What's Mallard raving about today?
Actually, no -- Rush Limbaugh listeners averaged 50 on the Pew Knowledge Quiz, and NPR listeners averaged 51.Know who got higher than that? Daily Show/Colbert Report watchers, Jim Lehrer listeners, and readers of major newspaper websites.The chart is at http://tinyurl.com/5glx2u, and the full report is at http://tinyurl.com/554mlh.Oh, okay. Yes, Tinny, you're VERY smart, don't worry what those other kids say. They're just jealous of how well you hold your liquor. Don't worry, in two weeks you can get back at the New York Times for daring to ask McCain for a second draft.
On thinking it over, maybe Tinny thought that a lower score meant "better" -- like golf, or blood alcohol levels.
Okay, Let's get this straight. The New New Times Magazine printed an interview of Rush Limbaugh.It was a long interview that rehashed the same ol' same ol' Rush talking points that had been repeated since the early 90's. That included the old Pew Research Center from that era. The same one that was debunked.I thought the article was weak, not worthy of the New York Times smell test. It turns out it was fluff piece commissioned by Rush flak Zev Chafets. It presented only the information that Rush would see fit to print. It might as well have had an "This is an advertisement" banner on the pages of the interview.
Tinshley's idea of a cocktail party: when the bartender refreshes the bowls of peanuts.
That foul windbag Rush is exactly the sort of person the duck would like. (It's strange how I've gone from despising liberals to despising conservatives and liberals alike. Are apolitical people the only decent ones?)
There's been more than one report. Mallard cherry-picks as usual.The 3-question report by Pew (as opposed to the 23 question) indicates Limbaugh listeners over NPR listeners. It is however, a small part of a study to determine more who uses what news sources. Survey accuracy increases with the number of questions asked. http://people-press.org/report/?pageid=1068However, regular newspaper readers topped the Limbaughs, so if Mallard's going to get snooty he might want to first check to see if they read.It should also be noted, even in that study, TNR beat out Limbaugh. Also, the questions were easy but I was never asked them! That's the thing about surveys: you need to know what the demographics were of who answered, you can't just take their word that it was accurate.
Er, I meant regular newspaper readers didn't top Limbaughs. It was the Weekly Stand readers that also topped Limbaughs.
Also interesting to note in the chart supplied by Nick, Fox "News" watchers rank near last.
I hate when people invite ducks to cocktail parties. They make an utter mess of the buffet, they crap all over the place and when they leave they trample your flowerbeds, run over your mailbox and sideswipe half the cars parked on your street. Stupid ducks. They all owe me an apology.
Here's a survey that shows how Faux News viewers (which I assume would encompass Rush listeners) have had basic misconceptions about the Iraq war. For example, Saddam was personally involved in 9/11, they found the WMDs, etc. I think these are a lot more important than knowing what Condi Rice's title is.http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/international_security_bt/102.php?nid=&id=&pnt=102&lb=bruscThere are multiple surveys I've seen that demonstrate the same point, but this is the first one I found on google.Oh, and the apology letter he drafted is blank. That seems about right.
Oh, and one more thing. The article was published in the New York Times Magazine on July 6th, not June 29th as his footnote states.(http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/06/magazine/06Limbaugh-t.html?scp=2&sq=rush%20limbaugh&st=cse)
Also noteworthy: Tinsley's whiney, aggrieved sense of entitlement. All those people who were mean to me (because I was mindlessly parroting Limbaugh talking points)? They were WRONG, and now each of them owes me an apology. So nyah. Even if Tinsley weren't completely full of shit as always, this would not exactly be classy behavior.
It should be noted:1) I don't know what the error level for the survey is, but in cases where it's close, it might as well be tied. 2) Wasn't Mr. Fillmore whining about ignorant college students with their 50% passing grade that went to 51% after they went through college on some rather obscurish history test?3) Am I really shocked that 51% is now considered a passing grade for a test that was FAR EASIER because it makes Mallard feel superior?4) Doesn't he know that statistics don't personally make him smarter? If the average man has an IQ of 100, it does not automatically mean every man has an IQ of 100.
nick:In fairness, Tinny is right about the thrust of the fawning NYT profile of Limbaugh. Your quarrel, therefore, is with them, not him, and it's as simple as that.I think I see where they dug that up. Here's the Times:"Limbaugh’s audience is often underestimated by critics who don’t listen to the show (only 3 percent of his audience identify themselves as “liberal,” according to the nonpartisan Pew Research Center for the People and the Press). Recently, Pew reported that, on a series of “news knowledge questions,” Limbaugh’s “Dittoheads” — the defiantly self-mocking term for his faithful, supposedly brainwashed, audience — scored higher than NPR listeners. The study found that “readers of newsmagazines, political magazines and business magazines, listeners of Rush Limbaugh and NPR and viewers of the Daily Show and C-SPAN are also much more likely than the average person to have a college degree.”Rush Limbaugh Is Just Getting Warmed Up - NYTimes.comAnd here is where they undoubtably got that:"Judged by their answers to three news knowledge questions2, the most informed audiences belong to the political magazines, Rush Limbaugh's radio show, the O'Reilly Factor, news magazines, and online news sources. Close behind are the regular audiences for NPR and the Daily Show."Section 4: Audience Segments: Online Papers Modestly Boost Newspaper Readership Pew Research Center
Post a Comment