New Study Strongly Suggests that Fox News Viewers are Exceptionally Misinformed

[Mr Spinkles]

Those studies were about Fox News, not about Fox News viewers. You can speculate based on that, but it is only speculation.

The first link is about Fox News viewers.

Additionally, an NBC/Wall Street Journal poll of 805 adults released August 19, 2009 found lots of misinformation about the health care legislation among Americans, and a breakdown found heightened misinformation among Fox News viewers.

I concede that two studies and one opinion poll is not proof positive; but taken together with the indirect (and bountiful) evidence that Fox News is not truthful or objective in its reporting, it's reasonable to conclude Fox News misinforms viewers. We have some direct evidence and a lot of indirect evidence to support this conclusion, and I have not seen any evidence which leads us in the opposite direction. (For example, where are the polls and studies showing, even tentatively, that Fox News viewers are least misinformed?)

 

[Troublemane]

average for journalistic fraud. Here is a list of what Fox News viewers believe that just aint so:

91 percent believe the stimulus legislation lost jobs
72 percent believe the health reform law will increase the deficit
72 percent believe the economy is getting worse
60 percent believe climate change is not occurring
49 percent believe income taxes have gone up
63 percent believe the stimulus legislation did not include any tax cuts
56 percent believe Obama initiated the GM/Chrysler bailout
38 percent believe that most Republicans opposed TARP
63 percent believe Obama was not born in the U.S. (or that it is unclear)
​

See, I love studies like this. Because it reveals the blatant bias inherent in those who try and cite it as objective. 60% believe climate change (aka, "global warming") is not occurring....oh really? Disagreeing with Al Gore makes one "misinformed"? Or does it merely make one of "differing opinion"?

Or how bout the 72% who think the Health Care Law will increase the deficit? TRUE my friend. I am sorry, but the CBO has said it will. Are you calling the CBO liars? Or do you think they get their info from Fox News?

72% believe the economy is getting worse....for over a year unemployment has not improved. Foreclosures have been continuing for about as long and do not look to be ending any time soon. I suppose how it looks to you is subjective, but really, is this a joke? Asking questions like this and then labelling anyone who does not answer 'correctly' as ignorant.

What an idiotic report.

...49% believe income taxes are going up...hello? Did not we just have a vote on this? You think maybe the people answering were voicing their belief that Obama would simply fulfill his campaign promise to roll back the bush era tax cuts?

I wonder who sponsored this study? George Soros?

 

[Requia]

I must have missed that post. Can you recap briefly where you think they've gone wrong, other than just vaguely suggesting they've manipulated the questions to produce desired "liberal" results?

They didn't 'go wrong'. They weren't trying to establish which media source had the most misinformed viewers. The study is perfectly valid for its purpose (which was to establish that a problem exists).

The big issue is that the construct they're using isn't meant to be unbiased as to the question of who is more misinformed, nor is there any way to determine how much bias there is in the construct.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

See, I love studies like this. Because it reveals the blatant bias inherent in those who try and cite it as objective. 60% believe climate change (aka, "global warming") is not occurring....oh really? Disagreeing with Al Gore makes one "misinformed"? Or does it merely make one of "differing opinion"?

Actually I believe the question was "Most scientists think global warming is occurring" or the opinion among scientists is "divided evenly". It's a fact that most scientists think global warming is occurring.

Or how bout the 72% who think the Health Care Law will increase the deficit? TRUE my friend. I am sorry, but the CBO has said it will. Are you calling the CBO liars? Or do you think they get their info from Fox News?

No, you're wrong. The CBO said the health care law would decrease the deficit.

72% believe the economy is getting worse....for over a year unemployment has not improved. Foreclosures have been continuing for about as long and do not look to be ending any time soon. I suppose how it looks to you is subjective, but really, is this a joke? Asking questions like this and then labelling anyone who does not answer 'correctly' as ignorant.

