This message was self-deleted by its author

[ChisolmTrailDem]

This message was self-deleted by its author (ChisolmTrailDem) on Wed Jul 9, 2014, 07:40 PM. When the original post in a discussion thread is self-deleted, the entire discussion thread is automatically locked so new replies cannot be posted.

[BainsBane]

1. Truth be told, cable "news" is awful

It's entertainment. I pulled the plug on my cable over a month ago and have no regrets. I hadn't watched cable news in ages anyway.

[DURHAM D]

2. Is this an online poll? nt

[ChisolmTrailDem]

7. Not sure right off the bat. Here are additional links:

PunditFact: http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/article/2014/jul/01/introducing-scorecards-tv-networks/

And here is the polling org's website: http://publicmind.fdu.edu/

[VanillaRhapsody]

3. is this another Dems are just as bad as Reps speil?

I guess for some that meme never gets old...

[ChisolmTrailDem]

9. That's not what I said. I was talking about a cable news network...

What the fuck are you talking about

I don't do Dems are as bad as fuckingassholehatefilledidiotrightwingshitnozzles.

[VanillaRhapsody]

13. and why did you care enuff to post it here exactly?

[ChisolmTrailDem]

15. Because that news network has been found to lie... a lot. What the hell

does that have to do with what you said?

I guess I also posted for an even simpler reason: Because I wanted to post it. Got a problem with it, put me on ignore or hide the thread. Easy enough?

[VanillaRhapsody]

17. says you....

You going to call Rachel Maddow a liar to her face and that she is the equivalent of Sean Hannity?

[ChisolmTrailDem]

19. Where are you coming up with this shit? I didn't say on word about Rachel Maddow,

whom I happen to be enamored with and whose work and opinions I agree with 99% of the time.

What is your problem?

If you're determined to make me an enemy or to cast some doubt over my loyalty to the Democratic Party, you'll have to come up with something real, not something you're making up as you go.

[VanillaRhapsody]

23. where does she work again?

What was that? Please repeat louder not everyone heard you the first time...

[ChisolmTrailDem]

24. MSNBC. And what is your point? What are you trying to do here? nt

[VanillaRhapsody]

27. and what was your point again?

What were you saying about her network again?

[ChisolmTrailDem]

28. That's it's been shown to lie about 46% of the time. So? nt

[VanillaRhapsody]

35. and it happened why?

Because msnbc also has morning joke...

[ChisolmTrailDem]

40. Which I said in my OP...

What is your purpose with this nonsense?

[dhill926]

38. + 1….

good grief…you're showing great restraint. Of course I haven't read down further haha...

[arcane1]

22. "In this case, it’s about the network that aired the content, not the person who said it."

"Our scorecards only include statements made on that network by a pundit or a host or paid staffer. That means they do not include statements made by elected leaders, candidates or party officials. We feel it’s difficult to hold a network accountable for the comments of a politician.

Also, if a Fox News host appears on NBC and makes a claim that we fact-check, that rating would appear on the NBC page. In this case, it’s about the network that aired the content, not the person who said it."


http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/article/2014/jul/01/introducing-scorecards-tv-networks/

[Raine1967]

31. You are really making some incredible leaps with this.

The OP has a legitimate point.

[Cal Carpenter]

53. Your posts make you seem like one of the least intellectually honest people

on this board. And that's saying a lot.

Extrapolating god know what from god know where. My goodness.

[HangOnKids]

73. Bravo

Clear as the deep blue sea.

[deutsey]

47. Thanks for posting the link.

[sadoldgirl]

4. And where, please, does this information come from?

And which shows are judged here?

[ChisolmTrailDem]

10. Follow the DU link in my OP, please. It's all there... I found my way all the way

to the polling org's website using that one link.

[Beaverhausen]

20. Politifact- and we know how accurate they are

not

[ChisolmTrailDem]

25. Link please? nt

[Beaverhausen]

26. I followed the link. It first went to Addicting Info, then to Punditfact, then to Politifact

Politifact is proven to be full of shit.

[ChisolmTrailDem]

33. The poll wasn't done by Politifact. It was done at Fairleigh Dickinson University. Link to the

Politifact poll, please?

[Beaverhausen]

39. here

http://www.politifact.com/

[ChisolmTrailDem]

43. The poll though...

And I see where my confusion on Politifact came from, I was seeing PunditFact and not putting the two together.

It wasn't them that did the poll and why would they spin in against fox and msnbc nearly equally.

