Whose audience is better informed?
posted at 10:44 am on March 8, 2009 by Ed Morrissey
Pew Research did a survey to test the audiences of various media outlets in order to determine how well each informs their listeners or viewers — and came up with some surprising results. They asked three questions based on current events, and then ranked the outlets by the percentage of their audience who got each right, and all three correct. A few surprises hit the top of the market (via Mark Impomeni):
When the Pew Research Center tested the public’s political knowledge earlier this year, the best-informed news audiences crossed the ideological spectrum. Nearly half of regular readers of The New Yorker, The Atlantic and Harper’s Magazine (48%) answered three political knowledge questions correctly. Regular listeners of NPR (44% three correct), and regular viewers of Hardball (43%) and Hannity & Colmes (42%) also fared well compared with other news audiences.
The survey, conducted April 30-June 1 among 3,612 adults ages 18 and over, found that about half of Americans (53%) knew that the Democrats have a majority in the House of Representatives, while 42% could identify the secretary of state (Condoleezza Rice). Fewer than three-in-ten (28%) could name the prime minister of Great Britain (Gordon Brown). Just 18% of the public answered all three questions correctly.
This follows on John Ziegler’s work at How Obama Got Elected, although in a less partisan manner. Ziegler also conducted his surveys of Obama and McCain voters to demonstrate the fecklessness of media coverage, a theme he put together as a documentary in Media Malpractice. Pew essentially finds the same problem working from the other direction — most of the mainstream media outlets fail to inform their audiences properly for political discourse.
Here is the top ten, as an example, with their aggregate scores:
- New Yorker/Atlantic – 48%
- NPR – 44%
- Hardball – 43%
- Hannity & Colmes – 42%
- Political magazines – 39%
- Rush Limbaugh – 36%
- Business magazines – 36%
- BBC – 34%
- Colbert Report – 34%
- News Hour (PBS) – 33%
Hannity and Rush were the only two outlets where over 80% of the audience could correctly identify the majority party in the House. Only a handful of others scored in the 70s. How did we do? Not too bad. “Online news” ranked 14th, with an aggregate score of 29%.
And where were the rest of the American media? In rather poor positions. In fact, ESPN — a sports network — outranked almost all of them:
- MS-NBC: 19th (25%)
- ESPN: 23rd (21%)
- NBC Evening News: 24th (21%)
- ABC News: 27th (19%)
- CNN: 28th (19%)
- Fox: 29th (19%)
- CBS News: 38th (10%)
Of all the listed news outlets above, only CBS failed to inform their audience well enough to get a majority that knew Democrats controlled the House. That’s really pathetic.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »
LETTER FROM THE BOSS…..
As the CEO of this organization, I have resigned myself to
the fact that Barrack Obama is our President and that our taxes and government fees will increase in a BIG way. To compensate for these increases,our prices would have to increase by about 10%.
But since we cannot increase our prices right now due to
the dismal state of the economy, we will have to lay off six of our employees instead. This has really been bothering me, since I believe we are family here and I didn’t know how to choose who would have to go.
So, this is what I did. I walked through our parking lot
and found six Obama bumper stickers on our employees’ cars and have decided these folks will be the ones to let go. I can’t think of a more fair way to approach this problem. They voted for change; I gave it to them.
I will see the rest of you at the annual company picnic.
JustTruth101 on March 8, 2009 at 10:49 AM
Jeff Goldstein’s manifesto on liberty:
I want to take these arguments out of the realm of personalities so that they reach a wider audience. If I’m right for part of that job, I’m willing. If not — if I’m too poison a commodity — somebody else can do it. The important thing is that the arguments be made and the message delivered. If we don’t stop the assault on language, we will necessarily drift toward totalitarianism and liberal fascism. NECESSARILY. Meaning, it’s built into the premises we are accepting.
I have a strategy — a shame strategy, one that plays to the constitutional weaknesses of the entitlement generation, that I think will resonate and could turn the tides. It also has the practical effect of turning the indoctrination strategy of the left against them. And I want to begin getting the word out.
Doing it on a blog that is reviled by the left (when they talk about me, they use an alternate spelling of my name, “Godlstein,” and never link my actual posts) and ignored by many high traffic sites on the right for the dual crime of being unconventional and having taken some of them on in a way that hurt their feelings, is no way to get things done.
