Source material.Anyone who does more then just watch the nightly news has noticed that there has been a dynamic shift away from "News" to more "Info-Tainment".
CNN with its 24\7 coverage had to fill up time in such a manner that people would watch. Sure they did have the Challenger footage and Baby Jessica, but it was the first Gulf War in 1991 that really made CNN shine. You figure it must have looked like a good idea because FOX news channel launched October 1996, followed by MSNBC on July 1996.
So now you have competition for advertising dollars, which means people having said station playing. Add to that the Internet where you not only get access to various news agencies, you also get eyewitness accounts, and fact checkers (and some kooks).
We have gone, in short order, from Network control of information to non-centralized non-control. I can read a story on MSNBC, google search and find more info that either confirms or refutes the story.
Currently we have lots of opinions shoved into the facts of a news cast. Spun this way and that way in order to "Shape" the news rather then inform. Some would say it has always been this way, just look at Walter Winchell or Hearst. The current polling is showing there is a low trust for various news outlets.
The Van Jones story is really telling. Here you have someone appointed by The President of the United states, with very controversial beliefs and statements. It was only covered by FOX until he resigned claiming he was smeared, by his own statements on video. Many of the folks around my office were wondering who Mr. Jones was and why he resigned.
So what can you do? Newspapers, Magazines, NPR, Broadcast and Cable news outlets all are more opinion padded facts then anything else.
I am hoping that people voting with their feet will start some change. The most bias of Newspapers are on the brink of collapse. Maybe they will consider it a good business move to provide factual news rather then party line.
4 comments:
You'll discover the same problem if you compare CNN, Pew, and Gallup statistics. which is not math, but interpretation. As Mark Twain write, "There's lies, D--n lies, and statistics." (I truly respect and take your "no profanity" notice quite seriously.)
The Polling debacle really comes down to this.
You do not create a Poll just so you have a story.
Anyone not releasing the questions, sampling and methodology, should jettison the poll in favor of casting bones...
If I learned anything studying "Experimental Child Psychology" (I know, it sounds horrible) on my way to my Child Development degree, it was how to "manipulate the data." You just leave out the parts that don't support your theory.
As a parent of a child who was apparently normal until his 2-year vaccinations, I can also say I don't trust studies that say the high levels of mercury in his vaccines had nothing to do with the autism. Funny thing - all the cited studies about how vaccines have no impact come from pharmaceutical companies. Weird how that happens...
Give me a double-blind any day. Kind of hard to do that with polls, which is why I don't pay much attention to those either.
Can this be, that we all agree? Tina's absolutely right—I've conducted statistical research first hand. You just leave out the parts that don't support your theory. Exactly.
I actually agree with Cheney on one point, and I've said this on both progressive and conservative blogs: "I ignore polls." Surprised? LOL!
Post a Comment