People who watch Colbert/TDS more informed than those who watch FOX

Pew's site is down at the moment, but the actual survey results show that, taking the margin of error into account, people who watch TDS/Colbert match up in terms of current events knowledge with listeners of Limbaugh, watchers of O'Reilly, and listeners of NPR.

OTOH, people who watched FNC (dunno why O'Reilly was separate, but the groups did answer very differently), local news affiliates, and morning shows (I don't know if they mean "Today" and "Good Morning America" or if they mean shit like "The View") were all at the bottom in terms of knowledge.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Pew's site is down at the moment, but the actual survey results show that, taking the margin of error into account, people who watch TDS/Colbert match up in terms of current events knowledge with listeners of Limbaugh, watchers of O'Reilly, and listeners of NPR.

OTOH, people who watched FNC (dunno why O'Reilly was separate, but the groups did answer very differently), local news affiliates, and morning shows (I don't know if they mean "Today" and "Good Morning America" or if they mean shit like "The View") were all at the bottom in terms of knowledge.[/QUOTE]

You have to admit that it's still comical, though.
 
Another recent study on the matter: http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=319

Let's face it, people like O'Reilly and Stewart are able to present news in much more interesting ways, with biases up-front and easily recognizable. I'd simply say its a more effective means of presenting the news, and that's tough for me to say about Stewart, but I have to give it to him. I don't care for his biases (or maybe it is that he plays them up for the audience that laps them up while I shake my head, but I digress), but you know them. And once you acknowledge them, he's informative.

And, Myke, I think certain exceptions should be given to separate the news analysis shows from the hard news. O'Reilly is a very different animal from Shep "Katrina was my road to a Pulitzer" Smith. Similar analysis...es...sisesisieesiss.... analysii?... could be drawn with other channels, but probably vary on the information content of the talking heads.

For instance, Hannity and Colmes? LIQUID PHAIL.

Meanwhile, Nancy Grace and Greta van Susteren's heads both exploded when it was revealed that O.J. Simpson was the father of Anna Nicole's baby and the two conspired to murder Natalee Holloway in an effort to cover this up. (Moral: TV news is phail)

Exit Question: Am I the only one who notices that CNN and MSNBC viewers are usually lumped together in the news story presentation of these polls, whereas Fox News viewers are segregated into their own demographic?

Edit Question: Are we really getting dumber as the decades go by, or are we just noticing it more?
 
[quote name='mykevermin']people-press.org is the Pew Research Center's website. It's the same study as cited in the OP.[/quote]

Aye, but if you read the news story, you see the stats twisted into some sort of teachable moment.
 
[quote name='RollingSkull']Aye, but if you read the news story, you see the stats twisted into some sort of teachable moment.[/QUOTE]

That's true; since I'm familiar with Pew, I knew how to access their actual report and compare it to what E&P actually said. That does not make it, as you say, "another recent study on the matter."

I'm not as troubled or bemused by these studies as others are. Pew is also one group (Gallup does this often), where survey researchers ask a random sample to (for one example) name the nine supreme court justices, and, comparatively, name the seven dwarves. Since (disappointing, but expected) more can name the dwarves than the justices, people come to the false conclusion that the average American is a dolt.

The reality is that many Americans are savvy folks with misplaced intelligence. Either Chomsky or Nader used to bemoan intellectual cries about how "stupid" Americans are, stating that asking Americans about, say, sports statistics will show you that we are a very smart nation - if intelligence is measured by knowledge and analytical skills, and not, say, whether one can name the current president of Russia.

So, when only 36% of people can name Putin as the president of Russia, it doesn't bother me. I do find it, however, a bit disappointing that only 60% correctly name Putin when given a multiple choice version of the question (with other answers being Yeltsin and Gorbachev).

Sure, I wish more Americans were politically aware, but I don't think a lack of political awareness means Americans are stupid as much as it means the average American is jaded as fuck by politics - low across the board approval ratings for damn near any politician outside of an election cycle can also support that claim.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']That's true; since I'm familiar with Pew, I knew how to access their actual report and compare it to what E&P actually said. That does not make it, as you say, "another recent study on the matter."

I'm not as troubled or bemused by these studies as others are. Pew is also one group (Gallup does this often), where survey researchers ask a random sample to (for one example) name the nine supreme court justices, and, comparatively, name the seven dwarves. Since (disappointing, but expected) more can name the dwarves than the justices, people come to the false conclusion that the average American is a dolt.

The reality is that many Americans are savvy folks with misplaced intelligence. Either Chomsky or Nader used to bemoan intellectual cries about how "stupid" Americans are, stating that asking Americans about, say, sports statistics will show you that we are a very smart nation - if intelligence is measured by knowledge and analytical skills, and not, say, whether one can name the current president of Russia.

So, when only 36% of people can name Putin as the president of Russia, it doesn't bother me. I do find it, however, a bit disappointing that only 60% correctly name Putin when given a multiple choice version of the question (with other answers being Yeltsin and Gorbachev).

