Funny political pictures

[infinite monkey]

I think if graphics errors on 'liberal' 24 hr network news were so rampant, they'd have a web page devoted to debunking them, too.

What is a liberal news network? Cnn? I really don't know.

How are they amping? Trying to tell people that it's not TRUE that Dewey won?

[Undertoad]

Amping up would be to create and distribute their own incorrect, misleading graphics, etc.

With a little honest reflection I think you'll find this statement is not true.

[Spexxvet]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

With a little honest reflection I think you'll find this statement is not true.

I've given it a little honest reflection, and after reconsidering, I find my statement to be true.

I'd have expected you to be more skeptical of fox news, Tony.

[Undertoad]

CBS News, operating with a large budget and airing 2.5 hours per week, explained that G. W. Bush was AWOL from his National Guard position via a document so obviously bogus that within hours it was thoroughly debunked.

When it was pointed out that the document was obviously bogus, CBS News hunkered down.

Fox News, airing 168 hours per week (minus reruns), occasionally makes errors in their graphics. MMfA selects the ones that seem damning because they create a narrative that you can enjoy having never watched the channel.

Ya follow?

[Undertoad]

Originally Posted by Spexxvet

I've given it a little honest reflection, and after reconsidering, I find my statement to be true.

That must have been a difficult minute and a half for you.

But OK, from now on, I will follow you, and only you, around the Cellar and point out your mistakes.

Divisive? Or honest behavior from me. Give the question two minutes this time.

[Undertoad]

I'd have expected you to be more skeptical of fox news

How do you know I'm not?

[infinite monkey]

OK, let me try this tack, though no one listens anyway (hey, I should make up graphics for all my posts.)

Fox news is extremely divisive

AND

Fox News is:

a) incredibly clever
b) incredibly stupid
c) incredibly poor
d) b and c

DO YOU THINK IT ISN'T WITHIN THEIR POWER TO HAVE SOMEONE PROOF AND EDIT THEIR GRAPHICS?

DOES CNN POST INCREDIBLY WRONG GRAPHICS ENOUGH SO IT WARRANTS ENTIRE WEBSITES?

You're pulling our collective leg, right?

[Spexxvet]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

That must have been a difficult minute and a half for you.

Look at the time stamps. I took at least 2 minutes, and possibly 1 second shy of 4 minutes.

Originally Posted by Undertoad

But OK, from now on, I will follow you, and only you, around the Cellar and point out your mistakes.
...

You want me.

Originally Posted by Undertoad

How do you know I'm not?

I don't, but from what you've posted in this thread, you seem to be giving fox the benefit of the doubt, saying that they made a mistake, over and over and over. A skeptic might entertain the idea that they do these types of things on purpose.

[infinite monkey]

This was an honest mistake, no way anyone would catch this error through any normal means. What, y'all think Fox is superhuman or sumthin'? Quit picking on them and just nod and smile. (Awww, come on, it's funny.)

[glatt]

That pie chart is a perfect example of what UT is talking about.

Some intern took those numbers, which are probably real, and plugged them into a graphics program. Instead of doing a bar graph, which would make sense, they selected the pie chart option. The pie chart took the numbers (probably not as percentages, but as actual whole numbers) and created the pie. then the intern couldn't figure out how to make the % symbol show up so they labeled each slice with the number followed by a % sign. These are journalists, not mathematicians.

NPR ran into a similar math screw up when their journalist didn't know how to read a Murdoch financial report and made a wildly wrong report that they had to retract in shame.

[infinite monkey]

And this happens all the time.

Because they have no one to review anything before it goes on air? EVER? That's why there are so many similarly wrong graphics?

NPR had 'a' screw-up? Does it happen so much that us laypeople have reason to notice? Nope. Us stupid people only deal with the ammo that's staring us right in the face.

Willful ignorance indeed.

Now smile and nod. Because you know, it's funny. All just some silly errors. I don't expect my chef to be able to consistently make a decent cheeseburger either. It's not HIS craft, and I can't, nay, I SHOULDN"T expect him to mostly make decent cheeseburgers.

O.M.G. I'm still digesting the line: These are journalists, not mathematicians. For one: mathematicians? 90 plus 60 plus 680 = 100? Yeah, don't expect they should know that. And journalists? Um, except for the FACT that they're fair and balanced that is NOT what I would call them.

Now I know you're pulling my leg. Youse guys. Quit it. I'm really upset with my brothers right now and I'm easily poked.

[Undertoad]

Let's do it this way IM: I will turn on Fox News right now and watch it for an hour. How many mistakes will I see? Not biased, one-sided stories meant to fire up its viewership... just mistakes?

I expect you figure I'll see one right away, because that's all FN airs?

A skeptic might entertain the idea that they do these types of things on purpose

A skeptic will use direct observation to determine truth.

[Spexxvet]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

A skeptic will use direct observation to determine truth.

And what direct observation tells you that fox is truly making mistakes?

[glatt]

I don't know. I've been in fast paced situations before where you have a lot to get done in a short amount of time and you just do the best you can. You wind up making some mistakes. You need a fresh pair of eyes to catch mistakes. And those eyes need enough time to actually look at stuff carefully.

I hate 24 hour news. I only see it in hotels when I'm eating my breakfast in the lobby. You can see how they put that crap together very rapidly. And even if there is nothing happening in the world, they still have to fill the air time.

There's some quote out there about not ever assuming that maliciousness is at play when mere incompetence can be used to explain the same problem. I think Fox is incompetent when they screw up their charts. I don't think they are malicious. I also think that to raise the level of quality up to the point that there are almost no mistakes, you would need to double or triple the size of their staff. You need one person to check the work of the other. I'd be surprised if they can afford that.

Fox news and CNN should both be treated as fast and sloppy and held to a lower standard than news programs that have all day to produce a half an hour.

[infinite monkey]

Originally Posted by glatt

I don't know. I've been in fast paced situations before where you have a lot to get done in a short amount of time and you just do the best you can. You wind up making some mistakes. You need a fresh pair of eyes to catch mistakes. And those eyes need enough time to actually look at stuff carefully.

And Fox can't afford it. They're understaffed, I'm sure.

Oh my dog.

We make mistakes in any areas, consistently, we put in check and balances. We keep making the same mistakes, our ass is out of here.

I love Americans, we're so ready to settle for mediocre, unless it's something sitting in our own living room, then we want perfection.

Again, I'll ask you: if it's just the occasional mistake why is it in our faces all the time? If the other side of the 24 hr newses are having the same issue, why don't we see stuff about that out there very often?

You guys are funny. I love you guys. Really.