This site has to change. The OUTLAW thing — which daleyrocks suggested over at Patterico’s is really just my cry for attention — needs to take on a life of its own, whether I’m around to steward the thing or not.
To get that rolling, we’ll need everyone who is interested to use the entirety of his or her networking skills. We’ll need to set up some sort of foundation and portal. We’ll need to organize events, host debates and speeches, and — most importantly — remain honest and true to our principles.
happy is right: people can present me as a whining attention whore, but in truth, I am as I am because, as time has gone on, I’ve watched the online classical liberal / conservative / libertarian movement head backwards, to the point where the GOP ran John McCain, Roger Simon is now responsible for shaping the “voice” of conservatism, and Patterico and Allah are arguing that Rush Limbaugh’s provocateurism places an undue burden on conservatives and politicians hoping to win over the soft middle (who, we’re told, don’t understand nuance in the first place), making it impossible to win the kinds of elections that would give the GOP power, even if said iteration of the GOP would of necessity be no different, really, than the Democrats they’d be replacing — and it literally hurts me.
I care, but I do so poorly — in such a way that I get depressed or angry or bitter, which unfortunately means that I alienate people online on occasion. My wife would much prefer I just quit altogether, and I’ve come close on several occasions. She knows me for who I am. So it hurts her to see me railing against what it is clear, given the present layout of entrenched power players, I have no hope of changing should I just stay with the status quo.
But the problem is, how can I stay away when I know what’s happening, and when I feel that, given the opportunity, some of the arguments I’ve articulated here over the years really could make a pivotal difference?
The real truth is — and I said this earlier — I don’t much care how the message gets out, or who gets the credit. I’ve only complained about being frozen out because it means the arguments are being frozen out.
And it’s time to change that.
OUTLAWISM doesn’t have its own PJM. It doesn’t have a Vanity Fair. Or a Media Matters. Or $8 million in seed money to be squandered turning an Army of Davids into a collection of hoary Goliaths. But that doesn’t mean it can’t have an impact.
Email me if you have any desire to sign on to the next phase of PW. If you are prepared to work, so am I.
Defense of Liberty!
Mr. Joe on March 8, 2009 at 10:49 AM
In fairness Keith Olberman’s 20 groupies do drag down their average.
William Amos on March 8, 2009 at 10:50 AM
Sadly, with regard to “listeners and viewers”, we’ll never recover from this monster:
https://subscribe.hearstmags.com/circulation/shared/forms/opr_fr03_side_art2.jpg
For every million votes Limbaugh generates, it generates three or four million.
Marcus on March 8, 2009 at 10:51 AM
I’m not really surprised at ESPN. Political commentary has infected sports coverage. Sadly.
Spirit of 1776 on March 8, 2009 at 10:54 AM
Wall Street is weak and jittery, rejecting the vague and laconic courtship of Timothy Geithner. G.M. is verging on bankruptcy, and A.I.G. should be. Americans are confused and fretful. President Obama admitted in his Times interview that the United States is not winning the war in Afghanistan, even as he denied — and then called back 90 minutes later to really deny — that he’s a socialist.
Let’s face it: The only bracing symbol of American strength right now is the image of Michelle Obama’s sculpted biceps. Her husband urges bold action, but it is Michelle who looks as though she could easily wind up and punch out Rush Limbaugh, Bernie Madoff and all the corporate creeps who ripped off America.
In the taxi, when I asked David Brooks about her amazing arms, he indicated it was time for her to cover up. “She’s made her point,” he said. “Now she should put away Thunder and Lightning.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/08/opinion/08dowd.html
Mr. Joe on March 8, 2009 at 10:55 AM
they should’ve included the economist, just because i hate seeing the new yorker, for all its pretentiousness, take #1 anything.
ernesto on March 8, 2009 at 10:56 AM
I’m a regular reader of the Atlantic, and the New Yorker, (and Mother Jones and Progressive as well as National Review) and I catch Hannity when I can, same as Rush, have Fox News on my presets, dislike O’Reilly, pick up the BBC whenever possible, watch The National several times a week on Canadian TV, read the UK press, and find Stephen Colbert often an amusing and informative end of day program…
Am I all screwed up?
Then again, I rarely listen to MS-NBC, ABC, CBS, NPR, and very rarely, if ever, watch anything on ESPN.
