Jump to content
IGNORED

Does Fox News Cause Ignorance, or Do Ignorant Viewers Prefer Fox News? A new study reveals the gap between the channel's fans and the rest of America


6853395

Recommended Posts

Does Fox News Cause Ignorance, or Do Ignorant Viewers Prefer Fox News? A new study reveals the gap between the channel's fans and the rest of America

http://www.newrepublic.com/article/118066/brookings-survey-fox-news-home-most-conservative-republicans

 

By Danny Vinik @dannyvinik Photo: Getty Images/Frederick M. Brown

 

Immediately before the presidential election in 2012, Fox News viewers were certain of one thing: Mitt Romney was going to win. It didn’t matter that poll after poll had President Barack Obama winning by a comfortable margin. Conservative pundits Michael Barone, George Will and Dick Morris all expected Romney to earn more than 300 electoral votes. Even after Obama's victory was certain on election night, Karl Rove wouldn't admit defeat.

 

For those of us reading Nate Silver and other election forecasters, those conservative predictions were laughably bad. And election night proved us correct: Obama won with 332 electoral votes. The millions of Republicans who were shocked and disappointed on election night were not let down by their hubris, although it undoubtedly played a role. The real fault lies with conservative media system, which had become an echo chamber of right wing talking points that did not reflect the national landscape.

 

In the aftermath of Obama’s reelection, smart conservatives argued that the right wing media was putting their party at a disadvantage by obscuring the truth. “You haven't just been misinformed about the horse race,” the Atlantic’s Conor Friedersdorf wrote. “Since the very beginning of the election cycle, conservative media has been failing you.” While Friedersdorf hoped the shellacking would be an awakening for the party, he doubted it would be. Nineteen months later, Friedersdorf is looking prophetic: A new Brookings and Public Religion Research Institute poll shows just how out of touch Fox News viewers are with both their fellow Republicans and the rest of the country. They learned nothing from 2012.

 

The Brookings/PRRI report surveyed 1,538 adults focused on immigration reform, but also included questions on their news preferences and a collection of other policy issues. The focus on new preferences allowed the researchers to divide the Republican respondents into two groups: those that most trust Fox News “to provide accurate information about politics and current events” and those that most trust a different network. The former, whom the authors label “Fox News Republicans,” made up 53 percent of Republican respondents. “Non-Fox News Republicans” made up the remaining 47 percent. This was an easy split to make, but for Democrats there was no clear divide on news preferences. Thirty one percent of Democrats most trusted broadcast news stations (ABC, NBC, and CBS) while another 26 percent chose CNN. Smaller percentages chose public television (14 percent), MSNBC (10 percent) and the Daily Show with Jon Stewart (9 percent).

 

trust_in_television_news_sources.png
PRRI/Brookings

 

In other words, the Republican Party is extremely polarized among its news choices while the Democratic Party is scattered among a number of networks.

 

This makes a huge difference for the policy preferences among Republicans. For instance, 42 percent of Fox News Republicans support a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants. For Non-Fox News Republicans, it’s 60 percent. That puts the views of Non-Fox News Republicans closer to those of Independents (61 percent support a path to citizenship) and Democrats (70 percent).

 
The difference is even starker in terms of views of immigrants. Sixty percent of Fox News Republicans say immigrants are a burden, compared to just 33 percent who believe they strengthen the country. For Non-Fox News Republicans, the numbers are nearly reversed: 56 percent believe immigrants strengthen the country, compared with 38 percent who believe they are a burden. As the chart below shows, the views of Non-Fox News Republicans are once again closer to the views of all Americans than Fox News Republicans:
republican_views_on_immigrants.png
PRRI/Brookings

A similar dynamic exists for Republican views on whether immigrants threaten American customs and values. In fact, on every issue, Fox News Republicans are more conservative than Non-Fox News Republicans (click to enlarge):

fox_news_difference_thumb.png
PRRI/Brookings

That makes Fox News the home of the Republican Party’s most conservative members. But those members would have found a home somewhere. It’s telling that they have done so at the Republican Party’s preeminent media source, but it does not disqualify the network from delivering factually correct news. Except the Brookings/PRRI survey also finds that Fox News Republicans are the most uninformed on immigration issues as well. Sixty four percent of Fox News Republicans wrongly believe that illegal immigration has increased during the past few years.  Adults who most trust the broadcast stations do not excel at that question either: 46 percent believe that illegal immigration has increased. But that’s much better than Fox News viewers.

