Posted on 01/14/2015 11:00:55 AM PST by EveningStar
The “Fox News Is Stupid and Evil” article is by now its own genre of journalism, albeit one that almost nobody does very well. In the course of attempting to enlighten some not especially bright Democrats earlier this week — hola, @mcspocky! — I went looking through a few of the so-called studies that purport to demonstrate that Fox News viewers are deeply and uniquely misinformed about public affairs. They are mostly horsepucky, as I demonstrated with this assortment of dim-witted accounts of the PunditFact “study” (which is not a study) of disputed Fox News statements, the authors of which rightly warn against using it to make general conclusions about Fox News, inasmuch as the data sample is admittedly arbitrary and biased — not out of malice or bad faith, but because the very structure of such fact-checking columns ensures that it is so, among other things by examining only disputed statements.
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...
More liberals watch Fox then they do CNN and MSNBC...combined.
Which explains the survey..
I had no idea how many pop-ups there were on National Review until just now. It’s been added to my browser’s blocked list.
Use ad block plus and your browser’s pop up blocking functions.
Ailes's job is keep the conservatives drooling in front of their TVs just as the CBSNBCABCPBSCNN keep the leftists drooling in front of theirs.
Anyone who gets their news from the homosexual Shepard Smith, the preening blowhard Bill O'Reilly or the manipulative sensationalist Sean Hannity is being played like a Stradivarius.
MY POV is that FoxNews is the opposite side of the dialectical coin provided by the MSM. Roger Ailes is a global elite just like his supposed counterparts in the leftwing press.
Ailes's job is keep the conservatives drooling in front of their TVs just as the CBSNBCABCPBSCNN keep the leftists drooling in front of theirs.
Anyone who gets their news from the homosexual Shepard Smith, the preening blowhard Bill O'Reilly or the manipulative sensationalist Sean Hannity is being played like a Stradivarius.
Well put.
A lib friend was over the other days helping me with some computer issues. He saw that I had Drudge on my address bar. He started complaining about Drudge being a nazi, etc. I asked him if he’d ever been to Drudge. He said, “Of course not!” So I took him to Drudge. Ha! He immediately saw that it was a news collection site, containing only links to news articles in newspapers and such media. He was quite surprised! I told him that, “Sure, Drudge slants to the right. You go to Huffpo, which slants to the left. I go to all sorts of sites, including Huffpo, and make up my own mind, following leads and links given.”
i’d rather they do news, I could do without fox and friends and the five. just give me headlines
“a lib friend” is not only an oxymoron but is to be avoided at all costs.
Did any network ever do that? If they did, it must have been before I started watching the news (mid-70’s as a kid).
Those women who are on at noon—they give me a headache. Guess I just don’t like female voices yakking away while I eat my lunch.
Sure, they’re conservative, but annoying nevertheless.
Kevin D. Williamson is delusional and needs to be committed to the insane ward of the nearest hospital.
““a lib friend” is not only an oxymoron but is to be avoided at all costs.”
That’s just not true! I’m a musician. Most, not all, of my Country Music friends are different degrees of Conservative. My Rock friends are more Liberals. This guy is a world famous guitarist. I’ve recorded with him. In all other aspects, he’s a great guy, and I enjoy our friendship immensely. We just don’t talk politics. We disagree politically, but that’s such a small aspect of our friendship, that we just pretty much ignore it. He does loath hillary though!
From the Article,
“60% believe that climate change is not occurring. [They’re probably wrong, but their views are not radically different from those of the average American. The study purports to show not only that Fox News viewers believe untrue things, but also that they believe untrue things at a rate significantly different from Americans at large.]”
I think the author’s comments show his own ignorance and bias. First, most FOX viewers are very likely to realize that the climate is always changing as do “97% of climate scientists”. Only idiots and those intentionally trying to mislead frame the question that way. The real question is whether CO2 from the burning of fossil fuels plays a significant role in warming the atmosphere. At this time there is very little real world data that supports the hypothesis, especially since satellite data which is not as subject to siting problems and manipulation has shown no statistically significant warming in over 18 years despite rising CO2 levels.
Then of course there are all of the other contradictions. The amount of CO2 released into the atmosphere from the burning of fossil fuels currently can explain only a small percentage of the current rise in CO2 levels. The vast majority of the rise in CO2 can only be coming from sources other than the burning of fossil fuels.
We are told that the oceans are absorbing vast amounts of CO2 causing the oceans to become more acidic, yet data from actual measurements does not support this. It seems more likely that the most of the increase in CO2 levels is coming from the oceans as they have been slowly warming for hundreds of years since the “little ice age”. As water that has absorbed CO2 rises in temperature it releases CO2.
It seems very likely that the author’s comments which demonstrate almost no understanding of the actual issue indicate that he has less understanding than those whose opinions he is making light of.
Then he also says,
“63% believe that Obama was not born in the U.S. (or that it is unclear). [That’s nuts.]”
If that is “nuts” then why is it that Obama has refused to release his school records? Why has he released two “birth certificates” which both have serious forensics issues, along with a selective service form that is an obvious forgery? Why won’t Obama allow the originals of any of these documents to be examined by actual experts? The way this has all been handled raises a lot of questions. So who is “nuts”? People who would like to see meaningful verification from someone who has been known to be a serial liar for all of his adult life? Or those who accept the claims of serial liar without any meaningful verification? We live in a topsy turvy world when common sense is called “nuts”.
If that’s the “Surrounded” Fox noon show of four hottie infobabes seated with their legs crossed & their dresses riding up, I just hit the mute button & enjoy.
;^)
There never was any such thing. There were just a lot of lies about their lack of bias, and it was more subtle.
But ALL journalists are biased. You just have to find the ones biased towards the truth.
I don’t know. My wife of 40 years was fairly liberal. Then she started listening to Rush at lunch and Watching Fox at night.
Whoa! what a change. Now she is one of those that can see.
You want to drive leftists completely nuts? Point out to them that Fox News isn’t even right-wing - at most, it’s a marginally right-of-center viewpoint.
A real right-wing news source would make them wet their panties.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.