The W
Views: 97680285
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Calendar | Color chart | Log in for more!
25.7.14 1328
The W - Current Events & Politics - Report: Watching Fox News makes you stupid
This thread has 35 referrals leading to it
Register and log in to post!
Thread rated: 4.92
Pages: 1 2 Next
(1729 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (22 total)
eviljonhunt81
Pepperoni








Since: 6.1.02
From: not Japan

Since last post: 2898 days
Last activity: 2894 days
#1 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.56
Or misinformed, at least. Here's the report from PIPA.

The most interesting thing is that people listening to the unabashedly liberal NPR know the score. huh.


edit: my 666th post? hahaha.

(edited by eviljonhunt81 on 4.10.03 1124)


Weekly Visitor - PSSSSHAW!

Jersey Is Dead - New Old Stuff!!!
Promote this thread!
OlFuzzyBastard
Knackwurst








Since: 28.4.02
From: Pittsburgh, PA

Since last post: 5 days
Last activity: 4 days
AIM:  
#2 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.99
In equally shocking news, a new study has determined that gravity causes objects to fall, puppies are adorable and ice cream is delicious, yet cold.



SAVE THE O.F.B.!!

Thank you for your support
Michrome
Head cheese








Since: 2.1.03

Since last post: 3743 days
Last activity: 2809 days
#3 Posted on | Instant Rating: 0.00
This is opposed to the New York Times, which constantly demanded Bush "admit" we underestimated the Iraqi army a week into the war. Or the Washington Post, which cited an anonymous source saying the military conflict will take "at least" 2 months? The only news sources that correctly reported during the actual conflict are ones that said that the U.S. is dominating, because that's what happened.



Yep, I forgot the password to my original name.
Pool-Boy
Lap cheong








Since: 1.8.02
From: Huntington Beach, CA

Since last post: 1225 days
Last activity: 25 days
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#4 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.60
Eh- just another example of how the "tolerant" liberals think that if you disagree with them, you must be a complete idiot.

Ah.. whatever happened to diversity of ideas?

(edited by Pool-Boy on 4.10.03 1422)


Still on the Shelf- Every Tuesday
OlFuzzyBastard
Knackwurst








Since: 28.4.02
From: Pittsburgh, PA

Since last post: 5 days
Last activity: 4 days
AIM:  
#5 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.99


We were not attacked by Saddam Hussein on 9/11. We were attacked by over a dozen Islamic fundamentalist terrorists, acting on behalf of Al Queda and their Saudi-born, last-known-residence in Afghanistan leader Osama Bin Laden. They were not working with Iraq and everyone in the administration, , now admits that.

We also have not found the weapons of mass destruction, despite constant overzealous cries from the right that "they found the smoking gun!". (Which, without fail, have turned out to be nothing. The latest find turned out to be
Botox.)

This is not a matter of "tolerance" or "disagreeing" or "diversity of ideas". They're talking about facts. And the survey concludes that most Faux News viewers are completely and totally ignorant of the facts.

I think this board tends to prove that quite often as well.



SAVE THE O.F.B.!!

Thank you for your support
Michrome
Head cheese








Since: 2.1.03

Since last post: 3743 days
Last activity: 2809 days
#6 Posted on | Instant Rating: 0.00
If you are going to start using polling data, then I have a new challenge for you. Why don't you poll the viewers of Fox News and the viewers of CNN to see how many of them think the minimum wage costs jobs. Of course, it will be a higher percentage on fox news. Does this prove that CNN viewers don't care about the facts?

Why don't we also present those viewers with the overwhelming evidence in favor of right to carry laws, and see how many of them scream and yell irrationally. It will surely be higher over at CNN.

Working closely with Al Qaida is not necessarily the same as being in on 9/11. Clearly there have been Al Qaida ties to Iraq in the past, whether it be members of the group residing safely in Baghdad, recieving medical care, or whatnot.


    The vial of botulinum bacteria discovered in Iraq by U.S. arms inspectors which experts call the most poisonous substance known to man is "a weapon of mass destruction," the State Department's top spokesman announced yesterday.

    "Botulinum kills people, it kills people in large quantities. Botulinum is a weapon of mass destruction, yes," said State spokesman Richard Boucher," according to an Agence France-Presse report. "Anything that destroys on a massive scale is a weapon of mass destruction."

    The botulinum had been stored in a vial discovered in an Iraqi scientist's refrigerator, where it had been stored for safe keeping since 1993.


This was yesterday.