 

That doesn’t mean Fox News is at fault for their viewers’ ignorance. It’s impossible to determine causality from this survey. Fox News may attract extremely conservative viewers or it may make conservative viewers more extreme. It’s likely a combination of the two. “It is not possible from this data to offer a precise solution to the chicken-and-egg question whether the more important fact is that those with very conservative views are already attracted to Fox or whether Fox turns its viewers into conservatives,” the authors write. “What is clear is that conservative are drawn to Fox, and that Fox may, in turn, reinforce and perhaps harden conservative views.”

 

Those hardened views are at odds not only with the rest of America, but also with the remaining 47 percent of the Republican Party who trust other news sources. In turn, Fox News viewers receive a warped view of the political landscape. Theyand Republican congressmenmay not consider Fox News an extreme news source. They may think it represents the center of the GOP. Under that mindset, presidential candidates should adopt a policy platform that appeals to the average Fox News viewer. But that’s a mistake when the average Fox News member is an extreme conservative. Instead of adopting a position that can garner support from the entire political spectrum of the Republican Party, they have chosen one that turns off moderate Republicans and appeals directly to extreme conservatives. Those moderate Republicans may ultimately vote for the GOP, but this strategy almost certainly alienates independent voters.

 

This makes the Fox News echo chamber a hazard for the party. It creates extreme candidates under the guise that they are electable, builds up a false narrative that they are in fact electable and then acts surprised when that narrative doesn’t play itself out. In 2012, this storyline was on full display. In the aftermath of that defeat, Fox and the Republican Party had the chance to fix it by reorganizing the station’s content with more moderate hosts and more accurate coverage. They have chosen not to do soand it’s only going to continue to hurt them in 2016.

 

Article:

http://www.newrepublic.com/article/118066/brookings-survey-fox-news-home-most-conservative-republicans

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Definitely ignorant viewers prefer Faux news. I would think it would be impossible for Fox news to get free thinking people to see their twisted points of view. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just wish UK had an equivalent of Fox rather than our left wing channels such as BBC and ITV were everything is PC and panders to all our various ethnic and sexually diverse groups that we are told we have to accept. UK has gone mad I mean hell a rugby player has just been banned for make a homophobic comment during a game - and I thoughg rugby was a game for men!

 

Our soaps are now littered with ethnicity and an over bias towards gays so bring on Fox in UK I say and perhaps also let us express our true views rather than PC sensorship.

Loving it on Soi 6

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some info for non-Americans:

 

Don't confuse "news" and "opinions."

MSNBC has admitted they are not a "news" network and don't even belong on the list.

The Daily show is a comedy half hour and definitely does not belong on a list of "news" shows. Anyone who thinks they are getting actual news instead of a daily version of SNL's Weekend Update is sadly mistaken. I'm sure most of their viewers realize this.

While Fox News' opinion shows may skew very conservative, their news shows cover events more broadly, i.e. they don't cover up or ignore stories for political reasons.

The only "free" national networks (requiring only an antenna and no monthly payment) are Broadcast networks ABC, CBS, NBC and PBS. (There is a FOX broadcast network, but they don't do broadcast news--only local news, sports and weather by local affiliates.) Everything else on the list is not available to everyone, so that also skews the answers from lower level income groups towards the Broadcast News and Public Television options.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The NEWS is presented well... and the OPINION shows often include liberal points of view along with the conservative... The demonization of fox is strange. Almost fascist in nature, in my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Last month Fox News was complaining that Obama was "giving up control of the internet".  They didn't mention anything about IPv6 having virtually unlimited addressing space so there's no longer any strategic advantage in the allocation of IP addresses.

