Most MisInformed Voters: Study says Fox News Viewers!

[CanadianKid]

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2010/12/17/fox_news_viewers_often_misinformed.html

Fox News Viewers Often Misinformed

A new University of Maryland study finds that those "who had greater exposure to news sources were generally better informed... There were however a number of cases where greater exposure to a news source increased misinformation on a specific issue."

Key finding: Fox News viewers were were "significantly" more likely than non-viewers to erroneously believe false information about the economy, taxes, climate change, bailouts and whether President Obama was born in the United States.

"These effects increased incrementally with increasing levels of exposure and all were statistically significant. The effect was also not simply a function of partisan bias, as people who voted Democratic and watched Fox News were also more likely to have such misinformation than those who did not watch it.

 

[Canceled.LTroll.9]

Our country is on the path toward bankruptcy. We must turn around before it's too late.

Let's not settle for the big-government status quo, which is what the president's commission offers. We owe it to our children and grandchildren to make these tough decisions so that they might inherit a prosperous and strong America like the one we were given.

 

[Bfgrn]

I heard a retired CIA agent (Ray McGovern) whose expertise was the old Soviet Union and the Eastern Bloc countries say the propaganda coming out of Fox News is at the same level as Pravda. But I suspect most Russians knew Pravda was propaganda...LOL

Fox News viewers, regardless of political information, were "significantly more likely" to believe that:

--Most economists estimate the stimulus caused job losses (12 points more likely)

--Most economists have estimated the health care law will worsen the deficit (31 points)

--The economy is getting worse (26 points)

--Most scientists do not agree that climate change is occurring (30 points)

--The stimulus legislation did not include any tax cuts (14 points)

--Their own income taxes have gone up (14 points)

--The auto bailout only occurred under Obama (13 points)

--When TARP came up for a vote most Republicans opposed it (12 points)

--And that it is not clear that Obama was born in the United States (31 points)

In addition, the study said, increased viewership of Fox News led to increased belief in these false stories. ref

 

[Canceled.LTroll.9]

Well, fast forward to today. We now know that the nearly trillion dollar stimulus package didn’t lead to the job growth promised by President Obama; instead it left already struggling state governments even deeper in debt because now they are on the hook to continue programs and projects that were started by these “free” federal funds.

 

[PostmodernProphet]

I heard a retired CIA agent (Ray McGovern) whose expertise was the old Soviet Union and the Eastern Bloc countries say the propaganda coming out of Fox News is at the same level as Pravda. But I suspect most Russians knew Pravda was propaganda...LOL

Fox News viewers, regardless of political information, were "significantly more likely" to believe that:

--Most economists estimate the stimulus caused job losses (12 points more likely)

--Most economists have estimated the health care law will worsen the deficit (31 points)

--The economy is getting worse (26 points)

--Most scientists do not agree that climate change is occurring (30 points)

--The stimulus legislation did not include any tax cuts (14 points)

--Their own income taxes have gone up (14 points)

--The auto bailout only occurred under Obama (13 points)

--When TARP came up for a vote most Republicans opposed it (12 points)

--And that it is not clear that Obama was born in the United States (31 points)

In addition, the study said, increased viewership of Fox News led to increased belief in these false stories. ref

which of these were wrong?......

 

[Damocles]

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2010/12/17/fox_news_viewers_often_misinformed.html

Fox News Viewers Often Misinformed

A new University of Maryland study finds that those "who had greater exposure to news sources were generally better informed... There were however a number of cases where greater exposure to a news source increased misinformation on a specific issue."

Key finding: Fox News viewers were were "significantly" more likely than non-viewers to erroneously believe false information about the economy, taxes, climate change, bailouts and whether President Obama was born in the United States.

"These effects increased incrementally with increasing levels of exposure and all were statistically significant. The effect was also not simply a function of partisan bias, as people who voted Democratic and watched Fox News were also more likely to have such misinformation than those who did not watch it.

"False Information"?

Only if you take the opinion of lefty pundits as "fact" can you assume that what they believe is "misinformation". The study assumes that one political opinion is more "valid" than another, then says anybody who holds a different view is believing "false information"...

Seriously? People fall for this?

 

[Damocles]

The Title should be:

"Study finds that people who watch Fox News have a different political lean than those who ran the study."

 

[Bfgrn]

which of these were wrong?......

ALL of them...

 

[Canceled.LTroll.9]

I have a vast variety of sources where we get our news too.

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

i love how the left holds these "studies" as gospel, but if you show them video of obama supporters being stupid, they totally discount it

hacks

 

[Bfgrn]

The Title should be:

"Study finds that people who watch Fox News have a different political lean than those who ran the study."