The Kay report clearly stated that Saddam Hussein was actively developing delivery systems far beyond the limit of the U.N. resolutions, and scientists are saying he was planning to restart the program when inspectors left. Not to mention he attempted to buy missiles from North Korea, a clear violation, but NK just fucked him over on the deal. What does this tell you? If you had your way, inspectors would likely be finishing up right now declaring that Iraq is clean of WMD, and he would go right back to putting the systems back together. He was actively defying the resolutions, and actively decieving inspectors.

While we're having fun with polling, let's see how you like this one: When Democratic voters are asked in polls who they're going to vote for, their support for Wesley Clark drops from Number 1 to number 4 when he is called "General Wesley Clark" instead of Wesley Clark. Does this prove Democrats hate the military? Or like the name Wesley?



Yep, I forgot the password to my original name.
Scott Summets
Sujuk








Since: 27.6.02

Since last post: 3815 days
Last activity: 3784 days
#7 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.54
Hey, all I know is Osama and Saddam just got married. It was in Weekly World News. If it's in print it must be true. THEY EVEN HAD PHOTOS FOR GOD'S SAKE!



"I wear it for the thousands who have died, believen' that the Lord was on their side. I wear it for another hundred thousand who have died, believen' that we all were on their side." RIP Johnny Cash



OlFuzzyBastard
Knackwurst








Since: 28.4.02
From: Pittsburgh, PA

Since last post: 5 days
Last activity: 4 days
AIM:  
#8 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.00
I loved the group picture with the little tiny Kim Jong Il.



SAVE THE O.F.B.!!

Thank you for your support
Grimis
Scrapple








Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1179 days
Last activity: 976 days
#9 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.29
    Originally posted by OlFuzzyBastard
    This is not a matter of "tolerance" or "disagreeing" or "diversity of ideas". They're talking about facts. And the survey concludes that most Faux News viewers are completely and totally ignorant of the facts.

    I think this board tends to prove that quite often as well.

There you go again OFB. The fact of the matter is that every time somebody disagrees with you one fucking ounce you pull this shit off becuase you know you don't have a fucking leg to stand on.

It's like Clinton or Nixon around here. "I don't have any support behind me or my point, so I'll obfuscate!"

Christ...

EDIT: And on top of all of THAT....

Success Story in Iraq, from the ultra-conservative Philaelphia Inquirer; or

Free after 50 years of tyranny: We may have fought for the wrong reasons, but there is more good than bad in post-Saddam Iraq from the Bush and Blair loving Guardian:

post-war Iraq has been portrayed. Visceral distrust of Bush/Blair has created a disregard both for fact and for the victims of Saddam. Arab commentators have had no shame in urging Iraqis, exhausted by three wars and more than a decade of sanctions, to launch a new war 'of liberation' against their liberators. Western commentators have luxuriated in the setbacks of the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA), as if wishing failure upon it - and by extension, the Iraqi people.

Disaster has been prophesied, self-servingly, at every turn: the war would be long (it wasn't, and most Iraqis had no direct experience of it); tens of thousands would die in the battle for Baghdad (they didn't); there would be a fully-fledged humanitarian disaster (there wasn't). Now, we are told, Iraqis fear the very real prospect of civil war. Not those I know. Not yet. Nor those polled in Baghdad last month by Gallup: 62 per cent thought getting rid of Saddam was worth the suffering they've endured; 67 per cent thought their lives will be better five years from now.

From the very beginning, the anti-war lobby has refused to listen to those Iraqis who supported war over continued tyranny. Banners saying 'Freedom for Iraq' were confiscated at anti-war rallies and photographs of Halabja, where Saddam gassed 5,000 Kurdish civilians, were seized. No voice was given to people such as Freshta Raper, who lost 21 relatives in Halabja and wanted to ask: 'How many of you have asked an Iraqi mother how she felt when forced to watch her son being executed? How many know that these mothers had to applaud as their sons died? What is more moral: freeing an oppressed, brutalised people from a vicious tyrant or allowing millions to continue suffering indefinitely?'

In the summer I spent more than a month in Iraq. What I found did not correspond to what was being reported - most crucially, that the liberators were already widely denounced as occupiers. As a rule, that simply wasn't true. In Baghdad, where US forces had permitted looting (although not as much as reported) and where security and services were virtually non-existent, attitudes towards the Americans were mixed. But even in Baghdad, even with Saddam and his sons still at large, the sense of relief at the toppling of the regime was palpable.





