Posted by caraher on September 8, 2005, at 10:06:12
In reply to Re: Bill O'reilly » caraher, posted by 10derHeart on September 7, 2005, at 20:42:34
> Interesting about the study. Do you have any idea where I could read more about that? A link or something? Guess I could try to Google it...Here ya go: A news article summarizing the findings...
http://www.reclaimthemedia.org/stories.php?story=03/10/04/6215001
And the original report: http://www.pipa.org/us_opinion.html (Click the "Iraq" folder then "Misperceptions, The Media and The Iraq War
A PIPA/Knowledge Networks Poll" (Oct 2, 2003)> Also, I'd just like to say Fox News *is* my chief news source. Despite that horrifying fact, I've never thought any of the 9/11 highjackers were Iraqi. Not sure how anyone reading or watching any accurate report, documentary, etc. about 9/11 would think so - it's just false. I can't recall that being reported by any news source - did Fox News report that at some point? I'm not saying they didn't, but I'm unaware of it.
I couldn't tell you whether they reported anything to that effect, only that their loyal viewers (obviously not including you, of course!) were more likely to believe such things.
I think part of it isn't so much what is said as what is *not* said. When, for instance, Bush justifies the war in response to the Cindy Sheehan vigil by saying that "we were attacked," failure to address the factually inaccurate implications of this statement (that we attacked those who attacked us first) is just as egregious a failure to engage in responsible journalism as passing off unsubstantiated assertions as facts.
There may also be a pre-selection effect at work, where the people who have made up their minds, facts be damned, just tend to be attracted to FOX
poster:caraher
thread:551578
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/poli/20050728/msgs/552269.html