• Though the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) concluded that the stimulus legislation has saved or created 2.0-5.2 million jobs, only 8% of voters thought most economists who had studied it concluded that the stimulus legislation had created or saved several million jobs. Most (68%) believed that economists estimate that it only created or saved a few jobs and 20% even believed that it resulted in job losses.
• Though the CBO concluded that the health reform law would reduce the budget deficit, 53% of voters thought most economists have concluded that health reform will increase the deficit.
• Though the Department of Commerce says that the US economy began to recover from recession in the third quarter of 2009 and has continued to grow since then, only 44% of voters thought the economy is starting to recover, while 55% thought the economy is still getting worse.
• Though the National Academy of Sciences has concluded that climate change is occurring, 45% of voters thought most scientists think climate change is not occurring (12%) or that scientists are evenly divided (33%).

Other key points of misinformation among voters were:

• 40% of voters believed incorrectly that the TARP legislation was initiated under Barack Obama, rather than George Bush
• 31% believed it was proven true that the US Chamber of Commerce spent large amounts of money it had raised from foreign sources to support Republican candidates
• 54% believed that there were no tax cuts in the stimulus legislation
• 86% assumed their taxes had gone up (38%) or stayed the same (48%), while only 10% were aware that their taxes had gone down since 2009
• 53% thought that the bailout of GM and Chrysler occurred only under Obama, though it was initiated under Bush

Clay Ramsay, of WorldPublicOpinion.org commented, "While we do not have data to make a clear comparison to the past, this high level of misinformation and the fact that voters perceived a higher than usual level of false and misleading information, suggests that the increased flow of money into political advertising may have contributed to a higher level of misinformation."

The poll also found significant differences depending how people voted. Those who voted Republican were more likely than those who voted Democratic to believe that: most economists have concluded that the health care law will increase the deficit (voted Republican 73%, voted Democratic 31%); the American economy is still getting worse (72% to 36%); the stimulus legislation did not include any tax cuts (67% to 42%); most scientists do not agree that climate change is occurring (62% to 26%); and it is not clear that Obama was born within the United States (64% to 18%)

http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/brunitedstatescanadara/671.php?nid=&id=&pnt=671&lb=

 

[Phantasmal]

The Title should be:

"Study finds that people who watch Fox News have a different political lean than those who ran the study."

Those that ran the study were much more intelligent than those who politically lean towards Faux!

 

[Phantasmal]

Well, fast forward to today. We now know that the nearly trillion dollar stimulus package didn’t lead to the job growth promised by President Obama; instead it left already struggling state governments even deeper in debt because now they are on the hook to continue programs and projects that were started by these “free” federal funds.

poor misinformed Sarah, no wonder you are a Faux news contributor! Just keep spreading that manure!

 

[PostmodernProphet]

Other key points of misinformation among voters were:

• 40% of voters believed incorrectly that the TARP legislation was initiated under Barack Obama, rather than George Bush

but then, it WAS initiated by Geithner, who was selected by Obama to be his treasury secretary.....which many on the left still refuse to admit.....

• Though the CBO concluded that the health reform law would reduce the budget deficit, 53% of voters thought most economists have concluded that health reform will increase the deficit.

apparently you pasted this from a site published before the CBO issued the revised numbers indicating that the health reform bill will in fact increase the deficit.....

 

[Phantasmal]

Why is that? Which on the left?

 

[Mott the Hoople]

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2010/12/17/fox_news_viewers_often_misinformed.html

Fox News Viewers Often Misinformed

A new University of Maryland study finds that those "who had greater exposure to news sources were generally better informed... There were however a number of cases where greater exposure to a news source increased misinformation on a specific issue."

Key finding: Fox News viewers were were "significantly" more likely than non-viewers to erroneously believe false information about the economy, taxes, climate change, bailouts and whether President Obama was born in the United States.

"These effects increased incrementally with increasing levels of exposure and all were statistically significant. The effect was also not simply a function of partisan bias, as people who voted Democratic and watched Fox News were also more likely to have such misinformation than those who did not watch it.

Well thank you Captain Obvious! LOL

 

[Damocles]

• Though the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) concluded that the stimulus legislation has saved or created 2.0-5.2 million jobs, only 8% of voters thought most economists who had studied it concluded that the stimulus legislation had created or saved several million jobs. Most (68%) believed that economists estimate that it only created or saved a few jobs and 20% even believed that it resulted in job losses.
• Though the CBO concluded that the health reform law would reduce the budget deficit, 53% of voters thought most economists have concluded that health reform will increase the deficit.