I am pretty well screwed up.
coldwarrior on March 8, 2009 at 10:56 AM
Hmm of the top ten, six would be described by most folks here as unabashadly leftist. I’m particularly proud that my beloved New Yorker and NPR are at the top, because duh. I’m LESS excited that Harball is up there, as I hate Chris Matthews, but I suspect it has more to do with the fact that he gets good enough guests to attract interesting people. The BBC-News Hour-Colber trifecta at the bottom is also gratifying.
Props to Limbaugh for his 6 place finish as for Hannity and Colmes? Wow….I’m stunned.
DeathToMediaHacks on March 8, 2009 at 10:58 AM
“CBS failed to inform their audience well enough to get a majority that knew Democrats controlled the House. That’s
really patheticprobably intentional.”forest on March 8, 2009 at 10:58 AM
FOX and CBS rounding out the bottom? Sounds about right.
DeathToMediaHacks on March 8, 2009 at 10:59 AM
Come on Ed and Allah, if you are going to put on Patterico, then put on Jeff Goldstein too.
Mr. Joe on March 8, 2009 at 11:00 AM
Hey! Where’s my ‘brand new life’?
Oh, wait. It’s here already.
No one said that the change would be good.
They just promised ‘change’.
Timothy S. Carlson on March 8, 2009 at 11:01 AM
That just proves that many liberals listen to his show.
fossten on March 8, 2009 at 11:01 AM
Wow. Partisan propagandist Ed is doing “statistics” now.
“Well, Hardball – 43% nevermind that… MS-NBC 25%! That’s right, people who are interested in politics, who watch MS-NBC but who don’t watch Chris Matthews! (Who’s that btw?)”
That’s how Ed Morrisey does statistics.
radiofreevillage on March 8, 2009 at 11:01 AM
Sounds about right!
katy on March 8, 2009 at 11:02 AM
Fox was tied with CNN and ABC and CBS was 9% behind all three of them. Do you even look at this stuff before posting?
forest on March 8, 2009 at 11:03 AM
OT:
Pics of Fullerton, CA Tea Party.
Over 8,000 attended:
http://www.ocregister.com/photos/came-brought-ken-2328216-others-john
artist on March 8, 2009 at 11:03 AM
radiofreevillage on March 8, 2009 at 11:01 AM
Too much pepper on the eggs today, huh?
Bishop on March 8, 2009 at 11:06 AM
Indeed.
myrenovations on March 8, 2009 at 11:08 AM
Isn’t there some overlap? Can’t someone be a regular listener of NPR and Limbaugh and read the New Yorker?
ddrintn on March 8, 2009 at 11:10 AM
I think Hotair’s audience is the best informed.
William Amos on March 8, 2009 at 11:12 AM
Besides, anyone who listens to Limbaugh and doesn’t know which party controls Congress needs to learn to use the volume knob on the radio.
ddrintn on March 8, 2009 at 11:12 AM
Uhh..3 questions?
Joke?
Itchee Dryback on March 8, 2009 at 11:17 AM
Guilty.
DeathToMediaHacks on March 8, 2009 at 11:17 AM
Wow, Putin/Russia troll radiofreevillage can’t read or follow a link! I ranked them right off the Pew release. Check the link for methodology.
Ed Morrissey on March 8, 2009 at 11:18 AM
Wow. 3 whole questions, and one of them is “Who controls Congress?” If that’s the depth of their probing, I suspect you could almost match those best numbers asking people whose life revolves around video games.
Patrick S on March 8, 2009 at 11:18 AM
Of course I do, Rush *is* the best current communicator of conservative values even as he relies on misrepresentation, distortion, half truths and at times, out and out lies to misrepresent progressives and liberals. I’m particularly interested in the rhetorical truths he uses on progressives as it allows me to better understand why people vote against their economic interests so often.
DeathToMediaHacks on March 8, 2009 at 11:20 AM
Ed, please refer to him by his full name – radiofreevillageidiot.
Patrick S on March 8, 2009 at 11:20 AM
I’ll occasionally watch MSNBC generic news coverage just when I want all Obama positive news all the time, but Chris Matthews is a devil.
DeathToMediaHacks on March 8, 2009 at 11:21 AM
heh… if only.
