Study Finds Fox News Viewers Are The Most Misinformed

[peejay 327]

I love it when people get possessive about news organisations. Criticise someone's sacred news cow and you might as well have taken a piss on their family Bible!

It's not the criticism of the news organization, it is the insinuation that if you view a particular news source that you are somehow some sort of cretin. Total bullshit. I don't buy into the opinion and commentary on FOX 100%, but they do accurately report on events and issues that other news sources ignore due to their bias. The more views out there the better. I don't watch just one source or form my opinions by watching or reading one source.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I think the study is talking about people who predominantly watch one source.

Lots of people say they use a variety of news sources, i wonder how many of those actually do

[peejay 327]

Want to pick on FOX? How about this doozie of "news" misinformation by Left leaning MSN this morning:

Fate of 'Dream Act' still unclear

While Reid is confident he has 60 votes to repeal the policy on gays, Senate aides said he's short of that number on another stalled Obama priority, one on immigration.

Regardless, Reid set a vote on Saturday to try to clear a Republican procedural hurdle against legislation that would provide a path to U.S. citizenship to undocumented immigrants who came to this country as children.

The "Dream Act" would provide legal residency to undocumented young people who came to the United States before age 16, graduate from high school, complete at least two years of college or military service and have no criminal record.

Republicans reject the bill as unwarranted amnesty and say the United States should focus instead on bolstering border security.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40715888/ns/politics-capitol_hill

Here is a statement from Senator Jeff Sessions who is on the senate judiciary committee that oversees immigration legislation (among other things):

Sen. Sessions outlined 10 reasons why the Senate should reject the DREAM Act:

The DREAM Act Is NOT Limited to Children -- Applicants can be up to the age of 29.

The DREAM Act Will Be Funded On the Backs Of Hard Working, Law-Abiding Americans -- CBO failed to assess costs for education, increased levels of unemployment due to the addition of workers to the workforce, and increases in potential applicants because of loopholes.

The DREAM Act PROVIDES SAFE HARBOR FOR ANY ALIEN, Including Criminals, From Being Removed or Deported If They Simply Submit An Application -- Burden of proving inaccurate information on a DREAM Act application is on the Department of Homeland Security.

Certain Inadmissible Aliens, including those from high-risk regions, Will Be Eligible For Amnesty Under The DREAM Act.

Certain Criminal Aliensincluding drunk driversWill Be Eligible For Amnesty Under The DREAM Act -- The DREAM Act allows applicants be convicted of 1 felony or up to 3 misdemeanors.

Conservative Estimates Suggest That At Least 1.3 Million Illegal Aliens Will Be Eligible For the DREAM Act Amnesty. In Reality, We Have No Idea How Many Illegal Aliens Will Apply.

The DREAM Act Does Not Require That An Illegal Alien Finish Any Type of Degree (Vocational, Two-Year, or Bachelors Degree) As A Condition of Amnesty -- The applicant only has to complete the equivalent of two years of college.

The DREAM Act Does Not Require That an Illegal Alien Complete Military Service As A Condition For Amnesty, and There Is already A Legal Process In Place For Illegal Aliens to Obtain U.S. Citizenship Through Military Service.

Despite Their Current Illegal Status, DREAM Act Aliens Will Be Given All The Rights That Legal Immigrants ReceiveIncluding The Legal Right To Sponsor Their Parents and Extended Family Members For Immigration.

Current Illegal Aliens Will Get Federal Student Loans, Federal Work Study Programs, and Other Forms of Federal Financial Aid.

http://www.numbersusa.com/content/news/december-17-2010/sen-sessions-10-reasons-oppose-dream-act.html

Where is the disconnect? Who is misinforming who?

Edited December 18, 2010 by peejay

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

Want to pick on FOX? How about this doozie of "news" misinformation by Left leaning MSN this morning:

Here is a statement from Senator Jeff Sessions who is on the senate judiciary committee that oversees immigration legislation (among other things):

Where is the disconnect? Who is misinforming who?

First your link goes to DADT not the Dream Act.

So line one is irrelevant. The law isn't saying only minors can use it, its saying only people who have been brought to the US as minors (under 16) can use it. And on the criminal record issue, the law uses the term Moral Character which many visas require. See here:

http://fsnews.findlaw.com/firmsite/attachments/LE6_c_checklist_WhatIsGoodMoralCharacter.pdf

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

Just

[peejay 327]

First your link goes to DADT not the Dream Act.

So line one is irrelevant. The law isn't saying only minors can use it, its saying only people who have been brought to the US as minors (under 16) can use it. And on the criminal record issue, the law uses the term Moral Character which many visas require. See here:

http://fsnews.findlaw.com/firmsite/attachments/LE6_c_checklist_WhatIsGoodMoralCharacter.pdf

Unfortunately the link that I quoted has been changed. I have no idea why.