The poll link is here: http://publicmind.fdu.edu/2011/knowless/

Perhaps you are willing to examine the results and see if PunditFact and AddictingInfo are themselves lying? I'm about to have to leave for a few hours or I would give it a looksee myself.

Thanks for the headsup on the Politifact/PunditFact headsup. It was my bad I didn't recognize them as being one and the same entity.

[Beaverhausen]

62. dated Nov. 2011

thanks for the up to date news.

[ChisolmTrailDem]

69. So? And your point is....? :shrug: The rest of the links and references, including the DU post this

OP bounced off of, is from July of 2014, which is a contemporary conversation.



ETA: Also, perhaps I linked to the wrong study/poll Oh, that sure would be a crime punishable by banishment to rightwinger land, huh? I found the link using the search function at Fairleigh Dickinson University's PublicMind website here: http://publicmind.fdu.edu/ I posted the link and said I didn't have time to look it over and suggested maybe a couple of others could do that while I'm shootin' some pool and drinkin' some beer...

[EC]

5. where is this poll from

only 8-9% true....I really doubt that.

[ChisolmTrailDem]

11. I'ts in the DU link in my OP. nt

[Go Vols]

12. here it seems

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2014/07/09/analysis-over-half-of-all-statements-made-on-fox-news-are-false/

[Ichingcarpenter]

6. i don't get my news from them

don't forget if its nbc/msnbc

you need to add nbc shows like
evening news and meet the press into the equation.



I think only Rachel checks her facts and also is the only one that corrects inaccuracies and then announces it on air..

[scheming daemons]

8. What's the percentage when Joe Scarborough is taken out of the equation?

[ChisolmTrailDem]

14. I wondered the same thing, lol. nt

[randys1]

41. I wish they would compare Rachel/Lawrence/Chris to Hannity/Oreilly/who else not sure

What you would find there would be probably 90% true of msnbc and90% false of the other

[jwirr]

55. Add Ed Schultz to that list.

[kelliekat44]

85. Beat me to it. nt

[onehandle]

16. Online poll. Meaningless. nt

[sadoldgirl]

18. Okay, I will believe it, if

I know it is done a) by reputable fact checkers and b) if it is done by each show. Up to now found Rachel's reports rather good.

[ChisolmTrailDem]

21. I've tracked down the pollster's website:

The articles are addressing a poll conducted by Fairleigh Dickinson University PublicMind Poll:

http://publicmind.fdu.edu/2011/knowless/

[EC]

29. Looks like they did better

than CNN and FOX. It also says it doesn't include the politicians or consultants.

[LittleBlue]

30. It's why I turned it off years ago

All news is at my fingertips. Why would I fark around with commercials and infotainment segments I don't care about?

[ChisolmTrailDem]

51. Your's is the most logical approach, I think. Fact is, we can't trust ANYONE. AT. ALL. But,

as I alluded in the OP, a lot of the lying on MSNBC no doubt takes place when the rightwingers are talking. However, it is the responsibility of MSNBC to call out and set those lies straight. My problem with them is that apparently don't practice journalistic ethics and therefore are still responsible for the rightwingers lies being propagated by their air.

I am going to start DVRing Rachel and a couple of others, Lawrence, Big Ed, and listen to music and non-"news" programming on my desktop Sirius app.

Thanks for your relatively pleasant comment.

[elleng]

32. 'LIES?'

to make an untrue statement with intent to deceive

to create a false or misleading impression

[conservaphobe]

34. Doubt it.

This is more "liberal media" and "both sides do it" bullshit.

[ChisolmTrailDem]

37. No it isn't. It's the result of a poll conducted by Fairleigh Dickinson University. nt

[Arkana]

36. Well, I think Moron--er, Morning Joe takes care of about 40-45% of that.

[randys1]

42. Poll? what does this have to do with a poll?

Either an entity which can be trusted 100% watched both networks for weeks and fact checked every single statement made or they didnt.

What does any of this have to do with a poll?

[herding cats]

44. Huh, could this be when they let the Republican side have their say?

I don't watch cable news, but I know MSNBC does still carry pundits like Joe (I've got nothing do to with that dead intern!) Scarborough.

Way too much silliness on cable news for my tasted, but to each their own.

[ChisolmTrailDem]

54. Perhaps. It does go to show though that the relatively few rightwingfucks on MSNBC can produce

as much bullshit out of the big holes in their faces as entirety of fox news punditry does. Every single word that spews from their sputum must be a lie, lol.

[oldandhappy]

45. Where are the footnotes on these studies?

Why did they turn out basically the same.?

I'll stick with Rachel and Laurence and Bill Maher -- yeah yeah HBO.