 

Fox News is YELLOW journalism. 

 

Yellow journalism, or the yellow press, is a type of journalism that presents little or no legitimate well-researched news and instead uses eye-catching headlines to sell more newspapers. Techniques may include exaggerations of news events, scandal-mongering, or sensationalism. By extension, the term yellow journalism is used today as a pejorative to decry any journalism that treats news in an unprofessional or unethical fashion.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellow_journalism

Working hard to support poor Issan families, by shagging as many bar girls as I possibly can.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fox triples the viewers of all other cable networks combined, soi gues it's how you look at it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The title of this thread speaks volumes itself. Ridiculing and demonizing those who you disagree with politically is quite fashionable these days.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Last month Fox News was complaining that Obama was "giving up control of the internet". They didn't mention anything about IPv6 having virtually unlimited addressing space so there's no longer any strategic advantage in the allocation of IP addresses.

 

Fox News is YELLOW journalism.

 

Yellow journalism, or the yellow press, is a type of journalism that presents little or no legitimate well-researched news and instead uses eye-catching headlines to sell more newspapers. Techniques may include exaggerations of news events, scandal-mongering, or sensationalism. By extension, the term yellow journalism is used today as a pejorative to decry any journalism that treats news in an unprofessional or unethical fashion.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellow_journalism

 

can you find examples of this on the liberal side? I can think of several... In fact it is hard to find ANY media outlet not practicing this anymore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Real journalism is being choked to death by the corporate media system that realized a while back that they can make way more money with fear mongering and battling talking heads than actually disseminating facts and educating the people. News and entertainment were, once upon a time, separate things. Not anymore.

 

With Fox news, you also have an owner with a strong point of view that puts a lot of effort into making sure that point of view infuses just about everything they broadcast. There are other US media outlets that stake out a somewhat liberal POV, but not too liberal, because that would disturb their own corporate owners.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Real journalism is being choked to death by the corporate media system that realized a while back that they can make way more money with fear mongering and battling talking heads than actually disseminating facts and educating the people. News and entertainment were, once upon a time, separate things. Not anymore.

 

With Fox news, you also have an owner with a strong point of view that puts a lot of effort into making sure that point of view infuses just about everything they broadcast. There are other US media outlets that stake out a somewhat liberal POV, but not too liberal, because that would disturb their own corporate owners.

 

Hahaha, ya msnbc is "not too liberal", 555555!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

MSNBC is liberal light. Watch much Democracy Now?

 

Whatever you think of their POV, they have the funkiest theme music of any news show out there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fox News simply provides an alternative viewpoint?  They are no more ridicoulous than those who chastise them for having a contrary opinion. 

The problem in America is people have accepted the corrupt two party system as the norm.  Therefore if one criticizes a democrat he must be a terrible republican and vice versa and if one criticizes Obama he must be a racist.  Such ingrained ignorant thought does not move the country forward.

 

I support neither party and hope a third party emerges that is free of the corruption and the mind games the two parties play with the voters.  The Republicans and Democrats are peas in a pod run by the establishment and not in your or my interest.  One need only look to Bush and Clinton who spewed hateful rhetoric toward one another during the election then when they retired Bush and Clinton are the best of buddies.  Sadly the last decent President was Carter and before him Kennedy but both were hammered by those pulling the strings because they could not stay on short leashes.

 

And by the way that article posted is as biased or more so than Fox.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I applaud any media outlet that scrutinizes the government.  For whatever reason.  Most politicians need to be monitored constantly.  What party they belong to is irrelevant.

Gaee lao. mai law doi. Mai ben rai, mee daang!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Best to get your news from alternative sources on the internet.  The major networks are all in the hip pockets of the corporations.  There is little if any investigative or inquisitive journalism.  You are intentionally being dumbed down. 