So you think being convicted of 1 felony or 3 misdemeanors constitutes "no criminal record"?

I'm not saying MSNBC purposely is misleading and/or misinforming the readers of that article, but at best it is sloppy journalism that does indeed misinforms the public as to the true content of this legislation. I see this type of sloppiness and misinformation through omission of the facts all the time. Accident or bias? Either way it misinforms.

Edited December 19, 2010 by peejay

[peejay 327]

Unfortunately the link that I quoted has been changed. I have no idea why.

So you think being convicted of 1 felony or 3 misdemeanors constitutes "no criminal record"?

I'm not saying MSNBC purposely is misleading and/or misinforming the readers of that article, but at best it is sloppy journalism that does indeed misinforms the public as to the true content of this legislation. I see this type of sloppiness and misinformation through omission of the facts all the time. Accident or bias? Either way it misinforms.

I waited too long to edit my post above again, but upon reflection MSNBC might have changed it because it was misleading and false. Never-the-less, I did copy and past the text I quoted from that link. The original article was about the legislative agenda for the senate today that included the DREAM Act and DADT.

[SuperDuper! 230]

I love it when people get possessive about news organisations. Criticise someone's sacred news cow and you might as well have taken a piss on their family Bible!

So true! Geez, who was the OP of this thread, again?

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

I just want to know how one does a study of TV viewers of various news programs and determines which is the most uninformed? Telephone survey. Ask them to name a country beginning with "U"? I mean, HOW do you do that with any degree of reliability.

The whole thing seems as though it can only be made up BS

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

Unfortunately the link that I quoted has been changed. I have no idea why.

So you think being convicted of 1 felony or 3 misdemeanors constitutes "no criminal record"?

I'm not saying MSNBC purposely is misleading and/or misinforming the readers of that article, but at best it is sloppy journalism that does indeed misinforms the public as to the true content of this legislation. I see this type of sloppiness and misinformation through omission of the facts all the time. Accident or bias? Either way it misinforms.

No thats definitely a criminal record. What I'm saying is, if you read the Dream Act it uses the moral character term like all visas. Therefore this will be enforced like all other visas.

[tmma 467]

Conflicting accounts....biased commentaries....Alarmist reports...Not alarmist enough reports....We're all misinformed-no matter which news source you watch.

edit- I spent some time in TV/radio as an intern and then as a broadcaster. I was taught and told never to put personal emphasis on words or phrases when reading the news, to remain almost unemotional no matter what the news was- so as not to convey my opinion which could be construed as the opinion of the station. It could be me, but I have noticed less and less of that. What i mean is that news seems to be broadcast more by opinionists than actual news folk.

( did that make sense,? It's early, maybe I need more coffee).

Edited December 19, 2010 by tmma

[Pooky 3,828]

Conflicting accounts....biased commentaries....Alarmist reports...Not alarmist enough reports....We're all misinformed-no matter which news source you watch.

edit- I spent some time in TV/radio as an intern and then as a broadcaster. I was taught and told never to put personal emphasis on words or phrases when reading the news, to remain almost unemotional no matter what the news was- so as not to convey my opinion which could be construed as the opinion of the station. It could be me, but I have noticed less and less of that. What i mean is that news seems to be broadcast more by opinionists than actual news folk.

( did that make sense,? It's early, maybe I need more coffee).

With you on the coffee

I think the preponderance of all-day cable "news" channels is where the news vs. opinion line gets very blurry. I can't watch something like Fox News, MSNBC, CNN, etc. because I'm used to half-hour long dedicated news programming from a national broadcaster, with distinct (and avoidable) time slots for opinion/current affairs programming.

It is widely known that the BBC is generally left-of-center. But the news programming is just that - news. That doesn't happen so much here in the USA.

[Peikko 1,575]

With you on the coffee

I think the preponderance of all-day cable "news" channels is where the news vs. opinion line gets very blurry. I can't watch something like Fox News, MSNBC, CNN, etc. because I'm used to half-hour long dedicated news programming from a national broadcaster, with distinct (and avoidable) time slots for opinion/current affairs programming.

It is widely known that the BBC is generally left-of-center. But the news programming is just that - news. That doesn't happen so much here in the USA.

That is the reason why I barely watch 'news' on the tv here; the presentation is so falsely sensational with phrases like 'you'll not believe what we've found out about x,y,z' peppering the dialogue. I don't need to be told what I'll believe or not, nor do I need to be titillated in this way. It's absurd and the reports are often along the same lines, superficial, exaggerating the importance of the story and littered with queues to guide our emotional responses. Bah, humbug!

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

Fox news reported that this story isn't true.