Shared publicly  - 
What do you think of this study suggesting that Fox News viewers know less about the world than people who watch no news at all?
Jeffrey Ullman's profile photoDenise Bauer's profile photoJohn Easterday's profile photoDavid Freelund's profile photo
"Faux" News only has one's "fair and balanced" reporting is neither fair nor balanced, and it smacks more of clerical work than reporting. When an important National or International event is taking place, I'll switch over to Fox JUST to see how well they'll mangle the facts, and insert their GOP-master's propaganda statements.
+Timothy M. Coplin Read the report itself, all of the demographic information is in it. All of the questions are in it as well, word for word as they were asked to each person polled.
They buried the lead: "People who only listened to NPR or watched Sunday morning talk shows or "The Daily Show" did the best in the study." Time to start listening to +NPR and +The Daily Show, folks.
The big news networks are not about presenting information. They are (like most media) about selling advertisements. Ads do not support the news, the news supports ad revenue. And when they DO give relevant information, how could anyone ever remember it. 50 moving objects on the screen is more likely to induce seizures than to create a lasting impression. A.D.D heaven.

NPR - does not fall into the category of serving the advertisers. Although it's hard to listen to how everything in the world is going to hell EVERY MORNING AT 7AM. "Good morning, millions are now dead, and it's probably your fault." Thanks NPR, good morning to you too. Yet, I still listen.

Daily Show - wants to make you laugh, so their information sticks.

Sunday Morning Shows - demographic of 50 years+, median income probably $200,000+. No clue if that's right, I get that from watching the ads, knowing I'm way outa my league.
These things are so made up....but funny...
Everybody criticize News Media in America; including people from other countries (and they have no respect for our News). At least this poll shows criticizers are not completely off the mark.

Why is that News Media are not taking it seriously and save their faces ? Advertising may be the time wasters (surely needed to fill up 24hr news), but that doesn't explain why talented people waste their talents by not doing their work.

But it sure is funny that +The Daily Show gives more news than Fox News.
I agree with +Kevin J. Chen . Another point is... though I'm a fan... MSNBC didn't exactly rock the world. Would have been interesting to see how newspaper and/or magazine readers (online or offline) fared,
Just as telling is the Fox News attack on FDU (in the Update). Ignore the real problem, attack the messenger.
Didn't another study come out with the same results at least a year or so ago?
Apparently quite a few people doubt that this study was representative of the facts ...
FYI the attack, +Boris Kofman is ... surprise ... a bit dubious in its assertions. FDU one of the worst? Not quite. It isn't top ten mind you, but... the Attack will certainly be the Faux talking point for days to come.
What do I think about it? Well it's a strange study with only 9 items so the range is very small. The most informed group (NPR listeners) had an average that was not really much higher than FOX. NPR listeners got about 3 of the nine questions right and FOX viewers got about 2. Big deal. You could also claim that NPR listeners are pretty shabby too.

Personally, I have no doubt that an individual who gets his or her news primarily from FOX is likely ill informed because FOX is not in the business of informing its viewers. It is a really poor news source. I think (ideology aside) they want to increase viewership and they tend to fixate on non-stories (not unlike HuffPo,BTW)

But, as near as I can tell, this is very weak study and contributes nothing to a national debate on media bias and informativeness.
I am not promoting any particular news station, but only a fool gets his news from only one source.
They have one agenda---conservative Republican--and they slant the news to accommodate that which is why viewers are misinformed.
I watch both sides and both sides have a slant...nothing is without opinion and slant anymore...
Interesting perspective +Paul Minda - wasn't sure (seriously) what is considered a substantive study.And you're right .... really no group did wonderfully well. Would be interesting (and probably depressing) for a parallel study to be conducted in other countries as a point of comparison.
I acquire my news from a significantly diverse variety of sources. I probably scan upwards of 300 articles per day, based on hits in my RSS reader. The NYT is a big part of my incoming media stream.