 

And for a good laugh watch Anchorman 2 it really is a satire on Fox News and very funny.

 

There is a reason CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS have lost countless viewers to online news and its not because they offer trusting insightful journalism it is because they are in the hip pockets of the corps and people are catching on.  Fox is too but people like the fact at least they are contrary.  This is why the networks are fighting to get control of the interent with new regulations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I watch Fox news quite often.  I don't believe I'm ignorant at all.

 

I hold advanced educational degrees.

 

Have achieved status in the corporate world.

 

Have friends from all walks of life.

 

Have a decent handle on what's going on around the world and in my city and neighborhood.

 

I travel (obviously), read a lot, farthest as I could possibly be from being racist (if you really need know I will be visiting Pattaya with my - get ready for this - non-white friend next month).

 

Am open to hearing others points of view, etc etc etc.

 

So, the answer - in my case at least - would be no.

 

 

My opinion is that the OP's topic is a bit arrogant and childish, I must say. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In response to the thread title speaking volumes, ridiculing, or demonizing, the title is the precise title of the publication and has not been editorialized or modified in any fashion.  I strongly believe, and once suggested in another news thread, that perhaps the moderators of this forum should have a policy about editorialized titles in the news postings.
 
It is for this reason that the title of the article is verbatim of the publication itself and has not been editorialized.
 
Furthermore, this is is a published article and neither the title nor article contents have been editorialized or modified.  In addition, for the original post, I intentionally neglected to add any comments, commentary, opinions, conclusions, etc.  The intention was to post the article itself, as is in the publication, and if you click on the link below, you will see that the publication, both title and contents, are identical. There are many world-news articles republished in this forum category and this should hopefully clear up any such misunderstandings that the title of the thread has been editorialized or that the original post is arrogant.
 
The purpose of sharing this news article was to share an article from the New Republic summarizing a recent study from the Brookings Institute. There have been discussions on this forum in the past regarding Fox News and exchanges between forum users regarding various positions on these matters.  Without commenting or addressing these posts and comments from past PA discussions, I simply re-published the actual article and source in the news thread to share and consider discussion of the article and study.
 
Here is a link to the 62-page PDF regarding the study.
 
 
Below is an un-editorialized description of the Brookings Institution:
 
"The Brookings Institution is a private non-profit organization. Its mission is to conduct high-quality, independent research and, based on that research, to provide innovative, practical recommendations for policymakers and the public. The conclusions and recommendations of any Brookings publication are solely those of its author(s), and do not reflect the views of the Institution, its management, or its other scholars.
 
Brookings recognizes that the value it provides is in its absolute commitment to quality, independence and impact. Activities supported by its donors reflect this commitment and the analysis and recommendations are not determined or influenced by any donation."
 
 
Neither this thread, nor the publication itself, is to say that all Fox News viewers are the same or that board members here who watch Fox News are necessarily categorized this way.  The Brookings study is based on statistical data and analysis to show that there is a pattern of viewpoints that shows, statistically, how a significant percentage of Fox News viewers differ from the general population on such matters, including, but not limited to, understandings of factual information.
 
The 62-page study, which I have taken the time to read, is a gathering of data supporting the influence that Fox News has on a significant majority of its viewing demographic.  I'm not going to bring up the source here, but similar impartial statistical studies have been performed in the past contrasting factual news data and information and how it's perceived between Fox News viewers vs. the general population, and similar statistical studies have been conducted for years. 
 
For example, in 2003-2004, when there was a similar thorough study as the publication in this thread, it was prior to the 2004 general election and it showed, as I recall, that even though it was a fact that Sadaam Hussien was not involved with the 9/11 attack, surveys showed that less than 1/3rd of the general population believed that Sadaam Hussien was involved with the 9/11 attack.  However, over 70% of Fox News viewers were convinced, or believed, that Sadaam Hussien was connected to 9/11.  Similarly, it was a fact that no weapons of mass destruction were ever found.  While less than 40% of the general population believed there were weapons of mass destruction, due to the repeated statements, this number was over 70% when isolated to Fox News viewers.  Statistically, there is substantiation through such research that Fox News has a targeted demographic audience and has an influence upon the accuracy of how a significant portion of it's viewing population understanding of such matters may be skewed.  Similarly, in 2010, approximately two years to the first Presidential term, approximately 20% of the US population believed in the so-called birther theory, even though it's factual that President Obama was born in Hawaii, this figure stood at greater than 50% among Fox News viewers.  Also, approximately 24% of the country believed he was of Muslim decent, which also stood above 50% among Fox News viewers.