Hog Wild on March 8, 2009 at 11:24 AM
I was listening to Hannity last week, he mentioned that about half the states don’t require Civic Classes anymore to graduate from High School…think about that, then if they go on to College, they end up being indoctrinated by Leftist Professors, who only promote the Civil Disobedience part of Civic Lessons. The good news if kids can’t afford their tuition, SEE How Obama got Elected. These far leftist Professors will loose their jobs, effectively putting themselves out of a job. Could they be recycled into the workforce – How? Those who can do, those who can’t teach:)
I think the above is a real possibility given the shape of the Dow, and The Credit Market.
Socialism Doesn’t Work On Any Level, Those That Promote Socialism Are Self Defeating.
The Change that all those College Kids voted for was the depletion of their parent’s Monetary Value- Can they pay for College tuition now? And The Credit Market is tied to Student Loans. “The Change” is that everyone’s quality of life will be lowered to meet everyone’s whose quality of life was already low. A Very Low Water Mark in American History. It doesn’t help that the Obamas and Supporters are reportedly Partying. Obama do as I say not as I do.
It all goes back to Education.
Dr Evil on March 8, 2009 at 11:26 AM
The phrase was structured wrong in the speeches, it was supposed to be Change and then Hope.
N4646W on March 8, 2009 at 11:27 AM
right in, ed!
thanks for reminding everyone that rush isn’t blabbering/screaming to idiots.
reliapundit on March 8, 2009 at 11:28 AM
You should type less, it would hide the idiotic premises you work from better.
aikidoka on March 8, 2009 at 11:29 AM
Give us some specific examples. For once.
ddrintn on March 8, 2009 at 11:33 AM
An amusing study but not altogether relevant and I’d can’t agree with you, Ed, that the answers to these three questions somehow are an indicator of the ability of anyone to engage in political discourse properly, if you will, or intelligently.
Knowing the name of the Secretary of state, or the Prime Minister of Britain, in no way helps in deciding whether their utterances are wise or foolish. Neither does it help in judging whether the policies they propose or the actions they take are good or bad.
The same goes for which party holds the majority in Congress other than knowing who to praise or blame for the results of their works.
Someone once mused that in stating a problem to a farmer and a professor, “the former will decide it often better than the latter, because he had not been led astray by artificial rules.”
Pew’s study, it seems to me, is a good example of using artificial rules.
Dusty on March 8, 2009 at 11:34 AM
This measures knowledge of three factoids, not understanding. I’ll wager that Colbert Report viewers will score lower on actual understanding of issues, since they have probably heard more punchlines than detailed analysis.
There are other dubious points, including what these particular outlets tend to cover.
And this survey’s almost a year old. What’s its significance today?
snickelfritz on March 8, 2009 at 11:34 AM
Rasmussen Poll, March 5th, marks another milestone in the decline of dinosauer media:
Online news sources now seen as reliable as local newspapers… http://tinyurl.com/RR0005
petefrt on March 8, 2009 at 11:37 AM
It’s not ineptitude if you intend to do it.
jukin on March 8, 2009 at 11:40 AM
You mean like in 2006 & 2008? Because 2006 is when everything started going to hell when “progressives” took control of congress and 2008 nailed the coffin shut with the election of a self avowed marxist…..
vapig on March 8, 2009 at 11:40 AM
Has anyone noticed the date of this survey? (April and June of last year) I think many more Rush and Hannity listeners are more informed at this point. America is waking up…I hope.
Razorsully on March 8, 2009 at 11:44 AM
So of the “Network News” outlets, MS-NBC came in first, eh? Not surprising since Ed and I comprise 40% of their audience and we both got all three questions correct. Interesting how NPR, so often pilloried here, came in at second place overall. But the fact that both the Daily Show and the Colbert Report slaughtered Fox (worse than all of the major news networks except CBS) is kind of hilarious, but may not be indicative of much.
What should it tell us? People who listen to Rush or watch Chris Matthews’ Hardball (which beat Rush overall, by the way) or watch Hannity, Colbert or Stewart are very much interested in politics, political news and our government. People watching the network news broadcasts and local news my be interested in current events in general, but many of them may not give a fig about government or politics. For all we know, a lot of them are watching primarily for the sports news or the weather.
This also probably speaks to why MS-NBC comes in first for the networks. It advertises itself as “The Place for Politics” and that’s pretty much all they talk about, with brief takeouts for other breaking news stories. If you watch that network, you’re watching for the political coverage. Nobody is tuning in to Rush to find out who’s making it into the NCAA sweet sixteen.
Jazz Shaw on March 8, 2009 at 11:45 AM
Now, I’m no statistician, but I didn’t see a number which represents the polled as a whole. What percentage of all the people polled got all three answers right?
How many missed the first question? How many the second? and How many the third?
I don’t find it alarming that some could not name Gordon Brown as Britain’s Prime Minister. What I find sad is how few know their own state representatives both national and local.
Jvette on March 8, 2009 at 11:48 AM
Pointless survey.
I know people who know the names of the British PM, their own representatives, and what party controls congress. But they can’t analyse or understand the implications of certain moves by the political parties if they tried.
Knowledge is a fine thing. However if you can’t apply the knowledge with an understanding of how the world works, you aren’t of much use.
mjk on March 8, 2009 at 11:53 AM
Hannity and Colmes destroys everybody else if you look at the average % of correct responses for the three questions rather than looking at the “all 3″ measure.
H&C: 68.666
NPR: 67.333
NYer/Atlantic: 67
Rush: 65
Chris: 65
Colbert: 62.333
Pol Mags: 61.333
Bus. Mags: 60.333
BBC: 54.333
This means that H&C viewers have a better general knowledge of these questions (on average), while some of the other publications/shows simply happen to have a larger percentage that know all three of the questions. This should not be overlooked.
If I went even further (moving into spin territory) and dropped the third question about the PM and used only the average method instead of the “all 3″ method of measure, it gets even more interesting…
H&C: 78.5
Rush: 77
NPR: 72.5
NYer/Atlantic: 71
Hardball: 71
Colbert: 69
Pol. Mags: 65
Bus. Mags: 67.5
BBC: 59.5
Side note: Shouldn’t BBC have topped the list for the Q on the PM of Britain?
Joe Caps on March 8, 2009 at 11:54 AM
Wow – I would’ve been in the top 18% if surveyed. That’s real cause for distress. No more democracy please!
DarkCurrent on March 8, 2009 at 11:56 AM
Of course not. He’s much better when talking football.
myrenovations on March 8, 2009 at 11:58 AM
Will you accept the work of media matters or will you right it off as liberal bias? They are fact checkers for the media, regardless of your partisan slant.
DeathToMediaHacks on March 8, 2009 at 11:59 AM
and let me guess, because you’re a real american and a die hard conservative you can, right?
ernesto on March 8, 2009 at 12:00 PM
In short, unless you’re a conservative, you’re dumb.
DeathToMediaHacks on March 8, 2009 at 12:00 PM
Let us not forget this was conducted from April 30th to June 1st of last year. I think it would be safe to say that the political climate has changed a great deal since then, and people have paid more attention to politics. This poll is pretty meaningless when you consider that. Also, the Secretary of State has changed, and I am sure if you asked this same question today, the numbers would be completely different. This poll is outdated. Too much has happened since then.
Joe Caps on March 8, 2009 at 12:00 PM
Jinx ernesto!
DeathToMediaHacks on March 8, 2009 at 12:00 PM
Good breakdown, Joe Caps. That’s the ambiguity I was talking about. And since Rush is primarily dealing with the AMERICAN scene, it’s not so surprising it breaks down this way.
snickelfritz on March 8, 2009 at 12:00 PM
A similar test should be implemented for Hot Air(Get Your Fill), Huffington Post(Fair???), Daily KOS(I won).
FontanaConservative on March 8, 2009 at 12:04 PM
Rush Limbaugh rarely takes about the governments or leaders of other nations, and Gordon Brown has not exactly set the world on fire as PM. So I am not surprised that his listeners might not know his name.
Many of us suspected during the last election cycle that a whole lot of voters believed the Republicans were still running Congress. These numbers would indicate we were right. That is stunning. Is Nancy Pelosi really that good that she has managed to avoid being identified as the leader of the Congress and so avoid being blamed for its abject failure since 2007? Are the media to blame for failing to identify Pelosi and Harry Reid as Democrats? Is George W. Bush to blame for not identifying Pelosi and Reid as Democrats often enough?
Regardless, this is something serious that Republican leaders must respond to.
rockmom on March 8, 2009 at 12:04 PM
Yes, what Mr. Joe said…
Put on Jeff G. at Protein Wisdom…
CinnamongirlUF on March 8, 2009 at 12:04 PM
In short, unless you’re a conservative, you’re dumb.
DeathToMediaHacks on March 8, 2009 at 12:00 PM
You’re catching on, must be a sliver of conservative in you.
Bishop on March 8, 2009 at 12:06 PM
Obviously! Anybody (liberal/progressives) who thinks raising taxes and spending a trillion dollars during a recession is the fix the economy needs is certifiable!
Oh – and lets pile on by destroying healthcare while we’re at it! Oh yeah! You guys are real geniuses!
vapig on March 8, 2009 at 12:08 PM
I suppose you see no contradiction is these two statements?
Your first statement basically says that you listen to Limbaugh so that you can better understand why we conservatives vote the way we do. Translation: it explains why we are so dumb when we vote.
The second blasts another poster for saying that superficial knowledge is not the same as critical thinking.
From what I have read of you, I would venture that you don’t have a clue about the real America that our founding fathers left us. You might benefit a little more from some in depth knowledge. As it has been said, “A little knowledge is a dangerous thing.”
Jvette on March 8, 2009 at 12:12 PM
Will you accept the work of media matters or will you right it off as liberal bias? They are fact checkers for the media, regardless of your partisan slant.
DeathToMediaHacks on March 8, 2009 at 11:59 AM
heheheheHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
The last time MediaMatters went after Limbaugh, their staff consisted of a guy who worked for the Kerry campaign, another from MoveOn.org, yet another from demorat turnout organization America Coming Together, still another who worked for the Demorat Congressional Campaign Committee and a finally a guy who worked for the Howard Dean campaign.
Yeah, no partisan slant there. LOL
Bishop on March 8, 2009 at 12:13 PM
An excellent point
DarkCurrent on March 8, 2009 at 1:15 PM
Some truths are self-evident
DarkCurrent on March 8, 2009 at 1:18 PM
Frankly, I may not have pulled Gordon Brown’s name out before the recent DVD fiasco.
But I know I could have told them it was another New Labor idiot.
snickelfritz on March 8, 2009 at 1:21 PM
I’m sure on Monday, Olbermoron will be crowing about this.
Speedwagon82 on March 8, 2009 at 1:24 PM
From the article:
While majorities in most news audiences knew that the Democrats have a majority in the House, regular viewers of Hannity & Colmes (84%), and listeners of Rush Limbaugh’s radio program (83%) scored best on this question. Large proportions of regular Hannity & Colmes viewers (73%) and Limbaugh listeners (71%) also identified Rice as the secretary of state; regular NPR listeners (72%) and readers of The New Yorker and other elite magazines (71%) also did well on this question.
Huh?
galtg on March 8, 2009 at 1:28 PM
Brilliant satire! Yes, I will “right” them off. Can you name another objective source who has tracked Limbaugh’s “errors”?
Just curious, kid: if the Clinton-founded, George Soros-funded Media Matters is so “good”, why do they have a Corrections Page as a regular feature?
This is totally unlike their right wing counterpart Newsbusters, which actually researches what they do before they post it.
Del Dolemonte on March 8, 2009 at 1:29 PM
According to PMSNBC, O’bama won 70 percent of the high school dropout vote in 2008. That’s even better than Algore did in 2000. He only got 59 percent.
Of course, Albie had other problems that year-such as not even being able to win his own home state.
Del Dolemonte on March 8, 2009 at 1:31 PM
This is totally unlike their right wing counterpart
Del Dolemonte on March 8, 2009 at 1:29 PM
Accordingly, this should be write wing counterpart.
Bishop on March 8, 2009 at 1:34 PM
It looks like the lefts plan to dumb down America is working. If the majority of the people are clueless then it is fairly easy to manipulate them. I say bring in law that requires everyone to pass a civics & economics 101 test before they are allowed to vote. This may rattle Acorn’s cage because they wouldn’t be able to register dead people anymore, unless they passed the test first. Knowing Acorn though, they would find a way….
DL13 on March 8, 2009 at 1:38 PM
Dude, from their own site:
“Media Matters for America is a Web-based, not-for-profit, 501(c)(3) progressive research and information center dedicated to comprehensively monitoring, analyzing, and correcting conservative misinformation in the U.S. media.”
notropis on March 8, 2009 at 1:39 PM
Again this pole is OUT OF DATE! Done in April and June of last year. No story here.
