OutFOXed the Death Star?
Liberals, this topic will be over your head so don't bother to read further.
Well, if you click the title it takes you to a NY Times piece where researchers studied the impact of FOX NEWS: AKA "Murdoc Vader's Death Star"
paraphased from the ever eloquent and now benovelent (as a self-proclaimed involutary donator to Air America) Al Franken. Measures were observed in markets where Fox News was carried on basic cable. The net result is that there was no substancial statisitcal difference in the voting patterns.
What does this mean, you know, in normal speak? Here are my two perspectives:
1) I must confess having studied statistics, the answer is that this study is TOTALLY MEANINGLESS because you cannot PROVE CAUSALITY between the two events. Meaning there cannot be a direct link to the voting habits and Fox News linked. The study also fails to prove even a CORRELATION (meaning while not directly linked the two items share a similar change over the same time period)!
Another way of saying it is that my lunch choice had the same impact on their vote: none.
My real question is, what was their intent when they set out to spend money and effort studying Fox News in the first place?
Or to humor the TIMES:
2) To my Conservative friends I have discoverd "statisitcal proof" that we are not influenced by the left wing media! Where did this come from?
With the credentials of the researchers Stefano DellaVigna of the University of California, Berkeley, and Ethan Kaplan of the Institute for International Economic Studies at Stockholm University it would seem difficult for an objective conservative conclusion to be drawn. The TIMES journalist writes that DellaVigna and Kaplan offer "two more promising explanations" that people used Fox to "confirm previously held beliefs" and that media is "somewhat for entertainment". I would say to you that this is not entirely accurate. For comparison I would submit for your approval my explanation of what the numbers mean:
In spite of the fact that the liberal media has dominated information dissemination for the past 30 years that Conservative thought has continued to thrive. The advent of Fox news will eventually have an impact against liberalism in that there is an alternative to the leftist media for younger viewers to take in. The ratings success enjoyed by Fox would suggest that their impact has only just begun to be mesured.
In conjunction with this change, political candidates are incresingly abandoning their leftist platforms when running for office. Heck, Clinton even supported reformation of Social Security! An unheard of statement from a Democrat prior to the 90's.
Incrementalism works both ways boys and girls! Conservatives are taking back what is rightfully theirs.
Whichever one works for you, run with it. Keep the tongue in cheek, it's more fun that way!
LIGHTNING DATA RADAR
Well, if you click the title it takes you to a NY Times piece where researchers studied the impact of FOX NEWS: AKA "Murdoc Vader's Death Star"
What does this mean, you know, in normal speak? Here are my two perspectives:
1) I must confess having studied statistics, the answer is that this study is TOTALLY MEANINGLESS because you cannot PROVE CAUSALITY between the two events. Meaning there cannot be a direct link to the voting habits and Fox News linked. The study also fails to prove even a CORRELATION (meaning while not directly linked the two items share a similar change over the same time period)!
Another way of saying it is that my lunch choice had the same impact on their vote: none.
My real question is, what was their intent when they set out to spend money and effort studying Fox News in the first place?
Or to humor the TIMES:
2) To my Conservative friends I have discoverd "statisitcal proof" that we are not influenced by the left wing media! Where did this come from?
With the credentials of the researchers Stefano DellaVigna of the University of California, Berkeley, and Ethan Kaplan of the Institute for International Economic Studies at Stockholm University it would seem difficult for an objective conservative conclusion to be drawn. The TIMES journalist writes that DellaVigna and Kaplan offer "two more promising explanations" that people used Fox to "confirm previously held beliefs" and that media is "somewhat for entertainment". I would say to you that this is not entirely accurate. For comparison I would submit for your approval my explanation of what the numbers mean:
In spite of the fact that the liberal media has dominated information dissemination for the past 30 years that Conservative thought has continued to thrive. The advent of Fox news will eventually have an impact against liberalism in that there is an alternative to the leftist media for younger viewers to take in. The ratings success enjoyed by Fox would suggest that their impact has only just begun to be mesured.
In conjunction with this change, political candidates are incresingly abandoning their leftist platforms when running for office. Heck, Clinton even supported reformation of Social Security! An unheard of statement from a Democrat prior to the 90's.
Incrementalism works both ways boys and girls! Conservatives are taking back what is rightfully theirs.
Whichever one works for you, run with it. Keep the tongue in cheek, it's more fun that way!
posted by Possum at 10:00
About Me
- Name: Possum
- Location: Middle Tennessee, United States
I used to know it all till I messed up and found I knew nothing. As a changed man and father the world is a better place. I can now say I'm the person I wanted to be when I grew up.
<< Home