(edited by Grimis on 6.10.03 0809)


2003 WORLD SERIES

vs

Please Believe It!
ThreepMe
Morcilla








Since: 15.2.02
From: Dallas

Since last post: 3611 days
Last activity: 3270 days
#10 Posted on | Instant Rating: 2.02
    Originally posted by Grimis
      Originally posted by OlFuzzyBastard
      This is not a matter of "tolerance" or "disagreeing" or "diversity of ideas". They're talking about facts. And the survey concludes that most Faux News viewers are completely and totally ignorant of the facts.

      I think this board tends to prove that quite often as well.

    There you go again OFB. The fact of the matter is that every time somebody disagrees with you one fucking ounce you pull this shit off becuase you know you don't have a fucking leg to stand on.

    It's like Clinton or Nixon around here. "I don't have any support behind me or my point, so I'll obfuscate!"

    Christ...



Pot, Kettle.

Kettle, Pot.

Now that you have been properly introduced...



I would like to congatulate Al Snow on his contact with La-Z-Boy. Because we all know Al doesn't sell chairs. - Mick Foley




Make sure to check out ThreepMe's Website of Fun
OlFuzzyBastard
Knackwurst








Since: 28.4.02
From: Pittsburgh, PA

Since last post: 5 days
Last activity: 4 days
AIM:  
#11 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.00
    Originally posted by Grimis
      Originally posted by OlFuzzyBastard
      This is not a matter of "tolerance" or "disagreeing" or "diversity of ideas". They're talking about facts. And the survey concludes that most Faux News viewers are completely and totally ignorant of the facts.

      I think this board tends to prove that quite often as well.

    There you go again OFB. The fact of the matter is that every time somebody disagrees with you one fucking ounce you pull this shit off becuase you know you don't have a fucking leg to stand on.

    It's like Clinton or Nixon around here. "I don't have any support behind me or my point, so I'll obfuscate!"

    Christ...

    EDIT: And on top of all of THAT....

    Success Story in Iraq, from the ultra-conservative Philaelphia Inquirer; or

    Free after 50 years of tyranny: We may have fought for the wrong reasons, but there is more good than bad in post-Saddam Iraq from the Bush and Blair loving Guardian:

    post-war Iraq has been portrayed. Visceral distrust of Bush/Blair has created a disregard both for fact and for the victims of Saddam. Arab commentators have had no shame in urging Iraqis, exhausted by three wars and more than a decade of sanctions, to launch a new war 'of liberation' against their liberators. Western commentators have luxuriated in the setbacks of the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA), as if wishing failure upon it - and by extension, the Iraqi people.

    Disaster has been prophesied, self-servingly, at every turn: the war would be long (it wasn't, and most Iraqis had no direct experience of it); tens of thousands would die in the battle for Baghdad (they didn't); there would be a fully-fledged humanitarian disaster (there wasn't). Now, we are told, Iraqis fear the very real prospect of civil war. Not those I know. Not yet. Nor those polled in Baghdad last month by Gallup: 62 per cent thought getting rid of Saddam was worth the suffering they've endured; 67 per cent thought their lives will be better five years from now.

    From the very beginning, the anti-war lobby has refused to listen to those Iraqis who supported war over continued tyranny. Banners saying 'Freedom for Iraq' were confiscated at anti-war rallies and photographs of Halabja, where Saddam gassed 5,000 Kurdish civilians, were seized. No voice was given to people such as Freshta Raper, who lost 21 relatives in Halabja and wanted to ask: 'How many of you have asked an Iraqi mother how she felt when forced to watch her son being executed? How many know that these mothers had to applaud as their sons died? What is more moral: freeing an oppressed, brutalised people from a vicious tyrant or allowing millions to continue suffering indefinitely?'

    In the summer I spent more than a month in Iraq. What I found did not correspond to what was being reported - most crucially, that the liberators were already widely denounced as occupiers. As a rule, that simply wasn't true. In Baghdad, where US forces had permitted looting (although not as much as reported) and where security and services were virtually non-existent, attitudes towards the Americans were mixed. But even in Baghdad, even with Saddam and his sons still at large, the sense of relief at the toppling of the regime was palpable.





    (edited by Grimis on 6.10.03 0809)


Grimis, I apologize, but those links are completely irrelevant to the discussion at hand. No one is saying that there are no positive events happening in Iraq - only that the negative ones are far out-weighing the positives. (Not to mention the fact that every single link you've posted in this or any other thread on the same subject I'd already heard. On CNN.)

But even more irelevant than that - that's not even what this thread is about.

We have NOT found weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. That's a fact. You can't fucking argue against it. You can say we may find them later, but that doesn't mean we've found them already. Most people who think we've already found them watch Faux News.

We have NOT uncovered a link between Saddam Hussein and Osama Bin Laden. That's another fucking fact. They've prayed for one. Dubya spent months and months hinting there might be one, but there is not one. And, again, most people who think there is watch Faux News.

That's the point of this thread. If you disagree with those two facts as being accurate, yes, you are misinformed. Just the same as you would be if you insisted that pigs can fly, that the moon is made of green cheese or that Fred Durst is a musician.



SAVE THE O.F.B.!!

Thank you for your support
A-MOL
Frankfurter








Since: 26.6.02
From: York, England

Since last post: 3784 days
Last activity: 3726 days
#12 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.35
And Grimis, the 'Comment' section on the Guardian is not always a liberal haven. They often let the right write columns offering a different perspective.



...full of energy. Multi-orgasmic, if you will, in a cosmic sort of way."
Grimis
Scrapple








Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1179 days
Last activity: 976 days
#13 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.29
    Originally posted by OlFuzzyBastard
    We have NOT found weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.

    We have NOT uncovered a link between Saddam Hussein and Osama Bin Laden.

And I'm not arguing those two specific facts. But the fact that Fox News in this study is where the "stupid" people are and that NPR/PBS is where the enlightened people are leads one to believe that the study was more than slightly jerry-rigged against Fox.

And the two articles posted do relate to the topic at hand; the fact that the media is dropping the ball in Iraq. How does one determine other "facts" in Iraq? It is a "fact" on the left that the Iraqis hate us and that we are doing more harm than good in Iraq. Obviously these "facts" have been trumped by more reliable on the ground sources.

The point is that there is no such thing as objective news. The fact that more people watch Fox than any other news outlet can also be a contributing factoring as to why more people less cognizant of facts are watching simply because there are more people watching...



2003 WORLD SERIES

vs

Please Believe It!
A-MOL
Frankfurter








Since: 26.6.02
From: York, England

Since last post: 3784 days
Last activity: 3726 days
#14 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.35
I believe that facts on Iraqi's likes/dislikes on the coalition forces are similar to American's views on Bush and on Pepsi vs Cola. Different people have different views. You cannot find a definitve answer for a fractured group of people on a devisive subject like this. Are some Iraqi's happy that Saddam is gone? Yes. Are some upset he has gone? Yes. Are the Iraqi's happy that a lot of their infrastructure was blown up be forces looking for weapons that do not appear to exist? Probably not. The media is not 'dropping the ball'; they are reporting the facts as fits their agenda. There just doesn't seem to be a lot going for those who support the argument that Saddam was an immediate threat.



...full of energy. Multi-orgasmic, if you will, in a cosmic sort of way."
ges7184
Lap cheong








Since: 7.1.02
From: Birmingham, AL

Since last post: 82 days
Last activity: 4 days
#15 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.49


A few of problems with this. You assert that most people who think we have discovered weapons of mass destruction watch Fox News. Well, my math skills may not be very good, but the last time I checked, 33% doesn't make up "most people". The survey would actually show that 2/3 of the people who think that we have discovered weapons of mass destruction watch something other than Fox News (at least as a "primary source").

Now, the second statement shows .67 with Fox News as a primary source. But we have a second problem (which also true of the first poll, meaning that my statement about "2/3" may or may not be true), the percentages do not add up to 100%. So what does "primary news source" mean? It implies that it would be your #1 news source. However, it seems that you were actually allowed to pick more than one. How many more than one? How is primary news source defined? Without this information, it is hard to tell exactly what this poll even means (which is the trouble with many surveys)?

Finally, this may be just a more indication of viewing tendencies than anything else. The last time I check, Fox drew better ratings than any other news network. With more people watching, it would stand to reason that with ANY opinion, the accompaning top news resource for those with that opinion would be Fox News. I would bet if you flipped the questions, like "Since the war has ended, the U.S. has not found weapons of mass destruction in Iraq." and then asked those who responded yes what was their primary news source, Fox News would also top that poll as well. It just means more people watch Fox than CNN or MSNBC, and nothing else. Many polls and studies have been flawed in similar ways, with erroneous cause/effect relationships being drawn from statistical data. If I was to guess, I think an erroneous conclusion is being drawn here as well.