Many of the subsequent comments above pertaining to this publication (republished in this thread) do not address the Brookings study or its statistical findings. Whether one's view are conservative or liberal, opinions are one thing, but I have come to a point both on this forum, and with people in general, that I do not wish to take the time to debate established factual information.  I have yet to see anyone comment or discuss that the research or demographic conclusions from the 62-page research study are erroneous or provide any substantiation that the study is bias or partial.  It's data collection comparing various demographics with comparisons of Fox and non-Fox viewers and recording the results.
 
Always remember that facts are always true, whether or not you choose to believe them.  The same applies to established science as well.
 
I don't take issue with alternative viewpoints, opinions, or ideologies.  However, I do take issue with inaccurate facts and misinformation.
 
As for news and information, I personally am not a fan of television news, but prefer published news from both reputable and professional journalism sources.  It's not a characterization, in my view, of liberal or conservative media, but rather, factual, accurate, and documented reporting.  I stick with news that accurately portrays what the facts are and allows the readers themselves to obtain the information and decide for themselves whether or not the policies are optimal upon consensus of that facts.  I do not believe it's beneficial to be misled on actual facts and data to adhere to ones particular agenda.  In addition, there are many reputable, and impartial, fact-checking organizations keeping tabs upon what's true and supported by actual documentation.
 
In summary, the original post was an un-editorialized article, and title, pertaining to the Brookings Institutes study, shared because there have been previous discussions regarding the professional journalism, or lack thereof, of Fox News coverage.  I welcome comments and discussion regarding the 62-page independent study and it's findings.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you watch FOX, you are a racist!! Haha. Typical liberal response.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

MSNBC annoys Conservatives. Fox News frightens Liberals.

 

Liberals get their values (1) from the 'progressive' political parties(not their families); these values have permeated the public sector - including schools, and the TV and movie industries to such a great extent that they have become the primary agents of socialization within Liberal culture. This process produced many good results in the past; such as, the civil rights movement, greater protection of women, assistance for the poor, and an end to the Vietnam war; however, it now serves to stifle freedom of expression - even within the family!. Enter Fox News.

 

Fox News counterbalances the oppressive force that the Liberal culture exerts upon the American populace. Liberal indoctrinatees fear that FNC is spreading dangerous lies. They do not realize that the fear is caused by their core belief system being challenged.

 

(1) agents of socialization: Social groups, institutions, and individuals (especially the family, schools, peers, and the mass media) that provide structured situations in which socialization takes place...  http://quizlet.com/18792733/sociology-real-world-ch-4-flash-cards/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I watch Fox news quite often.  I don't believe I'm ignorant at all.

 

I hold advanced educational degrees.

 

Have achieved status in the corporate world.

 

Have friends from all walks of life.

 

Have a decent handle on what's going on around the world and in my city and neighborhood.

 

I travel (obviously), read a lot, farthest as I could possibly be from being racist (if you really need know I will be visiting Pattaya with my - get ready for this - non-white friend next month).

 

Am open to hearing others points of view, etc etc etc.

 

So, the answer - in my case at least - would be no.

 

 

My opinion is that the OP's topic is a bit arrogant and childish, I must say. 

+100

Link to comment
Share on other sites

obviously there are intelligent people watching fox, who can draw their own opinions

 

same for the 'other' side.

 

I don't agree with much of what that network airs and certainly the daily show makes good use of murdoch indoctrinated journalism  

 

stuff like the anti gay stance is just medieval    

Member since Dec 06.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rather than ignorant (like you?) Fox viewers don't subscribe to the drivel that the establishment news stations spew out.  They all spew out the Obama Party line.  Fox is the ONLY news station that reports the items controversial to O'BUMMER.  They also keep asking the tough questions...

Why didn't the whitehouse do something in Bengazi?

Why is the VA so poorly managed?

Why did the IRS target certain political groups...

The other stations sweep it under the rug and kiss OBUMMER'S ass.

FOX kicks his ass for fucking up...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.google.co.th/search?q=iraq+fox+news&num=100&newwindow=1&safe=off&client=firefox-a&hs=k6d&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&channel=sb&source=lnms&tbm=nws&sa=X&ei=gjKZU-X6KYbl8AWh-4CACQ&ved=0CAgQ_AUoAQ&biw=1440&bih=750

 

Q. I wonder how the other networks will cover the current Iraq situation?

A. It is GW Bush's fault. :GoldenSmile1:

 

And the Obama administration's response:

"The U.S. said it is "deeply concerned" about the situation, with White House spokesman Josh Earnest urged Iraq's leaders to "step up to the plate" to preserve security. U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon also urged “all political leaders to show national unity against the threats facing Iraq.”

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/al-qaeda-offshoot-seizes-mosul-pushes-500k-iraqis-flee-n128156

 

Obama may possess above average intelligence but his indoctrination lowers his IQ to that of a child; however, he may just be appealing to his voter base. :GoldenSmile1:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fox News simply provides an alternative viewpoint?  They are no more ridicoulous than those who chastise them for having a contrary opinion. 

The problem in America is people have accepted the corrupt two party system as the norm.  Therefore if one criticizes a democrat he must be a terrible republican and vice versa and if one criticizes Obama he must be a racist.  Such ingrained ignorant thought does not move the country forward.

 

I support neither party and hope a third party emerges that is free of the corruption and the mind games the two parties play with the voters.  The Republicans and Democrats are peas in a pod run by the establishment and not in your or my interest.  One need only look to Bush and Clinton who spewed hateful rhetoric toward one another during the election then when they retired Bush and Clinton are the best of buddies.  Sadly the last decent President was Carter and before him Kennedy but both were hammered by those pulling the strings because they could not stay on short leashes.

 

And by the way that article posted is as biased or more so than Fox.

Are you serious?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.



  • COVID-19

    Any posts or topics which the moderation team deems to be rumours/speculatiom, conspiracy theory, scaremongering, deliberately misleading or has been posted to deliberately distort information will be removed - as will BMs repeatedly doing so. Existing rules also apply.

  • Advertise on Pattaya Addicts
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Our picks

    • Hi Guys

      As many of you know we have been running now for 16 years and apart from one brief time when we were allowed PayPal, so could use the inbuilt donation function, we have tried to avoid asking for donations. We have certainly avoided being in anyones face about it.

      Sadly that has now changed.

      The forum currently costs around $900 a month to operate. That includes Bangkok and Philippines but PA makes up the vast majority of it. This fee covers forum hosting, image hosting, notification emails and support.

      Before anyone says "its expensive" please be aware we have tried for years to find better for cheaper - it just doesn't exist for the size we are. Also a lot of hosts wont Touch us anyway. Our current host is actually cheaper than the previous one but that brings its own problems.

      Moving on -

      I would like to stress there is NO obligation whatsoever. Also, whatever happens the forum is going no-where!

      Donators can CHOOSE to have their donation listed (probably in this thread or we can make a new one) or to remain anonymous. Likewise they can CHOOSE whether the amount is published or not.

      There is no minimum, or maximum for that matter. ANY donation will be very gratefully received. We are very aware that many members are also having it tough these days.

      We are still unable to promote/post PayPal addresses etc on the forum so would ask that anyone who would like to make a donation to PM me, or ask me here to PM you and we will sort out details via that PM.
      • 97 replies
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.