I agree this one could be debatable, but it's worth considering the following from the study:

At the time the poll was conducted, the US Bureau of Economic Analysis had recently made its first estimate of growth in 2010’s third quarter and put it at 2.0%. On November 23 (shortly after the poll), the Bureau revised its estimate to 2.5%. The Bureau also reported that overall personal income increased 0.5% in October. Private wage and salary disbursements increased $33 billion in October, compared with an increase of $8 billion in September.
​

...49% believe income taxes are going up...hello? Did not we just have a vote on this? You think maybe the people answering were voicing their belief that Obama would simply fulfill his campaign promise to roll back the bush era tax cuts?

This poll was conducted before any rollback in the Bush tax cuts had taken place. No tax increases have gone into effect under Obama, in fact there were tax cuts. Many believed, incorrectly, that their taxes went up, or that no tax cuts were passed.

I wonder who sponsored this study? George Soros?

Actually the study was done by World Public Opinion .org, according to their "about" page their directors are mostly academics. The first author of this study has a PhD from Stanford and does research on public opinion. Their funding comes from the following sources:

WPO is made possible by the generous support of:
Rockefeller Foundation
Rockefeller Brothers Fund
Tides Foundation
Ford Foundation
German Marshall Fund of the United States
Compton Foundation
Carnegie Corporation
Benton Foundation
Ben and Jerry's Foundation
University of Maryland Foundation
Circle Foundation
JEHT Foundation
Stanley Foundation
Ploughshares Fund
Calvert Foundation
Secure World Foundation
Oak Foundation
United States Institute of Peace

According to the study you are 14 points more likely to incorrectly believe the stimulus included no tax cuts (even though a third of it was tax cuts) if you watch Fox News every day vs. never (49% up to 63%). You are 31 points more likely to incorrectly believe most experts think health care reform will increase the deficit. You are 30 points more likely to incorrectly believe most scientists do not think global warming is occurring.

This is not surprising given what we know about Fox News reporting. For example, personally, I happened to see 3 segments on Fox News about global warming. In those segments I saw 3 sort-of experts who do not believe in global warming. I saw 0 experts who believe in global warming. So it's not shocking viewers would get the impression most experts do not believe in global warming.

What is shocking is that a "news" channel would not only fail to inform, but misinform its viewers. You may as well watch Ren & Stimpy all the time, then instead of being misinformed on the important issues of the day, you will merely be ignorant.

 

[dust1n]

Here's an example of the "fair & balanced" interviews Fox News conducts. First, they unsuccessfully try to humiliate a spokesperson for Greenpeace:
[youtube]QVK96kDAFqs[/youtube]
YouTube - Greenpeace Wipes Away Fox News
[youtube]aIWns9ieUv4[/youtube]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aIWns9ieUv4

What a waste of 4 minutes... of everyone's time. The consumer, the employees, the Green Peace guy, the interns, the electricity...

 

[Mr Spinkles]

They didn't 'go wrong'. They weren't trying to establish which media source had the most misinformed viewers. The study is perfectly valid for its purpose (which was to establish that a problem exists).

The big issue is that the construct they're using isn't meant to be unbiased as to the question of who is more misinformed, nor is there any way to determine how much bias there is in the construct.

Let's review the study's findings:

In the great majority of cases, those with higher levels of exposure to news sources had lower levels of misinformation.
​

The exception to this general finding is Fox News. Those with higher levels of exposure to Fox News had higher levels of misinformation on 9 out of the 11 questions asked.

For every other news source studied, those with higher levels of exposure had lower levels of misinformation on almost all questions.

For example, for MSNBC, higher exposure led to greater misinformation only on 1 out of the 11 questions asked. Misinformation decreased with increased exposure to MSNBC on all other questions.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Those studies were about Fox News, not about Fox News viewers. You can speculate based on that, but it is only speculation.

It was about the viewers, and also viewers of other networks and news mediums. It surveyed viewers, and the groups were based on how frequently the subject is subjected to their news source.
And there exist mountains of evidence that show Fox News is very unethical when it comes to journalism. I'm in college and I will get expelled and loose my financial aid if I am caught doing half of what they do.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

See, I love studies like this. Because it reveals the blatant bias inherent in those who try and cite it as objective. 60% believe climate change (aka, "global warming") is not occurring....oh really? Disagreeing with Al Gore makes one "misinformed"? Or does it merely make one of "differing opinion"?