Besides, in the arena of ideas, I wouldn't find it useful to call any particular group of people ignorant or stupid. You're probably not going to influence many opinions that way, and besides it's not a very thoughtful way to debate.







Everything that is wrong in this world can be blamed on Freddie Prinze Jr.
TheCow
Landjager








Since: 3.1.02
From: Knoxville, TN

Since last post: 2360 days
Last activity: 2359 days
AIM:  
Y!:
#16 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.00
Two things:

They've actually done studies that show word order in questions does indeed matter when it comes time for people to register their opinions. I'm not saying that has anything to do with the results of the poll (as I think Fox News is a bane on the television industry... not that I watch TV much anymore, but when I did, it was), just something to think about.

Also, the percentages don't have to add up to 100%. They're asking of, say, the 100% of people who watch CBS, how many people believe there's a link between Saddam and al-Qaida. 56% of the people who watch CBS believe that. I mean, we could all sit around and estimate how many people that 67%/56%/whatever% really did believe that we found a link, and then determine if that's "most," but we all have better things to do. (I hope.)

If anything, the 16% of people who watch PBS/NPR that believe there's a clear link between Saddam and terror surprise me the most.... or at least the difference between them and Fox news/CBS.





Knoxville Lindy Exchange
Michrome
Head cheese








Since: 2.1.03

Since last post: 3743 days
Last activity: 2809 days
#17 Posted on | Instant Rating: 0.00
Why is it surprising? They make sure to mention it every 30 seconds.

PBS always runs absurd specials about how the military runup during the cold war wasn't really needed, and how the Soviet Union would have "fallen anyways". It's too bad some people saw their shows in the 80's that said we would have to deal with coexistance and that the Soviet Union wouldn't fall anytime soon. The station is a joke, Moyers is a joke.



Yep, I forgot the password to my original name.
Leroy
Andouille








Since: 7.2.02
From: Huntington, NY

Since last post: 1 day
Last activity: 49 min.
#18 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.52
    Originally posted by Michromee
    Why is it surprising? They make sure to mention it every 30 seconds.

    PBS always runs absurd specials about how the military runup during the cold war wasn't really needed, and how the Soviet Union would have "fallen anyways". It's too bad some people saw their shows in the 80's that said we would have to deal with coexistance and that the Soviet Union wouldn't fall anytime soon. The station is a joke, Moyers is a joke.


Moyers has more credibility than just about anyone else on television today. And given the amount of money PBS takes from the oil industry (Petroleum Broadcasting Service is the running joke), it's a miracle he's on the air at all.

Even President Eisenhower warned of the military industrial complex on his way out - during the height of the Cold War - something every president since has ignored (Republican and Democrat). But a lot of people have made a lot of money off that government money, and it ain't the people who need it.





"It's hard to be a prophet and still make a profit."
- Da Bush Babees

"Finally, a candidate who can explain the current administration's position on civil liberties in the original German."
- Bill Maher on Arnold Schwarzenneger

"You know, I'm a follower of American politics."
- President George W. Bush, 8 Aug 2003
Grimis
Scrapple








Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1179 days
Last activity: 976 days
#19 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.29
    Originally posted by Leroy
    Moyers has more credibility than just about anyone else on television today.

HA!!!!!! I almost had a stroke from laughing so hard on that one! Thanks for the pick me up, I needed the laugh!



2003 WORLD SERIES

vs

Please Believe It!
Leroy
Andouille








Since: 7.2.02
From: Huntington, NY

Since last post: 1 day
Last activity: 49 min.
#20 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.52
(deleted by Leroy on 6.10.03 1800)



(edited by Jaguar on 6.10.03 2142)

"It's hard to be a prophet and still make a profit."
- Da Bush Babees

"Finally, a candidate who can explain the current administration's position on civil liberties in the original German."
- Bill Maher on Arnold Schwarzenneger

"You know, I'm a follower of American politics."
- President George W. Bush, 8 Aug 2003
Pages: 1 2 Next
Thread rated: 4.92
Pages: 1 2 Next
Thread ahead: New Ontario Government
Next thread: Graham: In our Out?
Previous thread: Extract From 'Dude, Where's My Country' - 7 Questions For Bush
(1729 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
"This is doubly damning to the presidency's reputation, for it is not merely a lie, but a lie about not telling lies." I love The Onion, even if they did desert Wisconsin. They're truly "equal opportunity offenders". Good stuff.
The W - Current Events & Politics - Report: Watching Fox News makes you stupidRegister and log in to post!

The W™ message board

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim

This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.141 seconds.