The poll tested consumers’ knowledge of recent popular uprisings in Egypt and Syria and found a disturbing pattern of wrong answers by news source. Here is what the poll tested: Did the people of Egypt successfully topple the regime of Hosni Mubarak? The highest percentage of correct answers came from listeners of NPR at 68%. Lowest on the scale were viewers of Fox News at 49%.
According to Dan Cassino, a political science professor at FDU and an analyst for the poll: “The [poll] 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.”
These results come as no surprise. On July 25, 2010, I posted this commentary, A Contest of Madmen for the Primacy of the Sewer, which covered similar findings from The Center for Policy Attitudes at the University of Maryland. In all studies thus far, Fox News ranks at the bottom of the heap. Of course, few of us need a poll to confirm what we know intuitively: Fox News is not a news source but merely a ratings engine with only one purpose: To deliver maximum audience share for the Murdoch propaganda machine.
For a more detailed account on the sorry state of contemporary journalism, please have a look at the original post (which includes an important historical observation by Bloggingdino).
Wednesday Update:
(Pls. see comments below): "Not if one maintains an active mind."
If any visitors to this forum are implying – even in jest – that any writers or readers of this community have “inactive” minds, think again! Our minds are NOT inactive! Nor uninformed! Nor unwashed! If this is your implication, then consider me a very pissed off cephalopod. PAY ATTENTION because I will not repeat this again:
Fox News is the #1 purveyor of PARTISAN HATE SPEECH in America today. Fevered hysteria and conspiratorial fear mongering on national television are not harmless. For years, Fox News gave Glenn Beck a national audience, and this is what partisan hate speech has wrought (all have active links to original sources):
Murders, shooting sprees, domestic terrorism, private citizens hiding in fear, infamous intimidations and provocations broadcast on national television - all linked to Fox News!
After the shooting rampage in Tucson that left six people dead and thirteen injured, including Congresswoman Giffords, Fox News President Roger Ailes offered this appeal for civility: “I told all of our guys, shut up, tone it down, make your argument intellectually. You don’t have to do it with bombast.”
More bullshit! Nothing has changed. Week after week, Fox News churns out a constant sludge of partisan hate speech from verbal abusers such as Bill O’Reilly, Sean Hannity, Steve Doocy, and his son, Peter Doocy, as examples.
How quickly we forget these lessons of history. How the language of eradication and elimination (i.e. characterizing people as diseased, as vermin, as traitors, as a scourge) has led to genocide, pogroms, murder, and violence. The poisoned atmosphere unleashed by Fox News means any citizen - Democrat, Centrist, or Republican - can be slandered in public and targeted for persecution. Furthermore, these messages reach unhinged misfits who are most likely to act on impulse, and events have shown that violent rhetoric leads to violent acts. There is no plausible deniability that can exonerate Fox News.
Furthermore, when toxic television threatens public safety, it concerns everyone. Even prominent Republicans are alarmed:
Former Bush speechwriter David Frum:
Former Bush speechwriter Peter Wehner:
National correspondent for The Atlantic, Jeffrey Goldberg:
Partisan hate speech is not free speech. Nor entertainment. Nor funny. For all reasons cited above, gratuitous liberal bashing - even implied - is unacceptable here. If anything, perhaps the partisan biases of certain readers have blinded them to these outrageous abuses of the public airwaves. As the saying goes: No news is good news - and far better news than Fox News.
I suspect that the only poll Fox News viewers would rank high on is stupidity.
ReplyDeleteSee? Disinformation works. I love this post. Thanks Octo.
ReplyDeleteOcto, excellent post -- you beat me to it, so I'll just append my meager lizard-effort below as a comment.
ReplyDeleteJerry,
Yes, if so, you can be sure they're proud of it!