Mr. Kristof is very right to point out that single-source media consumers are less well-informed. But I was actually quite amazed that the number of correct answers was so low across the board. I have to wonder if either the questions were not well-formulated, or if we in the US are just that ignorant about the planet we live on.
Not to be snide, oh well why not, but I know too many people who rely on Fox for their information. And...well... they are less informed and usually have little idea of what is going on in the world. Instead they spout right wing sound bites all the time.
i agree. in general when gathering an opinion you should find various sources.
The result of the study is not at all surprising. I am almost completely off the TV grid now. The last time I watched TV was when I was in the gym. But back when I did have TV at home, Fox News Channel seemed to never fail to physically sicken me. So I guess people watch Fox to get their blood boiled up. News and information? That is of little importance even if they are there.
Fox isn't really too concerned with objective and accurate reporting. It's an entertainment channel. Oh, and saying that other media are bad, too, (like MSNBC viewers having low scores in some areas) doesn't negate the fact that Fox offers so little clarity on national and international discussions.
be careful mr. kristof, fox news may succeed making nyt reader a dirty word.
I think you have to be selective in your criticism. Locally our Fox News station is often better than it's competition, but that is faint praise because they both are trying to reach a very conservative viewership. The sideshow that is the daily screed of the national programing doesn't always match the news programing Fox presents.
It is so obviously preaching to the choir that any one who mistakes it for news is sadly mislead.
I think Nicholas is talking about Fox News, but not the local stations, and he is right. Their comentators like the Five Guys, Cabuto, Hannity, or OReally, only shows hatress to inmigrants and to Obama. They misinform all the time, and show a world that only exists in their retrograde, conservative, and negative imagination.
In other news a study found that the sky is blue.

Of course people that watch Fox news are uninformed, (nice way of saying stupid). If you watch more than 5 minutes and don't notice the blatant bias towards an extreme right wing agenda then you are deeply uninformed, (stupid).
It's not surprising given that its whole purpose is to misinform. Propaganda is what propaganda does.
+Paul Minda said "I have no doubt that an individual who gets his or her news primarily from FOX is likely ill informed". I think that people who get their news primarily from TV (any source) are likely ill-informed, because TV is mostly about headlines and advertising. (Only one of the networks is honest enough to call themselves "Headline News", but they all are.) If you want folks who are informed, they will be readers of news, not watchers.

And the implication of +Nicholas Kristof's question is that people who watch no news at all are somehow ill-informed may be exactly the opposite of the truth...
Fox news feeds the minds of the hateful people in our country. I wacth it for pure entertainment purposes only! You can't the bull they shovel out!
+Michael Houston Agreed. And the numbers from the original study seem to bear this out:No one did well. I suppose one might argue that the NPR listeners are a slightly different sample, as that's radio news, but still, the fact is that TV news watchers are just about all uniformly uniformed.

I think study will be smugly shared and posted by FOX haters, and that will really do no one any good...FOX viewers will still defend it as being the only reliable news, and the haters will continue to call it FAUX news..

FWIW, I never watch FOX news, CNN, or MSNBC: I'm in Canada and that's extra on my cable package. But I do stream NPR almost daily on the ol' iPhone.
d so
Hahaha. Fox-worthy= when one is too stupid to know how ignorant they are.
My personal opinion is that people who watch Fox 'News' or MSNBC , etc don't
necessarily want objective news as much as they want to be entertained with
media that reinforces they're existing biases. Written/Internet based
news is better in some ways, but even that is subjective.

Objective news is an ideal, but not easily accomplished.
Yeah, +brad peek ...Problem is, NBC doesn't make people nearly as stupid. Bias aside, Rachel Maddow is actually an intelligent human being. Fox is full of clinically retarded drones.
If you believe that you are on your own and that 'they' are about to take away all you care about, and you know all there is to know, you will find comfort in watching Fox News. If you believe that the world is a tough place where you must do your share to make it better, and you want to meet other people who believe the same, you should probably be watching MSNBC.
The problem is regardless of the study results a large number of fox viewers will be voting in November based on only what they hear on Fox. Thats the main concern.
And that people who watch The Daily Show scored the highest on this survey...gotta LOVE LOVE LOVE Jon Stewart & crew!
+Mark Welch the american public very often seem to be ignorant.
The bad thing about the "news" media: They all have an agenda and it is only about ideology.
Add a comment...