Sure, I wish more Americans were politically aware, but I don't think a lack of political awareness means Americans are stupid as much as it means the average American is jaded as fuck by politics - low across the board approval ratings for damn near any politician outside of an election cycle can also support that claim.[/QUOTE]

I bet you 80% could name the contestants on Idol, though.

I find the geography questions the most appalling. Hell, it's a map. A map with pictures. And colors. Doesn't take a genius to be able to point out the huge orange country in Asia as China. Take away the orange, and people freak.

I sometimes get confused on the former SSRs, but I'd hope that I'd get a minor pass on those since they didn't really exist when I was in school.
 
[quote name='dopa345']It also states that Democrats are less informed than Republicans though you didn't need a study to say that.[/QUOTE]

Not true, it says Democrats and Republicans are about equally informed, but there are more Democrats in the worst-informed group than Republicans. Given the facts of a younger skew in the demographics of the Democratic Party and increasing knowledge with age, this is hardly surprising.

[quote name='mykevermin']Sure, I wish more Americans were politically aware, but I don't think a lack of political awareness means Americans are stupid as much as it means the average American is jaded as fuck by politics - low across the board approval ratings for damn near any politician outside of an election cycle can also support that claim.[/QUOTE]

I think you're on to something - Americans have a ton of knowledge, but it's knowledge of stupid things. News channels (and other TV) feed into this trend greatly. A lot of people know what's going on in their favorite soap opera or on "24," but relatively few know much about Darfur or Venezuela.

[quote name='CocheseUGA']I find the geography questions the most appalling. Hell, it's a map. A map with pictures. And colors. Doesn't take a genius to be able to point out the huge orange country in Asia as China. Take away the orange, and people freak.

I sometimes get confused on the former SSRs, but I'd hope that I'd get a minor pass on those since they didn't really exist when I was in school.[/QUOTE]

Yep, the geographical ignorance of Americans is astounding:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12591413/
6 in 10 could not find Iraq on a map of the Middle East (75% Israel)
30% thought the most heavily fortified border in the world was between the U.S. and Mexico
Less than 3 in 10 think it important to know the locations of countries in the news
1/3 could not find Louisiana on a map (this was May 2006)

As the holder of a degree in geography and someone who grew up with no independent Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan to study, I hereby grant you a pass on them. Now give me the capital of Uganda :D
 
Since (disappointing, but expected) more can name the dwarves than the justices, people come to the false conclusion that the average American is a dolt.
Click to expand...

I disagree on the disappointing aspect. Supreme Court justices are appointed for life by bodies we elect, ostensibly, to handle such things. They aren't accountable to us, why know their names?

[quote name='elprincipe']Yep, the geographical ignorance of Americans is astounding:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12591413/
6 in 10 could not find Iraq on a map of the Middle East (75% Israel)
30% thought the most heavily fortified border in the world was between the U.S. and Mexico
Less than 3 in 10 think it important to know the locations of countries in the news
1/3 could not find Louisiana on a map (this was May 2006)[/quote]

Not all of us majored in geography. :p

Yeah, that border thing is stupid, but I've actually never seen a case made for invoking American lack of geographical expertise as anything other than a means of attempting to steal an argument through erudition.
 
[quote name='dopa345']It also states that Democrats are less informed than Republicans though you didn't need a study to say that.[/QUOTE]

Your posts completely disprove the study.
 
[quote name='evanft']Your posts completely disprove the study.[/QUOTE]

I don't see how as I am neither a Republican nor a Democrat.

You seem to have taken my point personally even though I never personally attacked anyone here. If you look at statistics on the demographics between Republicans or Democrats, it's a pretty simple inference from the data.
 
[quote name='elprincipe']Not true, it says Democrats and Republicans are about equally informed, but there are more Democrats in the worst-informed group than Republicans. Given the facts of a younger skew in the demographics of the Democratic Party and increasing knowledge with age, this is hardly surprising.
[/QUOTE]

It states that the average Republican (by their criteria) is better informed than the average Democrat. I'm not sure how you can argue otherwise.
 
:lol:
[quote name='dopa345']It also states that Democrats are less informed than Republicans though you didn't need a study to say that.[/quote]
 
[quote name='dopa345']It states that the average Republican (by their criteria) is better informed than the average Democrat. I'm not sure how you can argue otherwise.[/QUOTE]

I suppose technically you are right...but quoting from the article so everyone can judge for themselves what this means:

Democrats and Republicans were about equally represented in the most knowledgeable group but there were more Democrats in the least aware group.
Click to expand...
 
Well, I lost the Over/under on how long it'd take for this thread to devolve into "YOUR POSTS PROVE THAT DEMS/REPS ARE LESS KNOWLEDGABLE!"

And to think, it took an ENORMOUS amount of self-control not to finger Msut in this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top