Skip to comments.
We report, you get it wrong
Asia Times ^
| 2003/10/04
| Jim Lobe
Posted on 10/06/2003 2:08:23 PM PDT by leather_strap
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-45 next last
To: leather_strap
Are they jealous of Fox News or what?
2
posted on
10/06/2003 2:11:57 PM PDT
by
darkwing104
(Let's get dangerous)
To: All
SHOW YOUR PRIDE! SUPPORT FREE REPUBLIC!
|
|
Donate Here By Secure Server
Or mail checks to FreeRepublic , LLC PO BOX 9771 FRESNO, CA 93794
or you can use
PayPal at Jimrob@psnw.com
|
STOP BY AND BUMP THE FUNDRAISER THREAD- It is in the breaking news sidebar!
|
3
posted on
10/06/2003 2:13:05 PM PDT
by
Support Free Republic
(Your support keeps Free Republic going strong!)
To: leather_strap
"This is a dangerously revealing study," said Marvin Kalb, a former television correspondent and a senior fellow of the Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics and Public Policy at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University." Ah, yes... revealing: the Shorenstein Center on the Press at Harvard is the group that admitted Al Franken as a "Visiting Fellow", provided adle-brained student interns to help him with his latest "project", and allows The Shorenstein Center to be used (as in use of stationery) to attempt to entrap Vice President Cheney into Mr. Franken's "study" of Administration figures.
Glad to see that the Asia Times is so concerned about our "fair and balanced" media.
To: leather_strap
For each of the three misperceptions, the study found enormous differences between the viewers of Fox, who held the most misperceptions, and NPR/PBS, who held the fewest by far. That's pretty hilarious, because Bob Edwards was interviewing Terry McAuliff the other day and asked Terry if the Kay Report failed to back Bush's claim that the danger from Saddam was imminent. I'd rather have viewers with misconceptions than hosts with agendas.
5
posted on
10/06/2003 2:14:22 PM PDT
by
dirtboy
(Cure Arnold of groping - throw him into a dark closet with Janet Reno and shut the door.)
To: darkwing104
I don't know, I've just found this article.
But did you really read the whole article? It's not only about Fox...
Does anyone here knows something about PIPA? I'm just curious...
To: leather_strap
Basically, the study revealed that people who educated themselves rigorously from a variety of news sources came to far different conclusions concerning the available evidence than did liberal journalists and sheltered leftwing academics.
7
posted on
10/06/2003 2:16:52 PM PDT
by
dead
(I've got my eye out for Mullah Omar.)
To: leather_strap
I like how they conclude, as a given, the three "conceptions" are incorrect.
Why is Salman Pak, etc, not enough evidence for conceiving a link between Hussein and terrorists.
The explicit conceit is outrageous......paraphrasing "Folks watching Fox are always wrong, PBS/NPR listeners are brilliant."
Get lost.
8
posted on
10/06/2003 2:17:52 PM PDT
by
sam_paine
(X .................................)
To: GOPJ; Pharmboy; reformed_democrat; RatherBiased.com; nopardons; Tamsey; Miss Marple; SwatTeam; ...
Academic fraud alert!
This is the Mainstream Media Shenanigans ping list. Please freepmail me to be added or dropped.
Please note this is a medium- to high-volume list.
Please feel free to ping me if you come across a thread you would think worthy of this ping list. I can't catch them all!
9
posted on
10/06/2003 2:18:05 PM PDT
by
Timesink
(For a good time, visit clark2004.meetup.com. Ask for Mary!)
To: leather_strap
Based on several nationwide surveys it conducted with California-based Knowledge Networks since June, as well as the results of other polls, PIPA found that 48 percent of the public believe US troops found evidence of close pre-war links between Iraq and the al-Qaeda terrorist group; 22 percent thought troops found weapons of mass destruction (WMD) in Iraq; and 25 percent believed that world public opinion favored Washington's going to war with Iraq. All three are misperceptions. There are, of course, many other misperceptions, many of which are more prevalent on the left, but this group did not bother to include those in its polling, which guaranteed that the poll generated the desired result. I went to the website for this bunch and they are some of the most biased pollsters I have yet seen.
10
posted on
10/06/2003 2:18:19 PM PDT
by
dirtboy
(Cure Arnold of groping - throw him into a dark closet with Janet Reno and shut the door.)
To: leather_strap
Check out this
survey that PIPA conducted over Bush's refusal to support the Kyoto accords. Not ONE mention that the Senate voted 97-0 to never ratify a treaty with certain provisions like those that ended up in Kyoto.
Yeah, these guys are disinterested pollsters - NOT!
11
posted on
10/06/2003 2:21:13 PM PDT
by
dirtboy
(Cure Arnold of groping - throw him into a dark closet with Janet Reno and shut the door.)
To: leather_strap
Please DO NOT FORGET the barf alert next time.
12
posted on
10/06/2003 2:21:37 PM PDT
by
E. Pluribus Unum
(Drug prohibition laws help fund terrorism.)
To: *Public_Opinion_List
academic fraud ping
13
posted on
10/06/2003 2:21:58 PM PDT
by
Timesink
(For a good time, visit clark2004.meetup.com. Ask for Mary!)
To: leather_strap
Does anyone here knows something about PIPA? I'm just curious...Doing a Google search, it seems that PIPA is quite popular with the likes of the Village Voice and the Brookings Institute.
In that business, you are known by who quotes you...
14
posted on
10/06/2003 2:23:17 PM PDT
by
dirtboy
(Cure Arnold of groping - throw him into a dark closet with Janet Reno and shut the door.)
