Watching Fox News Makes You Dumb

Via TalkingPointsMemo.com, as we suspected, here’s the reason why watching Fox News makes one dumb:

There’s ample evidence that Fox News viewers tend to be surprisingly uninformed about current events. We’re starting to get a better sense as to why that is.

What’s more important: Iraq or Anna Nicole Smith? Depends on which network you’re watching.

According to [the Project for Excellence in Journalism's] first quarter News Coverage Index, “MSNBC and CNN were much more consumed with the war in Iraq than was Fox.”

In daytime, FNC devoted 6 percent of its time to Iraq, and 17 percent of its time to Anna Nicole. For CNN, the mix was 20 percent Iraq, 5 percent Anna; for MSNBC, the mix was 18 percent Iraq, 10 percent Anna.

“Fox also stood out for its lack of coverage on the firings of the U.S. attorneys, compared with the other channels. The story, which gained real momentum in mid March, consumed a mere 2% of Fox’s total airtime. CNN devoted twice that percent (4%) and MSNBC four times (8%).”

F(au)x News: PR Arm of the GOP

Here’s enough reason for Democrats not to trust Fox News, and to correctly describe it as an extension of the republican party:

Journalists strive to report the news, not to be the news. So Fox News should have been a bit embarrassed to headline a story that ended with the Nevada Democratic Party canceling Fox’s sponsorship of a pre-caucus debate.

Then again, Fox is not a typical news organization. [...] Fox’s prime commitment is to the triumph of conservative politics, not to a well-informed public. From hiring hosts to selecting stories to framing questions for discussion, Fox demonstrates its dedication to advancing the ideological interests of the right.

As former Fox reporter/anchor Jon Du Pre put it in the documentary “Outfoxed,” “We weren’t necessarily, as it was told to us, a newsgathering organization so much as we were a proponent of a point of view … we were there to reinforce a constituency.”

[...]

What evidence, forged or otherwise, did Fox rely on in asserting that Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) attended a Muslim madrassah? If CNN could go to the school and give the lie to the report, why couldn’t Fox? What outside panel was empowered to investigate how Fox could have aired such an outrageously inaccurate report? Who was fired for the inflammatory falsehoods?

A study by a University of Maryland center concluded, “Those who receive most of their news from Fox News are more likely than average to have misperceptions” about Iraq. For example, in 2003, 67 percent of those who relied primarily on Fox wrongly believed the U.S. “found clear evidence in Iraq that Saddam Hussein was working closely with the al Qaeda terrorist organization.” Only 40 percent of those who relied on print media harbored this illusion, debunked thoroughly by the 9/11 Commission.

Instead of providing “fair and balanced” reporting, Fox has created an audience ignorant of the facts, but fully supportive of management’s ideology.

An audience that decides for itself, based on “fair and balanced” coverage, ought not to reach monolithic conclusions. Yet, in our 2004 polling with Media Vote, using Nielsen diaries, we found that Fox News viewers supported George Bush over John Kerry by 88 percent to 7 percent. No demographic segment, other than Republicans, was as united in supporting Bush. Conservatives, white evangelical Christians, gun owners, and supporters of the Iraq war all gave Bush fewer votes than did regular Fox News viewers.

Good Catch

Good catch over at LiberalOasis.com:

Fox News Sunday’s Chris Wallace said today:

“We asked Attorney General Gonzales to come on today, but the White House declined our invitation.”

To repeat, Gonzales did not accept or reject his own invitation. The White House did.

If he was truly independent of the White House and its political agenda, he would control his own schedule and media appearances.

That pretty much answers the question if our attorney general is functioning as the people’s lawyer, or the president’s lawyer.

Fox News Loosing Clout?

This is an important point at the center of the brouhaha over the republican partisan nature of Faux News:

[T]he money people are noticing the animosity against Fox News, and realizing that the Fox News brand isn’t necessarily something their clients should want to be associated with.

The corporate world is cautious about politics, and they don’t like to get in the middle of political spats.  They prefer their politics quiet and out of site.  It’s probably just better for them to put their ads on CNN and MSNBC, and leave Fox News for the penis pills and the like.

Bless His Heart Indeed

"Bless your heart." I love hearing the phrase… here’s how the Urban Dictionary defines it:

1.	bless your heart
	1: phrase used by Southern women to excuse themselves for speaking ill of someone else. 2: an expression of sympathy or pity. 3: a polite way to respond to an ignoramus, particularly male, who showers upon you flattering but unwanted compliments. 1: "She’s as ugly as a mud-fence, bless her heart." 2: "Well, bless your heart, that must have been terrible!" 3: drunk fella: "I think you’re beautiful! Even if you were ugly, I’d STILL think you were beautiful!" recipient: "…bless your heart."
2.	bless your heart
	A polite way to say "go to hell" a: *gives the finger* b: Bless your heart!

I specially love hearing the phrase when delivered to conservative blowhards. Here’s Rev. Dr. Jeremiah Wright delivering a much deserved "Bless your heart" to über-conservative Sean Hannity of Faux News:

Video courtesy of Crooks and Liars.