[DirkGently]

46. No. For one, what is the basis of this?

I see you linked to Politifact, which itself lies constantly, and another site, that appears to have to do with polling?

There is no indication this "information" has any credibility at all.

There is no comparison, whatsoever, between the deliberate fusillade of dishonest propaganda, spewing like water from a firehose on the Fox News Network, and MSNBC.

In fact, MNBC programs like Chris Hayes and Rachel Maddow's shows do a tremendous job of debunking the craziness from Fox.

Political discussion is always subjective, up to a point. But when Fox entertains Birthers or violent Sovereign Citizen types, or climate change deniers, or even when it somehow manages to put a little (D) next to every single Republican caught in a sex scandal, it is lying, profusely, deliberately, and constantly.

Not the "same." Not at all.

[ChisolmTrailDem]

49. First, didn't link to politifact, I linked to another DU thread. Second, I linked an image

from AddictingInfo, a left-wing website that, AFAIK, doesn't have a lying reputatin on DU, though it's clear anyone and everyone is subject to being thrown under the bus around here.

The poll is here, which I've posted MULTIPLE times in this thread and have now added to the OP: http://publicmind.fdu.edu/2011/knowless/

[DirkGently]

82. From what part of any of that do you conclude

that Fox and MSNBC are equally unreliable?

MSNBC, however, helped: Watching MSNBC was associated with a 10-point increase in identifying Romney as the leader, and a 5-point drop in the likelihood of identifying Cain compared to those who got no exposure to news at all.

[sadoldgirl]

48. Alright, I checked the reference to the publicmind,and

found only the questions and answers in the poll. So, people are ignorant (whether willfully or not). However, nothing in there indicates that networks, radio or papers lied. What did I miss here?

[ChisolmTrailDem]

50. I guess we can throw AddictingInfo.com out with the trash, then. My comments in my

OP were based on their article which was supposedly based on Fairleigh Dickinson University's poll.

I guess this goes to show that we can't trust ANYONE. AT. ALL.

Or perhaps there's more digging that needs to be done. I wish I had the time but I'm going to go have a few beers with friends at the pool hall.

[blm]

52. Pay attention: They included 'lies' from RW guests.

Guess that part slipped past you, eh?

[ChisolmTrailDem]

57. If it did, would that be a crime for which I am never to be forgiven? Do you have a stake you

can roast me on? Do you feel better about yourself that you were able to zing me?

I said in my OP, FYI, that perhaps it was the rightwingers, including mourning schmo, that have the lie volume turned up so loud on MSNBC.

You see, in my OP, I essentially answered my own self by the time I was finished with it. I guess that part slipped past you, eh?

[blm]

60. You'd like to think so. But, scrutiny agrees with me.

.

[ChisolmTrailDem]

70. It's right there in my OP, LOL!

[blm]

76. Only to you - perhaps you could reword so it is FAR LESS AWKWARD

eh?

[ChisolmTrailDem]

78. One of those "LEARN ENGLISH!" or go away type things, eh? Gotchhhhaaaaa! nt

[ChisolmTrailDem]

80. Is all of my writing/grammar awkward?

What, exactly, are you trying to say about my writing abilities? Do you make a habit of digging at people whose ablitiy to communicate may not meet your standards? Who else on this website writes "awkwardly", in your estimation?

Are we required to have a degree in English in order to participate in the discourse here?

Are we allowed to have our own opinions on stuff?

You seem to have all the answers. So, I thought I'd ask while I have your undivided attention.

Thanks in advance for your counsel.

PS: Did I use proper punctuation in this post? Are you a book editor?

[Kelvin Mace]

56. I don't know which Occupy protests they were covering

but the folks I hung with were hardly "Democrats". Liberals, Socialists, Anarchists and the odd Libertarian, but not too many "Democrats".

[ChisolmTrailDem]

58. I haven't had time to look it over as I'm waiting for a friend to pick me up for some

beers and billiards.

I guess I depended to much on AddictingInfo.com for their analysis of the data.

I'll have a closer look later this evening.

[blm]

64. That's how I saw it, too.

I supplied food and water at local Occupy and most who started were Dems, and then a shift occurred when Paulites started popping in and dominating the debates at the campsites - they were like kudzu - invasive - essentially pushing out the Dems who helped started the protests.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

59. This is massively misleading...

If you look at the details on the Politifact website, you'll see that a good number of the false statements have been made by conservative GUESTS on an MSNBC program (Rudy Giuliani, John Sununu, etc.).

MSNBC is being held accountable for the false statements made by conservatives who come on their program -- who I'm sure are then pounced upon by Rachel, et al, as if they were statements being made by MSNBC commentators. Basically MSNBC is being faulted for allowing conservatives to come on their shows.

[ChisolmTrailDem]

63. Did I not basically in the paragraph under the image in my OP? nt

[blm]

65. MSNBC's status is no more deserved than FOX's?

who are you trying to snow?

[ChisolmTrailDem]

67. "unless the reasoning is that all the lying takes place with the righties on that network and...

...none with the lefties. Come to think of it, that mourning schmo show sure does have a lot of lying in it."

Can you not read? Or can you not comprehend? Or is it both?

Do you feel better about yourself that you think you exposed me doing something dishonest?

[blm]

75. That doesn't exculp - - well, perhaps in your own mind.

But, it doesn't to anyone with comprehension skills.

[ChisolmTrailDem]

79. It's right there in my OP! LOL!!!!!!

You're so funny =D

"So, who at MSNBC lies to us and who doesn't? I think most of us are capable of sussing out what is true and what is not, much like those who view no news at all. But MSNBC's status on this website is no more deserved than that of fox news, unless the reasoning is that all the lying takes place with the righties on that network and none with the lefties. Come to think of it, that mourning schmo show sure does have a lot of lying in it."

Help me comprehend it, please?

[Bluenorthwest]

71. MSNBC has shows hosted by Republicans. It's not just guests. Also, they pick the guests.

Maddow was a constant home to Pat Buchanan America's largest racist and homophobe. That was by choice, not due to an act of God. They still have that Tony Perkins on and other hate mongers, whom they give platforms to by choice. By choice. They don't 'allow' guests on, they seek them out and aggressively book them. They go get the guests, the guests don't call and say 'please allow me on'. Jaysus. Get some perspective man. Even Rachel is all about the $$$$.

[Skidmore]

61. What is a pundit's task???

It is to present an argument to persuade you to adopt their line of thinking. Punditry does not drink from the well of truth, rather it spins buzzwords out into the ether. Now, I watch a fair amount of MSNBC in the afternoon and evening. I skip the morning parade of idiots. I rely on my good friend, malaise (who has much more intestinal fortitude than I do) to sculpt the Morning Pile that Scarborough leaves in his daily passing. I have seen some really good hosts who take care to present facts in spite of the pundits they invite on. I think they try to chart a course through the spin from both right and left. I think it helps to remember that. I enjoy watching Joy Reid, Chris Hayes, and Rachel Maddow. I catch O'Donnell on the internet because he's on after my bedtime. I watch Kornacki and MHP on the weekends. Not exactly enthralled with Farrow or The Cycle people. Don't watch Chris Matthews because he's on at the same time our local news is broadcast and I'd like to know about nifty things like school bonds, road closures, civic and state planning, and the work of local charities and businesses. I do think that many of the MSNBC hosts are very skilled and some of the programs are more like seminars than what passes for political programs on other channels.

[Gidney N Cloyd]

66. I'd bet the bulk of MSNBC's "lies" were about Democrats/liberals.

Just like Fox, so see? Both sides do it.
.
.
.
.
.
.
...waitaminit...
.
.

MSNBC gives the right a pretty fair shake while letting untruths about the left fly unchallenged.

[elias49]

68. If we could get rid of Morning Joe

the numbers would improve dramatically!

[dpibel]

72. You're quite mistaken--and misled

Last edited Wed Jul 9, 2014, 07:33 PM - Edit history (1)

The poll to which you link is not the source of the "statement tracking" numbers.

It is the much discussed 2011 poll which says, "The conclusion: Sunday morning news shows do the most to help people learn about current events, while some outlets, especially
Fox News, lead people to be even less informed than those who say they don’t watch any news at all."

The true/false stuff is, in fact, generated by PunditFact. It says so right at the top of the page announcing this wonderful service. "We’re making it easier to see how a particular cable channel or network is performing on PunditFact’s Truth-O-Meter."

So, unless you believe that Fairleigh Dickinson's polling runs PunditFact's Truth-O-Meter, your link to the Fairleigh Dickinson poll is an error.

As for the conclusion, both here and in the companion FOX thread, that some percentage of everything that's said on a given network is false, well, that's partly a problem with PunditFact's own writing. Because they say, "For instance, 46 percent of the claims made by NBC and MSNBC pundits and on-air personalities have been rated Mostly False, False or Pants on Fire." This is where you are being misled.

Because they later say, "We use our news judgment to pick the facts we’re going to check, so we certainly don’t fact-check everything."

So what their little charts show is nothing like a fact check of everything on any network. In reality, what they are saying is, "Of the facts that we decide we're going to check, we have made the following determinations as to truthfulness."

Think about it: Their chart shows their analysis of 92 statements of fact on NBC/MSNBC. Do you really think that, over any meaningful period of time, a 24/7 cable channel airs only 92 facts?

Finally, as others have pointed out, PolitiFact is notorious for bizarre rulings on truth/falsity.

In other news: I've been a member of DU since 2002. Obviously I don't post much. I have no idea, really, why I decide to use my 1,000th post for this.

[The Magistrate]

83. And Mis-Led Even Further, Sir, By Whose Statements Are Checked

If one actually reads the 'MSNBC Report Card', a great many of the overtly false statements are made by right-wing guests on various shows, not by the people who host them.

[ChisolmTrailDem]

84. DING! DING! DING! No, you shouldn't have wasted your long-realized 1000th post on my OP....

Most of my posts go right down the toilet so, now and then, I'll post something that gets everybody riled up and watch as the daggers are thrust my way. I expose how much we hate each other around here for having different ideas and different opinions.

Works every time. And such a simple little OP too: equate something that is unquestioned with something that is questionable and, BOOM!

Yea, you should have found something more meaningful for your 1000th post. Shame you wasted it in such a hateful environment as was this thread.

However, all is not lost and your 1000th post will do some good. I am deleting my OP based on your good work. I found the link to what I thought was the study on the Fairleigh Dickinson University search results page here: http://www.google.com/cse?cx=015169512537894151013:dkxd8bv25te&q=fox%20news&oq=fox%20news&gs_l=partner.3...718493.720170.0.720393.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0..0.0.gsnos%2Cn%3D13...0.1697j631029j8..1ac.1.25.partner..0.0.0.#gsc.tab=0&gsc.q=fox%20news&gsc.page=1

It's very clear that NO MEDIA OUTLET either ON AIR or ON THE WEB can be 100% trusted. That is a shame.

Thanks so much for your good work and your informative post.

[Spider Jerusalem]

74. Fuck are you doing watching TV news anyway?

It's blathering nonsense designed for idiots. If you want news and commentary? Read. If you want news and commentary and don't have time to read? NPR and BBC World Service. If you want infotainment with a moderate partisan slant that panders to your personal biases? Then yeah, you probably want something like MSNBC.

[ChisolmTrailDem]

77. IKR??? LOL! I fully admit it, I'm addicted. Even made a big deal on here that I had stopped

watching for however many weeks and had broken my addiction. But some riff-raff shit happened and drew me back in and now I'm mainlining all over again! God help save me Baby Jesus!

Fact is, anyone who watches that crap (with a couple of exceptions) is just plain foolish, me included. I'm going to try dumping it again because, when it comes right down to it, and everyone listen up here because this is the last I'm going to say about it: WE. ALL. KNOW. THEY. LIE. ALL. TO. US. AND. DONT. NEED. ANY. POLL. TO. TELL. US. SO.

[rock]

81. Randomly lying about 50% of the time

is the perfect strategy for deception. In case you hadn't noticed Faux which more or less lies all the time is ineffective: except for the idiotically entralled, everyone knows that all they say is false. I.e. all lies is non deceptive.

[ChisolmTrailDem]

86. Deleting the OP. Tired of the abuse. Thanks for the beating! I love you too! OP within:

We already knew, and it's long been established thusly here on DU, that fox news lies. Here's a discussion already taking place that mostly ignores how much MSNBC lies to us while dogging fox: http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014842558



So, who at MSNBC lies to us and who doesn't? I think most of us are capable of sussing out what is true and what is not, much like those who view no news at all. But MSNBC's status on this website is no more deserved than that of fox news, [font color="red"]unless the reasoning is that all the lying takes place with the righties on that network and none with the lefties. Come to think of it, that mourning schmo show sure does have a lot of lying in it.[/font] <--- Some have refused to acknowledge this in the thread, so I'm highlighting it so that everyone knows that, yes, rightwingers were driving up the % of lies. Duh.

ETA: Here is the link to the poll (I think, another poster brought it to my attention that it's from Nov. '11 so I don't know why AddictingInfo.com and PunditFact.com are even talking about it this week :shrug from http://publicmind.fdu.edu/2011/knowless/ conducted at Fairleigh Dickinson University's PublicMind Poll. Anyways, we know that ALL the "news" networks lie to us. So, it's just a matter of degrees. [font color="red"]It's been brought to my attention this is NOT the correct link. Thanks to dpibel for using his/her 1000th post to clear it up for me.[/font]