What is Digg?158 Comments
- Hale, on 10/11/2007, -8/+41CNN had like four straight hours of Paris Hilton "news" yesterday, but go ahead and try to make Fox News look bad.
- Barman, on 10/11/2007, -19/+51Not surprising that Fox News is at the bottom of the barrel. "Breaking News: Anna Nicole Smith dead. Paris Goes to Jail. Paris comes out of jail." This is not news ... leave it to the E! channel. Although most of the other networks are just as guilty. They care too much about generating revenue from more viewers than providing actual news and debate. I try to watch Daily Show / Colbert every night I can, and its sad that night after night they make good points and commentary that most other "real" news programs are afraid to make.
- yargthepirate, on 10/11/2007, -7/+34So basically, no matter which news you listen to/watch, you're still likely to be an idiot. Everybody's got an agenda, including Stewart, although his is just reporting things that he can make fun of. Granted, this is basically everything, so there's not much of a practical difference.
- bemenaker, on 10/11/2007, -2/+22Not all republicans are bad and we know that. Now we will saw all neocons can leave the planet, but not all repubs are bad. Not all dems are good.
And CNN deserves to be flogged for showing Paris just like Fox does. - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -4/+23interestingly enough, they're right there with the viewing audience of the CBS, ABC, and NBC evening news. It looks like a statistical tie to me.
Also, the Daily Kos and Little Green Football crowds didn't do too well. - Sendss, on 10/11/2007, -2/+20The funny part here is that Stewart has about 15 minutes for news a day compared to a 24/7 cable news channel.
- ISurfTooMuch, on 10/11/2007, -1/+17Having access to information, even if it's high-quality information, doesn't make people more informed. What makes them informed is their desire to become informed. If they have that, they'll seek out the information they need. If they don't, it doesn't matter how much information is available to them; they'll never utilize it.
What we need in this country isn't more information. What we need is a change in attitudes about what's important. - devou33, on 10/11/2007, -18/+32Fox News has a function and it functions well. MSNBC, which is far from innocent, at least has SOME investigative reporting. Turn on Fox News or CNN any time of the day and you will notice that their programming never changes. Drones share the opinions of the people who the pay them, and they do so convincingly. Fox News' anchors know what they're doing and they're hired specifically because of their ability to manipulate people's opinions without seeming like they're trying to (which is obvious to anyone who seeks news elsewhere).
We are the product of our education, religion and the forces that surround us. Unfortunately for our country, our education sucks, religion has an agenda, and the media is succeeding in making us dumb. - Xeth, on 10/11/2007, -2/+15They even outperformed NPR listeners by 1 percent. Take that public broadcastng!
- Anachronus, on 10/11/2007, -2/+9But even with Daily Show viewer only a little over half got the answers right.
- wendelgee2, on 10/11/2007, -8/+14And why do you think CNN had that? Because FoxNews has swallowed up a portion of the marketshare, and everyone else is jumping on the bandwagon hoping to replicate that success. So...yes, it is Fox's fault. The rot spreads. Or maybe it's America's fault...maybe we get the news we deserve? Maybe we should vote with our remotes?
- bemenaker, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5Everyone has a bias, it is your job as a reporter to keep your bias out of the story, not easy, but it used to be accomplished better than it is today. You can even state your opinion on the subject but it should be the last thing you say on it, and it should be very clearly stated as such. They should also show both sides of an issue, the for's and againsts for every issue they talk about.
That's how you deal with bias. - Error601, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6Based on three questions apparently which is statistical lying. Dug down for wildly "Micheal Moore" style inaccurate. Why do liberals so often find it necessary to lie in a lame attempt to feel superior?
- SpaceMonkeyZero, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6RTFA
- falstaff, on 10/11/2007, -4/+9This is a non-story. It's the same phenomenon as saying that your professors who made class fun were better at imparting knowledge than the monotonous drones. When comparing television sources, the "fun" one did better, and the rest were basically dead even. Secondly, it's asking three questions. That's hardly comprehensive.
By cherry picking two data points to compare out of the 10, the only thing the submitter has shown is his own bias. The FAR more interesting data is in the lower right. Everybody's getting dumber. - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5Interesting results, easy to slant. More people watch Colbert and Daily show than watch news channels. There's a difference between entertainment and news channels. One can just easily say, by combining the scores of CNN and Fox News Channel, that cable news viewers are more intelligent than Comedy Central viewers. In fact that is probably more true than the Fox bashers would be willing to admit. But then again, to admit that FNC actually does some good by reporting without the Leftist slant would be tantamount to acknowledging there might be some truth to Creationism.
- CraigJ, on 10/11/2007, -4/+8Well, there is only 3 points between CNN and FOX, and they don't say what the margin of error is, but they are probably in a dead heat. Broadcast infotainment is lame for learning things. The bottom line is that smarter people get their information from multiple sources and take the time to be informed.
The 1989 to 2007 comparason is really scary, 31% can't name the VP? I wonder what a similar poll in the UK or France would look like? - molson66, on 10/11/2007, -7/+11That Stewart is deliberately satirizing the news while still remaining more current and informative than Fox News is what truly saddens me.
- wheresjim, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4I agree about the getting dumber part, but I do also think that intelligence and humor go hand in hand
- tlm2021, on 10/11/2007, -4/+8What the title should read is "Daily Show Viewers Know More About Current Events Than NPR News Fans." That's surprising
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4The entire chart, not just the parts that Wired wanted you to see: http://people-press.org/reports/images/319-2.gif
http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=319 - wheresjim, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4The most particularly telling stat were related to partisanship - "Which party controls the house?", "Is the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court conservative?", "What is the name of the Speaker of the House?", those are questions that relate to partisanship (or conservatism vs. liberalism), and on each of those the scores were higher, on some cases much higher. Which begs the question, "Are we more dumb because we are more partisan, or are we more partisan because we are more dumb?"
- ISurfTooMuch, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4And CNN and Fox News aren't? Oh, come now. Any outlet that thinks Paris Hilton is newsworthy is showing its bias right there.
- airwalkery2k, on 10/11/2007, -3/+6If you can come up with a better way to study people's knowledge over the phone, I'm sure they'd love to hear it.
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -2/+5http://people-press.org/reports/images/319-2.gif
Bill O'Reilly's audience was found to me one of the most informed. Wired just conveniently left that out. - insonh, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4Why is everything compared to “FOX News”?
Name one other thing in any category that’s gone side by side with FOX News in comparison
Like
More people watch dingle berries ferment than watch FOX News and CBS combined.
You never see that…ever!
Which tells me that whenever I see any story that is comparing FOX News with anything else it must be total ***** - biotch, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3Yes we should... I refuse to watch anything about Paris...
I change any channel that brings it up - Nateon, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3It would be interesting if they had an age group category for this too. I'm under the impression that a large majority of Daily Show viewers are college students and I'd like to see how well college students stack up to say 40 year olds in current events knowledge.
- reyalp, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3Your link doesn't have anything to do with whether Daily Show viewers are more informed than O'Reilly viewers. You fail.
- mandarin, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3DOnt they report only about Beckham and Posh?
- ISurfTooMuch, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3In a class I used to teach, I started each one with a current events quiz. Believe me, this statistic isn't surprising.
This was back when the Unabomber released his manifesto to the media. It was all over the news. So, figuring I'd give the students an easy question (and these were college students, mind you), I asked the question, "Why is the Unabomber in the news today?" One of the responses I got, and I'm not making this up, is, "We're planning to use the Unabomber in Bosnia." This guy thought the Unabomber was some kind of military aircraft. - cesig, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3Did you even look at the study? The whole point was to see who knew more about current events. And if you'd ever watched the Daily Show, you'd have a better understanding of what they cover. They have some of the most intelligent interviews out there. And some of the most intelligent and noteworthy interviewees, too.
- mochaman, on 10/11/2007, -4/+7Ironically O'Reilly called the Daily Show viewers slackers. Now Jon can clearly demonstrate that his viewers are better informed than Fox News.