It isn't "disagreeing with Al Gore" though. I find this funny because it seems to imply Al Gore created the Global Warming stories, when in reality Al Gore is simple agreeing with the many credible scientist and institutions and their peer reviewed journals and research that have for about 30 years now been saying Global Warming is very real, and we have to do something about it.

72% believe the economy is getting worse....for over a year unemployment has not improved. Foreclosures have been continuing for about as long and do not look to be ending any time soon. I suppose how it looks to you is subjective, but really, is this a joke? Asking questions like this and then labelling anyone who does not answer 'correctly' as ignorant.

The economy is improving. The job market hasn't, but the economy itself has. Actually where I live the unemployment rate is still slightly over 12%, but the sales of many extra things, such as sells in theatre tickets, has went up. It's been speculated that the job market wont improve for several more years.

...49% believe income taxes are going up...hello? Did not we just have a vote on this? You think maybe the people answering were voicing their belief that Obama would simply fulfill his campaign promise to roll back the bush era tax cuts?

Incomes taxes haven't went up though, and it's very likely that the data was gathered before the Bush tax cuts were about to expire.

 

[Alceste]

See, I love studies like this. Because it reveals the blatant bias inherent in those who try and cite it as objective. 60% believe climate change (aka, "global warming") is not occurring....oh really? Disagreeing with Al Gore makes one "misinformed"? Or does it merely make one of "differing opinion"?

Or how bout the 72% who think the Health Care Law will increase the deficit? TRUE my friend. I am sorry, but the CBO has said it will. Are you calling the CBO liars? Or do you think they get their info from Fox News?

72% believe the economy is getting worse....for over a year unemployment has not improved. Foreclosures have been continuing for about as long and do not look to be ending any time soon. I suppose how it looks to you is subjective, but really, is this a joke? Asking questions like this and then labelling anyone who does not answer 'correctly' as ignorant.

What an idiotic report.

...49% believe income taxes are going up...hello? Did not we just have a vote on this? You think maybe the people answering were voicing their belief that Obama would simply fulfill his campaign promise to roll back the bush era tax cuts?

I wonder who sponsored this study? George Soros?

See, this is incredible. You can show someone who gets their knowledge of the world from Fox or other Republican propaganda outlets a study demonstrating that many of their views are factually incorrect, and they will reply "HAHA! You think factually true things are TRUE????? And you think WE'RE misinformed????" then blame it all on George Soros. I'm flabbergasted. Really.

Do you really think that scientists are evenly divided about whether or not global warming is occurring? Or that Obama might not have been born in the US?

I am completely amazed.

 

[Sunstone]

I am completely amazed.

Reality is what God and Fox say it is!

 

[Alceste]

They didn't 'go wrong'. They weren't trying to establish which media source had the most misinformed viewers. The study is perfectly valid for its purpose (which was to establish that a problem exists).

Its purpose was to study the amount of misinformation propagated in the last election and public awareness of being misinformed. To achieve this, they collected a certain amount of data that could be analyzed along many different lines - Republicans vs. Democrats and MSNBC, PBS, CNN, Fox etc. viewers and readers of print media. As a side effect of this exercise, they did in fact establish which media source had the most misinformed viewers (regardless of political leaning), and that happened to be Fox.

Please let me know why you think the data shows otherwise. I looked at all the tables relating to media exposure and can't see how any other conclusion is possible.

The big issue is that the construct they're using isn't meant to be unbiased as to the question of who is more misinformed, nor is there any way to determine how much bias there is in the construct.

Yes, it is meant to be unbiased as to who is more misinformed. They selected a large number of key issues and had respondents rate them in order of significance, then focused on those specific issues in their analysis. They studied both public perception of "expert opinion", which is a knowable fact, and whether or not - and to what degree - public opinion corresponds to "expert opinion".

You can't help but admit that those who believe expert opinion on the reality of climate change is divided are factually incorrect. A fact is unbiased by nature, and the study went to great lengths in the effort to ensure that the questions they posed were fact-related.

There is certainly a way to determine how much bias was in the construct. Identify a basket of similarly significant issues (or even a few) the study overlooked where the balance of "misinformation" would likely have incriminated viewers of other networks.

BTW, please note this was a study of misinformation, not "bias". Believe it or not, there really are facts.

 

[Revoltingest]

The economy is improving. The job market hasn't, but the economy itself has. Actually where I live the unemployment rate is still slightly over 12%, but the sales of many extra things, such as sells in theatre tickets, has went up. It's been speculated that the job market wont improve for several more years.

Economic improvement is not a matter of "fact". There are disputable assumptions underlying it:
- Whether the unemployment rate matters
- How the unemployment rate is calculated
- The portion of increased GNP due to inflation
- Whether one is speaking of national or a state economy
In this economy, reasonable people can disagree about whether it's up or down.
Where I am, it's getting worse.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Economic improvement is not a matter of "fact". There are disputable assumptions underlying it:
- Whether the unemployment rate matters
- How the unemployment rate is calculated
- The portion of increased GNP due to inflation
- Whether one is speaking of national or a state economy
In this economy, reasonable people can disagree about whether it's up or down.
Where I am, it's getting worse.

That would make since if it is regional, and a probable explanation as to why there are so many varying theories. Here Chrysler and Delphi (I think it was bought out by GM) haven't had any lay offs in about 6 months. When those two places are working, everyones working. From the fast food workers taking their orders daily, sales associates ringing up their orders, doctors taking care of them, and truckers shipping things to and from. And when they lay off for any period of time, it means everyone else is having to cut hours.

 

[Requia]

Let's review the study's findings:

In the great majority of cases, those with higher levels of exposure to news sources had lower levels of misinformation.
​

The exception to this general finding is Fox News. Those with higher levels of exposure to Fox News had higher levels of misinformation on 9 out of the 11 questions asked.

For every other news source studied, those with higher levels of exposure had lower levels of misinformation on almost all questions.

For example, for MSNBC, higher exposure led to greater misinformation only on 1 out of the 11 questions asked. Misinformation decreased with increased exposure to MSNBC on all other questions.

And I've said, again and again, that you cannot draw conclusions from this. And it would be trivial to create a test with the opposite result (just only ask about things that MSNBC gets wrong).

 

[Mr Spinkles]

And I've said, again and again, that you cannot draw conclusions from this. And it would be trivial to create a test with the opposite result (just only ask about things that MSNBC gets wrong).

Incredible. We can't draw conclusions from the studies and evidence and data presented on this thread, but Requia can draw conclusions from hypothetical studies, which haven't actually been performed.

 

[Alceste]

Economic improvement is not a matter of "fact". There are disputable assumptions underlying it:
- Whether the unemployment rate matters
- How the unemployment rate is calculated
- The portion of increased GNP due to inflation
- Whether one is speaking of national or a state economy
In this economy, reasonable people can disagree about whether it's up or down.
Where I am, it's getting worse.

None of which are at all relevant to the question of whether or not "most experts agree" that the economy is growing.

 

[Alceste]

And I've said, again and again, that you cannot draw conclusions from this.

Yes, you've said that over and over again but haven't really explained WHY you can't draw conclusions from this data. You've also failed to produce any data that might suggest an alternative conclusion.

And it would be trivial to create a test with the opposite result (just only ask about things that MSNBC gets wrong).

It wouldn't be "trivial" at all - Koch Industries and their ilk would immediately pay millions of dollars to any half-credible institution that thought it could produce a study saying Fox is informing its viewers more accurately than the competition. The absence of such counter-evidence says a lot about whether such a study could actually be convincingly performed.

 

[gnomon]

I just realized that if I took the survey that I would have to check off that I watch FOX News "almost always".

Scary.

 

[Sunstone]

Fox News latest motto: "We deceive, you believe."

 

[Sunstone]

The LA Times has an editorial out denouncing the "news organization's" intentional propagation of misinformation. Will other mainstream media outlets follow suite?