I think I understand why our dear brothers and sisters the thoroughly “FOX-ed” are a little out of sorts. At least not watching any news leaves one's common sense and fundamental decency intact, if one had some in the first place. The Lord takes care of children and newsless fools. But listening to through-the-looking-glass right-wingery on an endless 24/7 loop damages both common sense and decency. You begin to think it's wrong to show compassion for your fellow beings; imperative to shove your narrow-minded, primitive version of Jeeeeebus down their throats in all possible venues and just good clean fun to complain bitterly that you’re “under attack” when they resist your doing so; a sign of weakness to support basic fairness in any area of life; and insane to accept an obvious fact as anything but your demonic opponents' diabolical plot to take over the solar system. What's more, you have the great comfort of knowing that millions of people are in entire agreement with you and your source of "news." What was that phrase I used a while back to describe a certain era oh, about 70-75 years ago in a prominent European country? Ah, yes, I believe it was, “toxic discursive bubble.” ‘Nuff said.
Glad to see this. I'm linking to it on my blog, just above the blogpost that mocks Limbaugh and the NASCAR people who booed the FLOTUS and Dr. Biden.
ReplyDeleteActually I find Fox News entertaining and occasionally factual.
ReplyDeleteMy belief is one should view several news sources, as well as opposing opinions, consider all the relevant data, and using their cognitive faculties make a informed decision.
Watching only Fox News without other sources of data is, well...
Rational, watching news porn may be 'entertaining,' but will definitely degrade your mental health.
ReplyDelete@ The Edge Columns - Not if one maintains an active mind.
ReplyDeleteI allow myself to watch un peu de FAUX only when I'm traveling -- it's a guilty pleasure to be indulged in on the road, you see (or in my case, on the game trail). I find their stuff insidious -- there's just enough reportage and veneer of "inclusiveness" to make it almost possible for them to call themselves "the news." But in the end I always come back to the observation that they're cheerleaders who will say outright of insinuate absolutely anything to promote their cruel, stupid ideology.
ReplyDeleteThat should have read "or insinuate." Sorry about the typo.
ReplyDeletePorn is something that we realize from the outset is morally 'wrong.' That's why it's a "guilty pleasure." In the end (pardon the pun) we are what we consume, active mind or not.
ReplyDeleteBeck's hate-mongering is the most egregious by far, but that still leaves Bill (Tiller the Baby Killer) O'Reilly with blood on his hands too.
ReplyDeleteWhen fascism comes to America, the flag wrapped cross will be hoisted and praised by the "fair and balanced" media.
Unrelated but I couldn't see this headline without thinking of you guys:
ReplyDeleteOctopus Caught Walking On Dry Land
OMG I think I saw this movie ... with apes! They're EVOLVING!!!!
REC - Hm, interesting comment.
ReplyDeleteThe mind is much like the body in some ways. Introduce small amounts of poison into the body steadily over time and the body adjusts to accommodate the poison as best it can. Throw in too much poison at once or speed up the dose rate, and the body gets noticeably sick. The damage can be permanent or even fatal. It also gets bad after small doses have been consumed for too long.
ReplyDeleteFox dispenses poison in the form or false and distorted information. It's not just a random selection of erroneous items. There are patterns intended to lead to conclusions and attitudes, or to reinforce and hand out attaboys for notions and attitudes people already have.
The damage can be seen and heard when Fox viewers parrot the network's lies and distortions, and exhibit the associated attitudes. The damage also shows up when people support dim wits with loud mouths for high political office and otherwise vote against their own and most others' best interests.
Fox appeals to the ignorant, to paranoid personalities, conspiracy theorists, resenters and the selfish. The network dresses their character defects, neuroses and attitudes up in patriotism, thus giving them cover.
Alcoholics can sometimes be spared and rehabilitated, so they quit ingesting dangerous amounts of what is for them poison. Alas, the First Amendment protects Fox and its viewers. For minds, poison is OK. There isn't even a requirement for truth in labeling.
@ SWA - Hm, a further acutely interesting observation.