To: leather_strap
But did you really read the whole article? It's not only about Fox... The impression I get, If you don't listen to us liberals then you are stupid. Did you see how many time the word misperceptions was used? Thats is a cute liberal word for stupid. I guess PIPA is another liberal fronted think tank.
15
posted on
10/06/2003 2:24:02 PM PDT
by
darkwing104
(Let's get dangerous)
To: leather_strap
It is becoming very difficult to forgive the press and their university accomplices. No need to read past the claim that FoxNews viewers are most deluded in this shameful sham 'study'. Clintons WhiteHouse perfected the art of pretty lies: reports, graphs, polls, studies, people.
Try researching election 2000 some time. As a Florida Republican with access to W Palm Beach precinct data, and much other info on DEM. mischief, doing research on the net was a shock. Major American universities - University of Michigan in partical with their supposed vast archive of election data - are misleading the world with selective and inaccurate data.
God bless Jim Robinson.
16
posted on
10/06/2003 2:24:35 PM PDT
by
Ragtime Cowgirl
("This isn't a game." <> "This is our lives." ~ Iraqi victim of Saddam to war critics who say "QUIT")
To: leather_strap
PIPA found that 48 percent of the public believe US troops found evidence of close pre-war links between Iraq and the al-Qaeda terrorist group; 22 percent thought troops found weapons of mass destruction (WMD) in Iraq; and 25 percent believed that world public opinion favored Washington's going to war with Iraq. All three are misperceptions. Well, one out of three is doing better than typical. Troops found WMDs. There were contacts between senior members fot eh Iraqi government and senior members of Al-Queda, not to mention apparent actual training camps on Iraqi soil. The issue is over how significant the finds were.
17
posted on
10/06/2003 2:25:11 PM PDT
by
lepton
To: leather_strap
Does anyone here knows something about PIPA? I'm just curious...
Leftist "think" tank
18
posted on
10/06/2003 2:25:14 PM PDT
by
gatorbait
(Yesterday, today and tomorrow.....The United States Army)
To: leather_strap
Based on several nationwide surveys it conducted with California-based Knowledge Networks since June, as well as the results of other polls, PIPA found that 48 percent of the public believe US troops found evidence of close pre-war links between Iraq and the al-Qaeda terrorist group; 22 percent thought troops found weapons of mass destruction (WMD) in Iraq; and 25 percent believed that world public opinion favored Washington's going to war with Iraq. All three are misperceptions. How can this purport to be a serious study when the questions are so obviously flawed? These are not misperceptions. To take them one at a time.
48 percent of the public believe US troops found evidence of close pre-war links between Iraq and the al-Qaeda terrorist group
Links between Iraq and al-Qaeda have been demonstrated, time and time again. Iraq hosted training camps, supplied weapons and expertise, and offered sanctuary to al-Qaeda fugitives over a period of at least ten years. The weasel words in this question are "US Troops" and "close". The links between al-Qaeda and Iraq were not discovered by "US Troops", and we could argue from now 'till doomsday about what constitutes "close".
22 percent thought troops found weapons of mass destruction (WMD) in Iraq
The Kay report documents a massive and ongoing WMD program in Iraq, which was ample cause for war. This is not a misperception. Before the war, nobody argued that Saddam had WMD actually on-hand as a cause for war, but rather that he was trying continually to acquire or produce them. By asking a question so deceptive and off-the-point, it is predictable that at least 22% of the people would get it wrong.
and 25 percent believed that world public opinion favored Washington's going to war with Iraq.
That really depends on how you define world public opinion, doesn't it. The consensus of European politicians and Third-World tyrants was against the war, but does that mean that "world public opinion" was against the war? I am aware of no data on this point. Polls do show that Iraqi public opinion was and is in favor of the war. Isn't that more relevant?
All three are misperceptions.
All three are at odds with the accepted dogma in US academia. But that does not mean that they are misperceptions.
19
posted on
10/06/2003 2:27:04 PM PDT
by
gridlock
To: leather_strap
Here is a representative report from PIPA. Have the barf bag ready.
We live in curious times. We seem to have a rational public and an ideological ruling class. Average Americans are basically centrist, prone to balance, compromise, fair shares, reasonable resolutions. Their Congress is polarized, hyperpartisan, responsive to cause activists of left and right. Washington regularly misreads the former and bemoans the latter.
Exhibit A was the impeachment of President William Jefferson Clinton. Showing astoundingly bad judgment and an excruciating lack of self-control, he indulged himself in an affair with a White House intern, then lied about itin legal proceedings, and to the American public. He had also, by some combination of skill and luck, presided over a national prosperitysoaring income and productivity growth and low inflation complete with fiscal surplus that virtually no one thought possible on January 20, 1993. And his empathy with Americans goals and needs was uncanny. The publics conclusion? Bad man, good president. Censure him and move on. The congressional resolution? Haul out the heavy guns. A year of bitter wrangling, driven by activists on the Clinton-hating right, ending in a partisan House vote for his ouster and acquittal by the Senate (also along mainly partisan lines) and no censure resolution at all. Meanwhile, Washington vacillated between certainty that the latest juicy revelation would finally destroy Clintons public support and wishing that statesmen would emerge to lead us out of the mess.
Yeah, this bunch is really unbiased...
20
posted on
10/06/2003 2:30:31 PM PDT
by
dirtboy
(Cure Arnold of groping - throw him into a dark closet with Janet Reno and shut the door.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-45 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson