The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

[WisconsinWildcard]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

My guess is the TDS and Colbert audience skews very highly into the grad school / young professional demographic -- the very people who are most likely to be well-informed and able to detect bias. From the type of humor used I wouldn't characterize the primary characteristic of the demo as so much "young" as "smart," or at any rate, "academic." It's basically the same shtick that has been the mother's milk of high end college parody mags for generations, just better done. Go ten years older and it's "Wait, Wait, Don't Tell Me."

This. So very much this. As a 20 something who has spent the last 7+ years in college, most of my friend circles (grad school/young professionals) watch TDS and Colbert regardless of their political view points. I would say many use it as their only "TV" news source. However, they ALL understand the parody and most, if not all, read various news sources to supplement, depending on their political leanings.

A likely unrelated story: I was watching the 2012 election with my girlfriend who is, bless her heart, a "blind" liberal. Loves Obama but does not really know why. She was very nervous about the election (for some reason) and I had Fox News on for the election coverage. She was getting increasingly annoyed with it, and asked me several times why I had it on that channel. I dodged the questions several times until Fox called it for Obama. When that happened she was confident with the call. I then explained that is why I had it on because Fox would be the last news network to falsely call an election for Obama. Bias can be an effective tool if you recognize it.

[Kepler]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

I wish stupid people didn't get brainwashed so easily.

You rang?

"Prayer rugs have recently been found on the Texas side of the border in the brush," Dewhurst said during a speech Friday at the Values Voter Summit, echoing a claim reported on Breitbart and thought to actually be an Adidas soccer jersey.

[Kepler]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

First, I did a poor job of writing my response. I meant that Gurt's cavalier attitude towards the fact that 21% of people my age were getting their news from comedy shows.

Second, I think you're assigning a much more sophisticated set of reasons as to why these people are using Stewart and SNL as sources for their news. They're using those sources because they're entertaining. That's it. I doubt most of them could see through the biases those shows use on various issues - either mocked biases or not. This 21% originate from the same group of people that are often the least informed about current political issues and they're confusing shows, but that may simply be a function of youth. SNL would never attempt to be truly informative, the "news" they're sharing is mostly mocking celebrity gossip when I've watched it. Stewart is informative to some extent, but it's intentionally slanted, and often to some farcical extreme or another as a necessity of his show's format.

My guess is the TDS and Colbert audience skews very highly into the grad school / young professional demographic -- the very people who are most likely to be well-informed and able to detect bias. From the type of humor used I wouldn't characterize the primary characteristic of the demo as so much "young" as "smart," or at any rate, "academic." It's basically the same shtick that has been the mother's milk of high end college parody mags for generations, just better done. Go ten years older and it's "Wait, Wait, Don't Tell Me."

[St. Clown]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

I think it's exactly the opposite. The 21% aren't "cavalier," they're sick of the BS of the "news" media. 80% of TDS and 100% of Colbert (the whole concept) is a parody of the news media and what a cynical joke it has become. It actually shows that they're engaged and pretty sophisticated critics. And IIRC they consistently score highest on tests of actual facts.

And really, what choice do they have? PBS is tedious even to me and I have a very high tolerance for boredom. For 20-somethings it must feel like a crypt. And the rest of the choices are either entertainment (CNN), pablum (the Big Three), or Pravda (FNC, MSNBC).

First, I did a poor job of writing my response. I meant that Gurt's cavalier attitude towards the fact that 21% of people my age were getting their news from comedy shows.

Second, I think you're assigning a much more sophisticated set of reasons as to why these people are using Stewart and SNL as sources for their news. They're using those sources because they're entertaining. That's it. I doubt most of them could see through the biases those shows use on various issues - either mocked biases or not. This 21% originate from the same group of people that are often the least informed about current political issues and they're confusing shows, but that may simply be a function of youth. SNL would never attempt to be truly informative, the "news" they're sharing is mostly mocking celebrity gossip when I've watched it. Stewart is informative to some extent, but it's intentionally slanted, and often to some farcical extreme or another as a necessity of his show's format.

[Spartanforlife4]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

Yes - and the list on Wiki is lengthy.

On a very serious note:

I wish stupid people didn't get brainwashed so easily.

[Kepler]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

The solution is going to be around education, convincing children that taking an interest and using their time to learn about their government will truly benefit them in the long run, but that gets into something much larger than this.

The problem with the cavalier attitude of 21% of the youngest generation getting their news from those shows isn't something that impacts a snapshot-in-time situation. We would need to know if it's a trend or an anomoly. Will future generations follow this same trend or not? If they do continue, then it's eventually not just 21% of a specific demo, but 21% of the entire population, likely growing higher than that if history's any indication.

I think it's exactly the opposite. The 21% aren't "cavalier," they're sick of the BS of the "news" media. 80% of TDS and 100% of Colbert (the whole concept) is a parody of the news media and what a cynical joke it has become. It actually shows that they're engaged and pretty sophisticated critics. And IIRC they consistently score highest on tests of actual facts.

And really, what choice do they have? PBS is tedious even to me and I have a very high tolerance for boredom. For 20-somethings it must feel like a crypt. And the rest of the choices are either entertainment (CNN), pablum (the Big Three), or Pravda (FNC, MSNBC).

[SteveP]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

Wasn't Teddy Kennedy also on the Watch List? The AA watch list would be another matter.

Yes - and the list on Wiki is lengthy.

On a very serious note:

FBI officials are investigating a beheading at an Oklahoma food distribution center after co-workers said the suspect tried to convert them to Islam after his recent conversion.

The alleged suspect, Alton Nolen, 30, was recently fired from Vaughan Foods in Moore prior to Thursday’s attack. Moore Police Department Sgt. Jeremy Lewis told KFOR that Nolen drove to the front of the business and struck a vehicle before walking inside. He then attacked Colleen Hufford, 54, stabbing her several times before severing her head. He also stabbed another woman, 43-year-old Traci Johnson, at the plant.

[Old Pio]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

To return (somewhat) to the topic of this thread.

Obviously, this is a left-wing plot!

Wasn't Teddy Kennedy also on the Watch List? The AA watch list would be another matter.

[SteveP]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

To return (somewhat) to the topic of this thread.

Obviously, this is a left-wing plot!

Stephen Hayes, a senior writer for the conservative-leaning Weekly Standard magazine, has been placed on the Department of Homeland Security's terrorist watch list, he announced Tuesday afternoon.

"Just informed I'm on the @DHSgov terrorist watch list. Explains why I have been subject to extra screening each of my recent trips," Hayes wrote on Twitter.

Hayes, who is also a Fox News contributor, speculated on the matter in subsequent tweets. He suggested his recent one-way trip to Turkey could have triggered extra attention. He also said he attempted to fix the issue on the DHS website but hit a technical glitch.

[St. Clown]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

Solution?

There is undoubtedly a higher percentage of people who don't get news from anywhere and go about their lives oblivious to the wheels turning around them.

21% of that demo when compared to the entire population isn't anything to get undies in a bunch over.

The solution is going to be around education, convincing children that taking an interest and using their time to learn about their government will truly benefit them in the long run, but that gets into something much larger than this.

The problem with the cavalier attitude of 21% of the youngest generation getting their news from those shows isn't something that impacts a snapshot-in-time situation. We would need to know if it's a trend or an anomoly. Will future generations follow this same trend or not? If they do continue, then it's eventually not just 21% of a specific demo, but 21% of the entire population, likely growing higher than that if history's any indication.

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

I agree. But, I go back to what I say about virtually all news outlets in all mediums having some degree of bias or an agenda. I honestly can't think of one that is straight down the middle.

Not to beat this horse carcass, but while true, that doesn't make all of the news outlets the same.

Leans right (left) is not the same as far right (left).

There are degrees and saying that they all have an agenda doesn't make Faux (or MSNBC) any less of a dishonest propaganda machine.


There are not universal equivalencies.

[SteveP]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

Again, though, I think it's pretty important to distinguish entities that are news organizations but have a slant and entities that are created for the sole purpose of pushing an ideology. The latter aren't "news," they are "reassurance."

Here's one critical test. A news provider creates cognitive dissonance, a propaganda outlet reduces it. Because real life is actually grey and complex, reporting actual news will leave people unsettled in their opinions. Propaganda outlets, on the other hand, aim to reduce complexity and ambiguity and move people back into the "sweet spot" of certainty.

I agree. But, I go back to what I say about virtually all news outlets in all mediums having some degree of bias or an agenda. I honestly can't think of one that is straight down the middle.

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

Given that these are topical comedy shows from which they're getting their news, 21% is a lot. And it doesn't matter if they're clueless about the news and elections altogether, they still live in our world and have the potential to impact election outcomes - 21% is too much!

Solution?

There is undoubtedly a higher percentage of people who don't get news from anywhere and go about their lives oblivious to the wheels turning around them.

21% of that demo when compared to the entire population isn't anything to get undies in a bunch over.

[SteveP]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

21%?

That's not a whole lot.

My guess is that at least 60% of that demo (including the 21% that would admit to that) are completely clueless about news and elections altogether.

Leno's Jaywalking segments pretty much proved your theory.

This does as well.

Be afraid, be very afraid!

A new poll by the Annenberg Public Policy Center revealed that most of you failed civics class in elementary school: Only 36% of Americans could name all three branches of the federal government, while 35% “could not name a single one”.

[St. Clown]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

21%?

That's not a whole lot.

My guess is that at least 60% of that demo (including the 21% that would admit to that) are completely clueless about news and elections altogether.

Given that these are topical comedy shows from which they're getting their news, 21% is a lot. And it doesn't matter if they're clueless about the news and elections altogether, they still live in our world and have the potential to impact election outcomes - 21% is too much!