ReplyDeleteAll,
ReplyDeleteI didn't even touch upon the tabloid hacking scandal in the U.K. The dozens of thugs hired by Murdoch Incorporated to tap into cell phones, telephones, and email accounts. I didn't even touch upon the parents of a murdered girl who believed their daughter was still alive because a Fox hacker accessed and then erased telephone messages - thus hampering a police investigation. Did I mention the estimated 5,000 people whose private accounts were hacked by Murdoch thugs. Notwithstanding the lies told by James Murdoch before the British Parliament!
Fox News is a CRIMINAL ENTERPRISE.
I do hope that everyone had a lovely Thanksgiving holiday.
ReplyDeleteI see that the stew has been stirred quite well while I've been absent.
I've read the studies regarding Fox News and I have no love for Fox News' perversion of journalistic ethics. However, the very meaning of a free press means that there will be no government censorship of that press (the exception being treasonous statements, or violations such as defamation). There are no provisions for government interference because the press is mean spirited, bi-partisan, totally inaccurate etc. That leaves the public. We can and should express our discontent with media outlets that we feel fail in their mission to present objective facts or to at the very least, make it clear when what is being expressed is an editorial opinion.
I think that it is all about how we actually listen to and evaluate the news and that burden is on the listener and/or viewer. I Find Fox News to be of interest. I really like knowing what the opposition has to say on topics. No news source is totally neutral. The listener is the one who must sort opinion from fact.
Interchanging ideas with people with whom one fundamentally disagrees is a good exercise in critical thinking. Back in the 1970s, as we came to realize that integration had not eradicated systemic and social racism, a cornerstone of race relations became human relations discussion groups. I was greatly involved in such groups on a state level and to a lesser extent, on a national level. I sat in rooms across from people who used the n-word in their life outside of that room, had confederate flags displayed on their vehicles, and believed and expressed he opinion that God didn't intend for the races to mix. It was an invaluable experience. I came away with a better understanding of how they thought and how to shove their racist barriers aside in such a way that they feel that the change came totally from within themselves. I was also able to discard the anger that I harbored against them for the racism that they expressed. In addition, I developed a pretty thick skin which is a necessity if you're going to engage in discussions about difficult subjects.
Rational adds some interesting flavor to the stew. I've checked out his blog and there isn't a lot with which I agree. It's impossible to refute what you don't understand clearly. As I don't share Rational's views on some major issues, I find his POV fascinating. It's the same reason that I watch Fox news.
I have no worries that doing so will degrade my mental health. I also believe that one should get news from a variety of sources. It's like doing any type of research; the researcher must make an educated evaluation of the validity of the sources.
I think that the focus on Fox news is perhaps misguided. As a society, we need to focus on the lack of intellectual curiosity in a fairly large segment of the population. This is a much bigger issue than Fox news. If Fox disappeared from the airwaves, some other network would come along to replace it and the same people would be seduced by it. You can't make the world function more harmoniously and more fairly by simply repressing ideologies that support opposing belief systems. Fascism, Nazism, Nationalism, Communism--there is always an "ism" waiting around the corner to seduce the minds of some people. My grandmother called people who were susceptible to petty minded bigotry, small minded. The issue is small mindedness, not a news network.
There is a lot of intellectual sophistication here at the Zone; it seems to me that there is plenty of room for addressing thorny issues with those who hold opposing views. In my view, we are certainly more than capable of addressing such ideology and remaining firmly polite at the same time.
Sheria wrote: "You can't make the world function more harmoniously and more fairly by simply repressing ideologies that support opposing belief systems."
ReplyDeleteVery true, but I don't think anyone is suggesting repressing other people's ideologies or suppressing their "news" outlets.
Our country isn't just suffering from the choices of the small minded, though. The selfish, predatory and perverse present much bigger problems.
The problem with Fox and its willingly uncritical viewers is that it presents itself as an ethical news organization and its content as legitimate news. In reality, Fox is an operating extension of the Republican Party and disseminates propaganda with flagrant disregard for ethical standards and practices.
The dishonesty doesn't stop there. As a business, Fox presents itself as a competitive cable channel. In reality, Fox News is on basic cable all over the country for a reason that has nothing to do with being competitive or in great demand. It has run for years as a large-scale money loser. Any normal channel would've folded, but some very big money had an agenda that transcended being financially successful as a cable channel. The goal was propagandizing, and at that Fox has been highly successful.