It appears as if people who don't watch fox confuse the CBO with "most economists".

• Though the Department of Commerce says that the US economy began to recover from recession in the third quarter of 2009 and has continued to grow since then, only 44% of voters thought the economy is starting to recover, while 55% thought the economy is still getting worse.

This would depend on how they are measuring the economy. While we are in a minimal growth, new jobs are not being created at a rate even fast enough to keep up with new entries into the workforce, let alone repairing the jobs lost.

• Though the National Academy of Sciences has concluded that climate change is occurring, 45% of voters thought most scientists think climate change is not occurring (12%) or that scientists are evenly divided (33%).


Other key points of misinformation among voters were:

• 40% of voters believed incorrectly that the TARP legislation was initiated under Barack Obama, rather than George Bush

Yeah, some people confuse the TARP with the Stimulus. While additions to TARP were given since, TARP was initiated under Bush with the support of Senators Obama and McCain.

• 31% believed it was proven true that the US Chamber of Commerce spent large amounts of money it had raised from foreign sources to support Republican candidates

That's more than should, the reality is even the NY Times had to admit that none of the foreign money they raised was spent on any support of any candidates.

• 54% believed that there were no tax cuts in the stimulus legislation

This is likely because rate cuts were not in the bill, only credits and they likely view that as credits rather than cuts. Although any form of decreasing changes are counted as "cuts" by the other side. As I said, if you lean differently or view something differently the "study" assumes you are erroneous rather than viewing the same thing from a different perspective.

• 86% assumed their taxes had gone up (38%) or stayed the same (48%), while only 10% were aware that their taxes had gone down since 2009

This is again because of the way they were "cut", since the rates are the same and only credits were different (like EIC) many people didn't see many of these cuts.

• 53% thought that the bailout of GM and Chrysler occurred only under Obama, though it was initiated under Bush

Actually Bush punted by giving them a temp fund to see them through the end of the year. We spoke about it endlessly on this site.

Clay Ramsay, of WorldPublicOpinion.org commented, "While we do not have data to make a clear comparison to the past, this high level of misinformation and the fact that voters perceived a higher than usual level of false and misleading information, suggests that the increased flow of money into political advertising may have contributed to a higher level of misinformation."

Well, above I have explained several different ways that they may be attributed to simply viewing the exact same thing from a different perspective. The notes here pretty much sum up what I stated earlier in the thread that you quoted before this post of regurgitated copy/paste.

The poll also found significant differences depending how people voted. Those who voted Republican were more likely than those who voted Democratic to believe that: most economists have concluded that the health care law will increase the deficit (voted Republican 73%, voted Democratic 31%); the American economy is still getting worse (72% to 36%); the stimulus legislation did not include any tax cuts (67% to 42%); most scientists do not agree that climate change is occurring (62% to 26%); and it is not clear that Obama was born within the United States (64% to 18%)

Read the above. Again, this only underlines my earlier point.

Seriously, the title should really read, "Political opinions that differ from ours are judged to be erroneous."

 

[Canceled2]

It appears as if people who don't watch fox confuse the CBO with "most economists".



This would depend on how they are measuring the economy. While we are in a minimal growth, new jobs are not being created at a rate even fast enough to keep up with new entries into the workforce, let alone repairing the jobs lost.


Yeah, some people confuse the TARP with the Stimulus. While additions to TARP were given since, TARP was initiated under Bush with the support of Senators Obama and McCain.



That's more than should, the reality is even the NY Times had to admit that none of the foreign money they raised was spent on any support of any candidates.


This is likely because rate cuts were not in the bill, only credits and they likely view that as credits rather than cuts. Although any form of decreasing changes are counted as "cuts" by the other side. As I said, if you lean differently or view something differently the "study" assumes you are erroneous rather than viewing the same thing from a different perspective.


This is again because of the way they were "cut", since the rates are the same and only credits were different (like EIC) many people didn't see many of these cuts.



Actually Bush punted by giving them a temp fund to see them through the end of the year. We spoke about it endlessly on this site.



Well, above I have explained several different ways that they may be attributed to simply viewing the exact same thing from a different perspective. The notes here pretty much sum up what I stated earlier in the thread that you quoted before this post of regurgitated copy/paste.



Read the above. Again, this only underlines my earlier point.

Seriously, the title should really read, "Political opinions that differ from ours are judged to be erroneous."

I read the actual poll. The same could be said about the viewers of other media depending on the issue and the question asked. In addition to this -the publics understanding of the validity of CBO numbers or the claim of "most economists" is totally subjective. The CBO for instance published different numbers based on variable data.

Anyone who actually believes that this HC monstrosity will reduce the deficit may not be watching Fox...but they ought to be given a bathrobe and slippers after being committed.

The Congressional Budget Office just revised upwards the projected cost (PDF) of the new health care law by $115 billion. The increase is due mainly to the fact that the original CBO score of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act did not factor in the cost of actually having the government implement the reform via discretionary spending, and the law provided for a significant number of grants which did not have a specific dollar value.

I suspect at least some of the decisions about how to structure the new law’s grants and discretionary spending requirements were to help keep the CBO score low. Democrats became bizarrely and dysfunctionally obsessed with the CBO score about which most Americans are completely misinformed if they know anything at all.

The extremely long, completely unnecessary, four-year phased implementation was the most egregious gimmick to keep the CBO score below some arbitrary number. If you believe the new law will actually provide significant help to Americans in need, the multi-year delay by Congressional Democrats, simply to get a prettier CBO score, should cause moral outrage.
In the end, how much the law will actually cost is anyone’s guess. The CBO tries their best, but their projections require some huge assumptions that could easily be wrong, and their previous track record on predicting the costs of health care legislation is poor. What we do know is that the new law lacks true cost control and will not bring our outsized and escalating health care expenditures in line with the rest of the industrialized world. It will not come close to solving that problem, regardless of what this revised analysis by the CBO says.

Read here

 

[Bfgrn]

but then, it WAS initiated by Geithner, who was selected by Obama to be his treasury secretary.....which many on the left still refuse to admit.....


apparently you pasted this from a site published before the CBO issued the revised numbers indicating that the health reform bill will in fact increase the deficit.....

The Troubled Asset Relief Program, commonly referred to as TARP, is a program of the United States government to purchase assets and equity from financial institutions to strengthen its financial sector which was signed into law by U.S. President George W. Bush on October 3, 2008.

United States Secretary of the Treasury

Henry Paulson - July 10, 2006 to January 20, 2009

LINK required for your false accusation. Here's the CBO Site...

http://www.cbo.gov/publications/collections/health.cfm

 

[Bfgrn]

I read the actual poll. The same could be said about the viewers of other media depending on the issue and the question asked. In addition to this -the publics understanding of the validity of CBO numbers or the claim of "most economists" is totally subjective. The CBO for instance published different numbers based on variable data.

Anyone who actually believes that this HC monstrosity will reduce the deficit may not be watching Fox...but they ought to be given a bathrobe and slippers after being committed.

The Congressional Budget Office just revised upwards the projected cost (PDF) of the new health care law by $115 billion. The increase is due mainly to the fact that the original CBO score of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act did not factor in the cost of actually having the government implement the reform via discretionary spending, and the law provided for a significant number of grants which did not have a specific dollar value.

I suspect at least some of the decisions about how to structure the new law’s grants and discretionary spending requirements were to help keep the CBO score low. Democrats became bizarrely and dysfunctionally obsessed with the CBO score about which most Americans are completely misinformed if they know anything at all.

The extremely long, completely unnecessary, four-year phased implementation was the most egregious gimmick to keep the CBO score below some arbitrary number. If you believe the new law will actually provide significant help to Americans in need, the multi-year delay by Congressional Democrats, simply to get a prettier CBO score, should cause moral outrage.
In the end, how much the law will actually cost is anyone’s guess. The CBO tries their best, but their projections require some huge assumptions that could easily be wrong, and their previous track record on predicting the costs of health care legislation is poor. What we do know is that the new law lacks true cost control and will not bring our outsized and escalating health care expenditures in line with the rest of the industrialized world. It will not come close to solving that problem, regardless of what this revised analysis by the CBO says.

Read here

About that $115 billion ...

I wrote a post yesterday explaining what the CBO was talking about when it said health-care reform could lead to $115 billion in further discretionary spending if Congress so chose. What I didn't know was that the majority of the money in the CBO's estimate -- $86 billion, to be exact -- was for existing programs. "For example," writes CBO director Doug Elmendorf in a post meant to clarify the report, "those potential costs include $39 billion authorized for Indian health services that already receive appropriations every year." That is to say, we'd be spending that money with or without the Affordable Care Act. To make this a bit clearer, I broke the $115 billion figure out into a graph:

Of the new spending that does exist, it may or may not ever come to pass. It's up to a future Congress, and a future appropriations bill, to decide its fate. And, in any case, there's not much of it.

By Ezra Klein * May 13, 2010; 11:03 AM ET
Categories: Health Reform

The Washington Post