Fox News Viewers Know Less Than People Who Don't Watch Any News

[Don Katsu]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mobile...n_1106305.html

Fox News viewers are less informed than people who don't watch any news, according to a new poll from Fairleigh Dickinson University.

The poll surveyed New Jersey residents about the uprisings in Egypt and the Middle East, and where they get their news sources. The study, which controlled for demographic factors like education and partisanship, found that "people who watch Fox News are 18-points less likely to know that Egyptians overthrew their government" and "6-points less likely to know that Syrians have not yet overthrown their government" compared to those who watch no news.

Overall, 53% of all respondents knew that Egyptians successfully overthrew Hosni Mubarak and 48% knew that Syrians have yet to overthrow their government. Dan Cassino, a political science professor at Fairleigh Dickinson, explained in a statement, "Because of the controls for partisanship, we know these results are not just driven by Republicans or other groups being more likely to watch Fox News. Rather, the results show us that there is something about watching Fox News that leads people to do worse on these questions than those who don’t watch any news at all."

This isn't the first study that has found that Fox News viewers more misinformed in comparison to others. Last year, a study from the University of Maryland found that Fox News viewers were more likely to believe false information about politics.

I LOLd

[Cail]

not surprised

[Anton]

Not the first university study to draw this conclusion, either.

MSNBC was sometimes good, sometimes bad. Newspaper, Sunday morning news, and The Daily Show were all positive factors.

[Bingbong]

*yawn*

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...news-are-most/

[Blarg]

Sure they know less about some issues but they know more about many different important news stories like how great sarah palin is, how little evidence there is for global warming, why those socialist liberals want to destroy christmas, death panels (other news channels don't even cover how the government wants to kill your grandparents!), how lazy the OWS protestors are and their deep hatred of all things jewish. That's only a small sample of how the mainstream media doesn't cover real stories and just focuses on left wing socialism stuff.

[Aurara]

Can't say im suprised, but hey, it makes everyone else look better by comparison!

[Rhinox]

*yawn*

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...news-are-most/

So he was right?

[Anton]

So he was right?

He was right, but he wasn't that right, was the verdict. I think.

I mean, the report repeatedly confirms Fox News watchers were right at the national average for correctness. Which is totally well informed, considering the only group that scored lower was people who don't follow the news (according to the first study)

Take this gem from the above link(second study):

Here, the range of results was much wider. Once again, Fox News was just about at the national average -- 19 percent of Fox viewers scored in the high knowledge category, compared to 18 percent of all respondents -- but this time a handful of news outlets scored lower than Fox did. With scores ranging from 17 percent all the way down to 9 percent, they were CNBC, local television news, network news, morning news shows, television newsmagazines, personality magazines, religious radio, the Weather Channel, CBS News, Access Hollywood and similar shows, and in last place, the National Enquirer.

Fox news, setting the information standard for the Weather Network and National Enquirer.

That a comedy show infers better information than a major news outlet (Jon doesn't even stay on topic longer than... 5 minutes) should be damning enough. 5 minutes of jokes on a topic being more informing than regular viewership to a news outlet...

[Demosthenes11]

*yawn*

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...news-are-most/

lol did you even read it? The only reason it's "false" is because "most consistently misinformed media viewers" is such a broad statement.

For example, if I were to say swampy was the dumbest person alive, there might exist someone that actually is dumber than he is. That doesn't make him any less dumb, however

[SwampdonkeyPLD]

lol did you even read it? The only reason it's "false" is because "most consistently misinformed media viewers" is such a broad statement.

For example, if I were to say swampy was the dumbest person alive, there might exist someone that actually is dumber than he is. That doesn't make him any less dumb, however

And considering your analysis of that politifact report, you'd be that someone.

[Pirian]

And considering your analysis of that politifact report, you'd be that someone.

He said it pretty badly, but it did say that what was making Fox's numbers look higher were indeed the presence of many non-news sources.

They weren't even denying that Fox viewers were more often the most uninformed, just that Stewart's statement of "Fox News viewers are always the most uninformed." This statement is false because some studies took into account these non-news sources, and in these cases, Fox viewers were more informed and thus were not at the absolute bottom of the poll, as Stewart was saying. The article also said that his statements might have been made with the assertions that the comparisons were strictly between media outlets, but that wasn't what they were testing.

[hey]

Now, when they say watch, do they mean watch, or watch and/or read? Because who the fuck watches the news?

[Kuya]

What is it about this news channel that misinforms people so much

[Xantavia]

What is it about this news channel that misinforms people so much

Well, for starters, I believe they were legally prohibited from continuing to use the phrase "fair and balanced" by the American courts when they talked about themselves. Second, its owned by Rupert Murdoch.

But I think one of the biggest factors is that for a "news" channel, they have maybe 2-3 hours of news a day, and that is at like 3 in the afternoon. Prime time is filled with conservative talking heads, voicing opinions and editorials. Outside of my personal dislike for conservative side of politics, it seems unethical to refer to opinions as news. To be fair, I think on paper somewhere they refer to the prime time programming as "news editorial shows", but you won't find it mentioned anywhere on the airwaves.

[Khamsin]

Now, when they say watch, do they mean watch, or watch and/or read? Because who the fuck watches the news?

People who get their info by watching commentators on a TV news talk program discuss current events.

[Ksandra]

@ the study, that report doesn't necessarily claim that the studies were wrong or anything, just that stewart's claim of "Who are the most consistently misinformed media viewers? … Fox viewers, consistently, every poll." they rated it false because not every poll lists them last.

Well, for starters, I believe they were legally prohibited from continuing to use the phrase "fair and balanced" by the American courts when they talked about themselves.

not sure where you got this idea from. It is still their trademark phrase.

[Xantavia]

not sure where you got this idea from. It is still their trademark phrase.

I was going from old memory on this this. I remember hearing about a case, but didn't realize it was thrown out shortly after. From wikipedia (a totally balanced place for facts)

In December 2003, FNC found itself on the other end of a legal battle concerning the slogan, when AlterNet filed a cancellation petition with the United States Patent and Trademark Office to have FNC's trademark rescinded as misdescriptive. AlterNet included the documentary film Outfoxed as supporting evidence in its case.[44] After losing early motions, AlterNet withdrew its petition and the USPTO dismissed the case

[Plow]

I tried to watch that outfoxed one time on netflix, it was unwatchable though so I have no idea what all it actually said.

[Ksandra]

I was going from old memory on this this. I remember hearing about a case, but didn't realize it was thrown out shortly after. From wikipedia (a totally balanced place for facts)

Ah gotcha. I thought it might have been the canada thing. Irrc fox news isn't allowed to have a Canadian version of their channel because of it being "false and misleading."

[Bingbong]

lol did you even read it? The only reason it's "false" is because "most consistently misinformed media viewers" is such a broad statement.

For example, if I were to say swampy was the dumbest person alive, there might exist someone that actually is dumber than he is. That doesn't make him any less dumb, however

Did you even read it?


In the first survey, O'Reilly watchers rated in the top category, what cable channel is his show on again?
In 2008, similar type survey put Fox watchers AHEAD of CNBC, local news, network news, and morning news shows. Hannity and Colmes watchers scored above Daily Show viewers, and again, O'Reilly watchers were well above national average, what cable channel are their shows on again?
In 2010, another similar survey had Fox news viewers scoring above both MSNBC and CNN watchers.

So yes, on the whole did the scores put them at the top? Nope... but hey, when you have more viewers than the other cable news stations, you're not going to get all the smart folks, are ya?