study stated they controlled for level of education.

    My assessment is there are many people who watch Fox who are not worldly or especially sophisticated, and traditionally conservative. You know, the simple people who live in the part of the country the sophisticated elites on either coast fly over. These are the simple people who cling to their guns and religion (per Obama).

    There are also those, as myself, who do watch Fox, but also many other sources across the political spectrum, both domestic and international. I think there are extremes in sophistication who watch Fox, and I grant that the unsophisticated impact the study results.

    But the interesting thing is this: While Fox may have many who are not as sophisticated, and let's say it, not as intelligent as viewers of other sources, Fox also has the best and brightest. The comparison on Real Jock tells part of the story. The great majority of guys who are conservative on Real Jock are informed, and generally quite bright. Some of the liberals are bright, but the majority are neither bright nor informed. They rely on gimmicks (e.g. inappropriate use of caps), emoticons instead of responses, snide remarks instead of intelligent discussion, and increasingly dispensing of false statements. Could be deliberate, but I suspect often based on ignorance. On the whole, very average. So you guys can feel superior to the simple people who cling to their guns and religion. That's all you've got.
    Trust me, it IS deliberate.............. and you 'know' why, Or are you that 'uninformed'?

    An acknowledgment that the far left on RJ lies? Reading comprehension challenges? As stated, average.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 22, 2011 2:37 PM GMT
    socalfitness said
    TropicalMark said
    socalfitness saidI took a very quick look at the study from Fairleigh Dickinson, mainly to see if the results were skewed by less educated people watching Fox. The study stated they controlled for level of education.

    My assessment is there are many people who watch Fox who are not worldly or especially sophisticated, and traditionally conservative. You know, the simple people who live in the part of the country the sophisticated elites on either coast fly over. These are the simple people who cling to their guns and religion (per Obama).

    There are also those, as myself, who do watch Fox, but also many other sources across the political spectrum, both domestic and international. I think there are extremes in sophistication who watch Fox, and I grant that the unsophisticated impact the study results.

    But the interesting thing is this: While Fox may have many who are not as sophisticated, and let's say it, not as intelligent as viewers of other sources, Fox also has the best and brightest. The comparison on Real Jock tells part of the story. The great majority of guys who are conservative on Real Jock are informed, and generally quite bright. Some of the liberals are bright, but the majority are neither bright nor informed. They rely on gimmicks (e.g. inappropriate use of caps), emoticons instead of responses, snide remarks instead of intelligent discussion, and increasingly dispensing of false statements. Could be deliberate, but I suspect often based on ignorance. On the whole, very average. So you guys can feel superior to the simple people who cling to their guns and religion. That's all you've got.
    Trust me, it IS deliberate.............. and you 'know' why, Or are you that 'uninformed'?

    An acknowledgment that the far left on RJ lies? Reading comprehension challenges? As stated, average.
    No its a statement of fact that INDEED "snide remarks instead of intelligent discussion" is deliberate. "intelligent discussion" is something the majority of the uber right here CANT allow. Therefore, you get what you deserve. There is NO one 'right' here but unfortunately if they disagree or bring other 'facts' they are labeled wrong and ultimately 'shut down' by the 'conservatives' Not to say this hasn't or doesn't happen with the liberal side of the house.. Not once have I witnessed a 'uber' conservative admit wrong even when history has proven it, common sense dictated it, and prominent conservatives have stated it. I'm sorry but 'discussion' doesn't start with "liberals are nazis" "liberals are bums", "you're wrong" etc etc etc.
    Every member here has a different viewpoint, different level of education, different life experience. NOT one of them is "wrong". 'Discussion' isn't labeling, it isn't degrading, it isn't 'ignoring', it isn't condemning. It is an act or instance of discussing; consideration or examination by argument, comment, etc., especially to explore solutions; informal debate.
    Notice the words used in the definition?

    Are you going to deny in public here that there are NO lies presented by the "far right" here on RJ?
  • musclmed

    Posts: 3284

    Nov 22, 2011 3:05 PM GMT
    the study seemed to pick parameters important to the people running the pole.
    They mentioned asking people in NJ about the revolution in Egypt, and OWS.

    QUOTE AUTHOR GOES HERE
    New Jerseyans are not necessarily more likely to be knowledgeable about domestic
    politics than international events. Just 47% are able to identify the Occupy Wall Street
    protesters as predominantly Democratic: 11 % think they are Republicans. Viewers of
    cable news on MSNBC are the most likely to think the protestors are Republicans.

    Watching the left-leaning MSNBC news channel is associated with a 10-point increase
    in the likelihood of misidentifying the protesters


    I am sure there are other parameters of the study. But the points in the "press release" point out the bias of the study designers. OWS and Egypt uprising, two important news events sure. Both are events very aligned closely to the hearts of liberals.

    The study shows why Fox maybe more successful than say other outlets. This is more of the same elitist attitude "We know whats important and this is what you should think " attitude the media has had for decades.
    And you know what happened to those newspapers/media outlets that think that way, they are going extinct.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 22, 2011 5:04 PM GMT
    musclmed said

    The study shows why Fox maybe more successful than say other outlets. This is more of the same elitist attitude "We know whats important and this is what you should think " attitude the media has had for decades.


    Couldn't you say the same thing about Fox?

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 22, 2011 5:07 PM GMT
    Balljunkie said
    musclmed said

    The study shows why Fox maybe more successful than say other outlets. This is more of the same elitist attitude "We know whats important and this is what you should think " attitude the media has had for decades.


    Couldn't you say the same thing about Fox?



    He wouldn't know because he only watches Faux News and displays the ignorance of one of their viewers.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 22, 2011 8:33 PM GMT
    "events very aligned closely to the hearts of liberals"


    icon_rolleyes.gif

    Awareness of events having worldwide significance has nothing to do with liberal ideology, - people are only as well informed as the sources they choose.

    The fool is solely to blame for his own ignorance.

    If one is proud to be ignorant, watch FOX. (and vote Republican)