Razorsully on March 8, 2009 at 1:50 PM
I read Media Matters purely for entertainment. It is propaganda. I love when they do the stories headlined, “Pundit X said Y that goes against our ideology, and failed to point out the lame talking points our side has on the matter.” It is funny how these stories only come up when somebody makes a CONSERVATIVE arguement without offering the LIBERAL take, never the other way around. Ohh…my other favorite…”JUST BECAUSE IT’S COLD DOES NOT PROVE THAT GLOBAL WARMING IS A HOAX!” You will never see the story “Just because it got warmer for a few years does not mean that global warming exists!”
Joe Caps on March 8, 2009 at 1:52 PM
Er, before you trolls make a bunch of hay of some of some crab grass, I don’t just get my news from one source. This would lead you to believe that a New Yorker magazine reader “only” reads New Yorker and Fox viewers only watch Fox. I’m underwhelmed at this poll.
hawkdriver on March 8, 2009 at 1:53 PM
And yet they scored a 4th and 6th place on this list, respectively. Wonder why us Hannitized dittoheads are angry? We bear the brunt of the hard truth, and if it weren’t for those two guys we’d be wallowing in spin from cradle to grave.
RepubChica on March 8, 2009 at 1:54 PM
I LOVE Jodie Miller, thump. thump, thump!
hawkdriver on March 8, 2009 at 1:56 PM
Anybody who sees their website as anything else is a complete moron. They do not try to hide it, it’s just that some people are so dumb they don’t pick up on it.
Joe Caps on March 8, 2009 at 1:58 PM
This is why you shouldn’t take polls seriously. I mean, even the few obvious facts about their methodology make their conclusion inane. It’s not even close.
I’m kind of shocked that only a few people are pointing that out, and everyone else is arguing about how relevant the clown’s shoes are. It’s pathetic.
Merovign on March 8, 2009 at 1:58 PM
Oh, and WRT “Media Matters,” the correct answer to the question “will you accept my idiot talking points without questioning my ruse” is, of course, “no.”
Merovign on March 8, 2009 at 2:02 PM
Ladies and gentlemen, it appears that ernesto and DTMH have left the building. Their bombs were duds and now they have retreated, as they always do when confronted with the idiocy of their posts.
Jvette on March 8, 2009 at 2:03 PM
The Big Dog Race Started Yesterday In Alaska Gov Sarah Palin was there. I voted For Gov Sarah Palin and Cindy McCain’s husband:)
http://youhavetobethistalltogoonthisride.blogspot.com/2009/03/iditarod-7-march-2009-race-begins.html
Dr Evil on March 8, 2009 at 2:04 PM
Very old survey, dating back to October and the previous administration. It would be interesting to see the results of a newer survey
michaelo on March 8, 2009 at 2:11 PM
Or, perhaps, I go and do other things for a while rather than spend my WHOLE Sunday grappling with you. I thought I really liked internet posting boards, but I have to admit, I don’t know how you people have the time to keep track of every posters posting habits the way you do.
DeathToMediaHacks on March 8, 2009 at 2:15 PM
Obama and his staff didn’t even know who Gordon Brown was. They get their info from MSNBS, I guess. They will do better next time because the Taliban are going to give all of the answers, to the test, in the class notes. Plus he gets to bring his tele-prompter and Blackberry.
2Tru2Tru on March 8, 2009 at 2:18 PM
I’ll take that as a “I don’t have any”.
ddrintn on March 8, 2009 at 2:19 PM
DeathToMediaHacks on March 8, 2009 at 11:20 AM
You should type less, it would hide the idiotic premises you work from better.
aikidoka on March 8, 2009 at 11:29 AM
AMEN. She goes on and on and I for one, could not care less what a libtard, progressive thinks of conservatism. She is an idiot! Where’s Shipley? At least he was reasonable and didn’t constantly give unwanted and unasked for advice…
JAM on March 8, 2009 at 2:25 PM
Since the time of my first post to you, I have visited and posted in several other sites, made coffee, gone to the bathroom, gave my dogs their morning treat and read several sections of the newspaper.
I have limited time online, usually in the early part of the day so I take advantage of that time.
Funny, you seem to have the time and inclination to respond to being called chicken, but not to my original post and those of others here who challenged you. Maybe you are just overwhelmed like your hero Obama. Or maybe you had to go to your masters, MediaMatters to get your talking points.
Jvette on March 8, 2009 at 2:26 PM
It shouldn’t be surprising that regular viewers of political shows know more about politics than regular viewers of general news shows, or that those sources which skew toward the more educated have more informed viewers than those that don’t. That doesn’t make the study meaningless, but it does explain most of the general trends I see in the results.
Too bad they didn’t ask Atlantic readers who Trig’s real mother was, though; that would have been entertaining.
calbear on March 8, 2009 at 2:27 PM
No blogs included?
Heart-ache.
getalife on March 8, 2009 at 2:33 PM
No. The study is meaningless:
1. It assumes everybody gets their news from only 1 source.
2. It is from too long ago considering the change in the political climate/peoples interest politics which rose during the election.
3. One of the questions has a different answer now (Condi-Hillary), and since there are only 3 questions, this means that 1/3 of the results is meaningless for this reason alone.
4. It ranks them by the highest “All Three” measures. No average is provided (see previous post), which would be just as appropriate (if not a more appropriate) measure to use to rank them.
I could go on. This is BS. I’m sure if Fox News happened to top the list, Media Matters would do a study to show how the study is flawed and would make many of these same points. But, since liberal publications/talkers topped th list, it will be accepted at face value by the MSM.
Joe Caps on March 8, 2009 at 2:36 PM
That can be explained because none of the “highbrow” conservative publications were singled out by name, just dumped into the general categories of “business magazines,” “political magazines,” etc. By contrast, NPR, The New Yorker, and The Atlantic were singled out. Whether that bias was intentional or accidental, it makes the matter of who topped the list entirely moot.
calbear on March 8, 2009 at 2:44 PM
I have never liked polls, believing them to be too easily manipulated to get the answer the pollster wants and to be too easily influenced by the words spoken by our elected officials and not the actions being taken.
I firmly believe that the drop in support for the war was deliberately precipitated by the media and the Democrats for the purpose of gaining a majority in congress and the White House in 2008.
I usually participate when I get called for a survey, just out of curiosity about what the questions will be and how they are framed.
One poll during the election, in October after the economic meltdown, asked me if I liked the direction the country was moving in. I laughed at that and told the questioner that I did not, but not for the reasons he wanted me to, but because by then I could see that Obama was going to win. He of course did not want to hear that part and persisted by saying “So, you don’t like the way the country is going?” What a joke.
Another poll went through some pretty routine questions, what is your party affiliation and for whom will you vote in November. At the end, for demographic purposes, I was asked if I bought coffee at Starbucks or Dunkin Donuts and if, and if so, how often I shopped at Walmart. I laughed at that one and told the lady, “Why don’t you just ask me if I live in a trailor.”
Polls are tools used to manipulate opinion not a barometer of opinion in my view.
Jvette on March 8, 2009 at 2:44 PM
They do both.
Jamson64 on March 8, 2009 at 2:52 PM
I don’t agree. How many Americans believed that Sarah Palin said that she could see Russia from her house? An opinion not based on reality, but on the mis-characterization of what she actually said. Results are easily manipulated by the media and by the way a question is framed. Poll results are skewed and themselves used to manipulate opinion.
Jvette on March 8, 2009 at 3:02 PM
Stupid people need news, too.
BrideOfRove on March 8, 2009 at 3:08 PM
Rush’s numbers will go up dramatically as more and more Americans have their mid-day freed up due to unemployment.
anniekc on March 8, 2009 at 3:11 PM
Hannity has a “Man on the Street” segment on his Thursday afternoon radio shows. He sends a producer to the streets in NYC and the try to get people to talk to him. He will tell them to ask the person something like “Do you believe in change”, and then get them on the cell phone to talk to him.
It’s been really hilarious lately, as many of the people are walking away and not able to answer his questions about specific “change” issues.
It’s scary regarding the number of people who can’t name the VP, who can’t name even a couple of Surpreme Court justices, who can’t name the leaders in Congress…and yet they still vote.
ladyingray on March 8, 2009 at 3:23 PM
Why isn’t the option of Blogs not on the list?
- The Cat
MirCat on March 8, 2009 at 3:32 PM
I wouldn’t make assumptions about causation in this survey. For example, I would bet that a typical person considers himself pretty well informed already when he starts reading the New Yorker. Also, notice that TV news dominates the bottom of the ranking. Does this mean that TV news does a poor job of informing people about current events? Maybe. But TV news is also the easiest and most casual way of absorbing news. Only people who are already serious about studying the news go to print media or more obscure sources, so the level of political awareness of those people is already high.
viking999 on March 8, 2009 at 3:32 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »