Quote:
Originally posted by Secret_Agent_Man
There was no substnce to argue, and I went for a cheap shot, taking yet anothert chance to mock a media personality whom I have despised for 15+ yeears.
Your post was about the survey results on 'misperceptions' among people who report getting their news predominantly from one source -- grouped by that source. You said "maybe the misperceptions are on the part of NPR/PBS, et al." In context that tatement is meaningless, but I get your point -- that the results of the survey are only as good as the questions framed and what the survey -takers define as a 'misperception". I think that the question thta got most Fox viewers was the one on whether there were "substantial" links between al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein. I'm sure that the 'correct" answer was "No" -- which seems to be the consensus of informed observers -- but it is a squishy question.
BTW -- On tht subject, "The Economist" has characterised the U.S. administration as having "wilfully overplayed the little evidence hey have."
|
Yes, but they also still support the war, don't they? Which raises a question in my mind that I've been meaning to ask you, Ty and the like. We've been debating this stuff for weeks, and I'm wondering if you are now of the opinion that the war was wrong. That is, if you knew then what you know now, would you have supported the war?