- zyl0x, on 10/11/2007, -8/+11I don't think anyone here is surprised.
- ISurfTooMuch, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3You may fail to inform, but you probably won't fail financially.
If you haven't seen it already, watch the movie "Network". It's over 30 years old, but it's a real eye-opener. It's dead-on accurate about the state of news today. Required viewing if you want to understand the motivations of television "news" execs, IMHO. - DivisibleByZero, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3Not sure it's fair comparing 1989 vs. 2007 figures on who the president of Russia is. Our relations with Russia are vastly superior to those of 1989. Relevant comparison would be to ask who's president of Iran or something.
Why does the asterisk at the bottom list five questions, which don't cover the data presented in the graph? - mrfoos2, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Like duh! Everyone knows liberals know more than everyone else. It's their "thing".
In related news, a new poll generated by conservatives shows that FoxNews viewers are morally "righter" about issues than Daily Show viewers. - reyalp, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Your link doesn't have anything to do with whether Daily Show viewers are more informed than O'Reilly viewers. You fail.
- troglodytejb, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2The Pew Research Center? Quite a bit of credit, actually. As the most transparent INTERNATIONAL polling organization composed of bipartisan, well educated individuals, it's actually just about the MOST accurate. Most of the other polling organizations sport a bias based on funding on employee political leanings. Just about the only 2 polling organizations you CAN trust are Gallup and Pew. Gallup releases much more frequently and publishes raw data, including question text, but Pew is independently vetted and used as the "gold standard" in international polling.
Also, keep in mind that was also ALMOST CERTAINLY not the exact text of the question. Find the original source, rather than the wired infographic, then complain about the poll. - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3I wanna fabricate a kick to your balls for saying something so stupid.
- neuropsychguy, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2"Having access to information, even if it's high-quality information, doesn't make people more informed."
Which is the problem with Digg: a lot of information (some of it quality) but a lot of uninformed people commenting about things they know nothing about. It sure is entertaining though! - DivisibleByZero, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Quick arithmetic in my head says they're sorted based on the average of all three columns, which is a fair value to sort on. Haven't checked every row, but that's why network evening news beats Fox News.
/wait a minute. The does my local fox affiliate's evening news count as Fox News? - acdcfanbill, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3Just because I listen to O'Reilly doesn't mean I take his word as law either ;)
- cesig, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Maybe so. But statistically they're still some of the most knowledgeable about current events. Irony or not.
- biotch, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Harry and Lloyd were laughed at... The daily show is laughed with.
The creators of dumb and dumber could be considered intelligent. - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2http://people-press.org/reports/images/319-2.gif how about that one? You know the original source of this Wired hit piece. It puts the O'reilly Factor and Rush Limbaugh audiences at the top tier -- right along side the Daily Show. Limbaugh's is just as "Informed" and O'Reilly's is slightly further behind.
The full summary of the study: http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=319 - dmjarrington, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2There's a brigade of people that ridicule Alex Jones and prisonplanet.com, but I find that when I'm talking to people in the street that I am much more informed than the average citizen on whatever issue, be it immigration, monetary policy, or otherwise. Alex Jones has the facts... People don't like what he has to say, but he is usually 100% right on his predictions. He even predicted 9/11 before it happened...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FXJRg4Vh0kc
He's not always right on EVERYTHING, but he is closer to the mark more often than not. However, if that is too much sensationalism for you, you could just go straight to http://www.ronpaul2008.com and hear the message that the other politicians and news media have been *trying to avoid* for years. - gojeda, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2The interesting thing about this story is not what is in it, but what was left out.
This is not the first time this story has appeared on digg. Unfortunately, Wired decided to do a bit of creative editing and failed to mention that viewers of The O'Reilly Factor scored best as did those who tuned into NPR.
Wired has become a bit of a little liberal bitch lately. I am going to have to keep my eye on it and tighten its choke chain.
Therefore, BURIED for INACCURACY. - wonderchemist, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3It's quite simple, unless you KNOW what the daily show is mocking, the jokes won't be funny.
- bsmang, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Digg! (lol)
-
Show 51 - 100 of 158 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 