S.W. perhaps there is no conscious suggestion as to repressing unfavorable ideologies or news outlets but it's the real world application of the anti-Fox news stance. I cna't see what else is the ultimate action. The government certainly cannot censure them or force them to present news with objectivity. Fox appears to have no desire to clean up its own act. How else are you proposing to deal with its partisan practices other than by suppressing them?
ReplyDeleteOn the other hand, focusing on better educating the public to have more skill at distinguishing fact from opinion is a non-censure focus on dealing with the problem of propaganda from Fox or other sources.
Perspective and opinion have been intermingled with news for some time and Fox is not the only new organization that has crossed that line, it's just more egregious in its transgressions.
Attacking the concept of freedom of the press is always fraught ith danger. I am a major fan of Rachel Maddow. She's far from objective but I love her POV. I despise Glenn Beck. He's far from objective but I disagree with pretty much every word that he utters. For Maddow to exist, Beck must be allowed to exist. We can critique Beck's POV all that we want but we can't suggest that he be muzzled because the slipper slope is such that once you start restricting the rights of a few, it ultimately affects the many.
My ultimate question, is what is it that people propose to do about Fox news, other than constantly complain about its lack of objectivity? It has an agenda and much of what passes as news is propaganda. However, I'm a fan of the effective use of propaganda myself when it supports ideologies in which I believe.
I'm far more concerned about the lack of critical thinking on the part of the public and how little our education system from grade school through graduate school does to teach critical thinking skills. Fox News is the tip of a huge iceberg and I stand by my belief that focusing on Fox's propaganda as news agenda distracts us from the very real problem of a nation with a significant number of non-thinkers.
We can challenge Fox News as propganda and an illegitimate source o news, but we can't shut it down as long as thee ae people who wish to view it. Btw, 68% isn't really that superior to 49%. Approximately half of the people who use Fox News as their primary news source evidently understand some of the issues. On the other hand, while only 32% of NPR listeners were unable to accurately respond to the question on Egypt, that means that nearly a third of NPR listeners didn't understand what they heard and NPR works at being objective fair, and balanced in its reporting. What's the 32%'s excuse? This is a lot bigger than a problem with Fox News.
oops! non-censure was supposed to be non-censorship
ReplyDelete"How else are you proposing to deal with its (Fox's) partisan practices other than by suppressing them?"
ReplyDeleteBy drawing more and more attention to and disapproval of the operation's mendacity and its true raison d'etre. So thoroughly discredit Fox that even desperate-for-work hack broadcast journalists will avoid working there and more and more people won't want others to know they watch it, lest they be considered beyond gullible. In short, by making Fox a pariah.
I have never said we can or should shut Fox down or even censor it. That would only make it a martyr of the radical-conservative cause anyway.
If Fox can be discredited badly enough that most people with two functioning brain cells won't go near it, Murdoch and any others willing to waste their money on it can go right ahead until they're tired of wasting their money. That would be the ideal outcome.
Just how did US mainstream media degenerate from civil discourse into polemic hate media? Fox is not merely an entertaining alternative. It is a propagator of intolerance and hatred.
ReplyDeleteHere in Canada we also claim to have a free press. However, news media is overseen by the Canadian Radio and Television Commission (CRTC), a licensing body that regulates the media commons (airwaves, etc.). In this capacity, if I have my own facts straight, there are stringent regulations regarding what may be presented as news to the public, news being something based on actual, factual events and reported in an unbiased manner. News opinion and editorializing is also required to be fair and balanced.
Efforts to create a Fox News type of news source in Canada have been so far thwarted by these CRTC regulations, as the CRTC definitions of what is legitimate news affect the broadcasters' preferred placement on cable and satellite carriers.
But the corporate pressure to dismantle these regulations (as well as to privatize the CBC) continues ongoing... and is especially threatening given this current pro-privatizing, deregulating Conservative government.