Elections Majority of Democrat- & Republican voters feel that media divides ppl along racial & gender lines

[Son of Jamin]

A new nationwide Zogby poll® of 1,024 likely voters in the U.S., conducted 11/7/18 to 11/8/18 with a margin of error of +/-3.1%, shows voters feel the mainstream media plays a role in dividing Americans.

The intense feelings about the mainstream media, and the political divide they play a role in, were common among many different demographics. But there were instances where some groups agreed or disagreed more or less. There were also some instances of demographics agreeing with each other, which rarely do, when it comes to politics and social issues. Men (70% agree) and women (73% agree) were very much in agreement (strongly and somewhat agree combined) about the role the mainstream media plays in dividing the public and spreading hate.

While both genders were in agreement, generational age groups had an inverse relationship. Interestingly, younger voters age 18-24 and age 18-29 (81-82% strongly and somewhat agree/18-19% strongly and somewhat disagree) were much more likely to blame the media for spreading hate and misunderstanding than older voters age 65+ (62% strongly and somewhat agree/38% strongly and somewhat disagree) and age 70+ (67% strongly and somewhat agree/33% strongly and somewhat disagree).

Party identification was also another area, where there were major differences in the intensity of how voters felt about the mainstream media's role in spreading hate among voters. Republicans (94% agree/6% agree) were almost twice as likely to agree compared to Democrats (51% agree/49% disagree) with the media's role in dividing voters and spreading hate. Independents were more in line with voters overall: 74% agreed and 26% disagreed.

Income and geography did not figure into how voters felt about the mainstream media, each variable within these sub-groups were emphatic that the mainstream media plays a role in spreading hate and misunderstanding. Voters who earn a household income of <$25k, $100k-$150k, voters who live in large cities, and rural areas, were all in agreement (72%-77% agree/23-28% disagree) that the mainstream media is divisive.


It must also be noted that majorities of voters in many of the same groups that felt the mainstream media spreads hate and misunderstanding, also felt that President Trump is responsible for the spread of hate and misunderstanding, but more voters overall, and in most sub-groups, blame the media slightly more!
https://zogbyanalytics.com/news/875...political-lines-a-majority-of-democrats-agree
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It's nice for once to see that the majority of voters for the Democrats, Republicans and Independents can finally agree on something, that media divides people.

 

[Fugazy]

Well, duh.

 

[rokzilla]

Let’s not forget the Zimmerman/Trayvon Martin fiasco.

 

[TheComebackKid]

Enemy of the people

 

[KeepItRealist]

Let’s not forget the Zimmerman/Trayvon Martin fiasco.

What, you mean when they assumed George Zimmerman was a white man due to his name and showed pictures of a preteen Trayvon Martin, altered the police call and made up a pack of lies about him being a model student and what not?

 

[Trotsky]

Next, we need to provide a coherent definition of "the mainstream media." To say this in regard to the New York Times or Boston Globe would be kinda silly. To CNN and Fox News? Not so much.

 

[rokzilla]

What, you mean when they assumed George Zimmerman was a white man due to his name and showed pictures of a preteen Trayvon Martin and made up a pack of lies about him being a model student and what not?

They literally doctored his photos lol.

 

[second sight]

Next, we need to provide a coherent definition of "the mainstream media." To say this in regard to the New York Times or Boston Globe would be kinda silly. To CNN and Fox News? Not so much.

“We” don’t, you might

 

[KeepItRealist]

They literally doctored his photos lol.

They showed pictures of him when he was a child and implied he was some little kid murdered by a racist asshole for no reason. When he has much taller than Zimmerman, had a Lean habit that already had significant negative impact on his body and had been kicked out of his house by the mother because she couldn't control him and had been forced to leave school after threatening to kill an employee.

But at least Trayvon's mother raised him for the most part, Mike Brown's mother abandoned him at birth, then attacked the grandmother that raised him with a pipe-wielding mob because she was selling T-shirts to raise money. Both families collected big ghetto lottery jackpots tho due to incidents their offspring began.

 

[Trotsky]

“We” don’t, you might

Yes, I realize some people are willing to just dismiss all journalism and fact-finding universally and remain in their own fictional world. But by "we," I was referring to non-idiot citizens.

 

[EradiatedHaggis]

Next, we need to provide a coherent definition of "the mainstream media." To say this in regard to the New York Times or Boston Globe would be kinda silly. To CNN and Fox News? Not so much.

"The New York Times announced Monday it hired left-wing writer Sarah Jeong, who has a long history of racist tweets"
https://www.heraldsun.com.au/blogs/...k=2de6991596de775b26e54ed3bcb552d7-1542294185

How dare white women not ceed the sidewalk to black men...
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/19/...=nytcore-ipad&smid=nytcore-ipad-share&referer

Dear white America...
https://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/12/24/dear-white-america/

 

[Rygu]

Identity politics are a complete cancer.

Do all gay people have the same opinions and perspectives as other gay people? No. Do all black people? No. Do all white people? No. Do all men/women? No.

So why do they all have to be grouped together in the us vs them mentality?

Almost all the MSM is guilty of this. And it's certainly not by accident.

 

[Social Distance Warrior]

Well, no shit.

 

[sangreporsangre]

Yea it's really messed up. The mass media pushes extreme polarization for profit. Even once-respected outlets now push race-baiting clickbait because that's what gets attention and therefore drives revenue. The media is a reflection of us, and it turns out that we're a bunch of assholes.

 

[Trotsky]

"The New York Times announced Monday it hired left-wing writer Sarah Jeong, who has a long history of racist tweets"
https://www.heraldsun.com.au/blogs/...k=2de6991596de775b26e54ed3bcb552d7-1542294185

How dare white women not ceed the sidewalk to black men...
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/19/...=nytcore-ipad&smid=nytcore-ipad-share&referer

Dear white America...
https://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/12/24/dear-white-america/

If your definition of divisiveness requires that we ignore that races exist, that racism exists, and that insights and truths can be extracted from racial interaction to improve our society and the lives of our citizens, then yeah every single journalistic institution ever is divisive.

Also, the New Hampshire one is just factual: New Hampshire is trying to make itself more appealing to nonwhite citizens so that it doesn't suffer population/economic loss and can compete with more diverse states where racial minorities feel more welcomed. It's completely logical that a state whose demography is very different from the country at large would want to make itself as enticing as other states that are more representative.

 

[EradiatedHaggis]

If your definition of divisiveness requires that we ignore that races exist, that racism exists.

Yeah yeah cause racists printing racist shit in the NYT doesnt count. Again, you and reality dont get along when it comes to forming your shit opinions.

 

[all caps]

Should've just listened to me

We arent even arguing topics. We argue about arguing. While the news becomes the news. The fuck are we doing?

 

[Trotsky]

Yeah yeah cause racists printing racist shit in the NYT doesnt count. Again, you and reality dont get along when it comes to forming your shit opinions.

You've provided no evidence of "racist shit" and you're (once again) basing your hyper-emotional response on phantoms and confirmation bias.

 

[EradiatedHaggis]

You've provided no evidence of "racist shit" and you're (once again) basing your hyper-emotional response on phantoms and confirmation bias.

I give you 2 more posts before you stop posting again because you cannot figure out how to not post moronic shit...

Your argument has failed and you cant say shit to prove it right as it only takes a few links to show your statement is wrong. New York Times has become shit over the last 3 years. Sad for you, have fun proving yourself correct and I will further prove you are full of shit and cant defend what you say...

"Today, the trustworthiness of major U.S. newspapers is unimpressive. The New York Timeshas been published in New York City continuously since September 18, 1851. The paper’s motto has been “All the News That’s Fit to Print,” and has long been regarded as the national “newspaper of record,” but survey participants now rate its trustworthiness as low, just 2.12 out of 10."

By an INDEPENDENT media watch group.
https://www.aim.org/guest-column/ho...-washington-post-and-the-wall-street-journal/

You turn, quick...do what you do best.

 

[Trotsky]

I give you 2 more posts before you stop posting again because you cannot figure out how to not post moronic shit...

Your argument has failed and you cant say shit to prove it right as it only takes a few links to show your statement is wrong. New York Times has become shit over the last 3 years. Sad for you, have fun proving yourself correct and I will further prove you are full of shit and cant defend what you say...

"Today, the trustworthiness of major U.S. newspapers is unimpressive. The New York Timeshas been published in New York City continuously since September 18, 1851. The paper’s motto has been “All the News That’s Fit to Print,” and has long been regarded as the national “newspaper of record,” but survey participants now rate its trustworthiness as low, just 2.12 out of 10."

By an INDEPENDENT media watch group.
https://www.aim.org/guest-column/ho...-washington-post-and-the-wall-street-journal/

You turn, quick...do what you do best.

Lol @ your "INDEPENDENT media watch group." All you did was cite to a user survey from an ultra-conservative outlet. I realize that you probably can't spell, let alone understand, methodological error and I know absolutely that you don't know who Reed Irvine even is, but you aren't helping your case.

In 1998, at the Conservative Political Action Conference, he maintained that there was a conspiracy within the Republican Party to suppress investigations of Clinton administration scandals. "Conspiracy is a word that has been given a very bad connotation -- it's become synonymous with 'kooky,' " he told a Post reporter. "But really it has a very good connotation." In other words, he elaborated, some conspiracy theories are valid. But not Hillary Clinton's notion of a vast right-wing conspiracy. "She's kooky," he said.

In 1986, Mr. Irvine predicted erroneously that coverage of the Iran-Nicaragua connection could cripple anti-communist efforts in Central America and would lead Mexico into communism.

"He was a die-hard anti-communist," said his son, Donald Irvine, president of Accuracy in Media. "There was a bulldoggedness, an incredible determination in my father. Nothing ever stopped him; he wore a shield of armor, and you couldn't hurt him. It didn't matter if he was talking to [the late Washington Post Co. chairman] Katharine Graham or [former Post executive editor] Ben Bradlee or [former New York Times publisher] Arthur Ochs Sulzberger."

Mr. Irvine was born in Salt Lake City. He graduated from the University of Utah in 1942 and attended graduate school at the University of Colorado. He served in the Marine Corps during World War II, where his job was to learn Japanese and translate interviews with prisoners of war. After the war, he returned to graduate school, enrolling at the University of Washington until he won a Fulbright scholarship to Oxford University from 1949 to 1951, leaving with a master's degree in literature.

He worked as an economist with the Federal Reserve from 1951 until 1977, when he retired. In 1969, when he was still at the Fed, members of his lunch group regularly complained that conservative points of view were not adequately reported in the media. Mr. Irvine appointed himself as just the one to set the nation's media straight. He formed Accuracy in Media.

"I think he was ahead of his time in drawing attention to media misbehavior and misdeeds, pointing out that if media didn't correct its own errors, its credibility would suffer drastically. And that's exactly what's happened," said Cliff Kincaid, editor of Accuracy in Media Report.

Ben Bagdikian, a critic of media consolidation whose view is more liberal, said that Mr. Irvine's influence waned after its first splash.

"He was a very doctrinaire, rather unchanging ultraconservative critic. In the years since the mid-1970s, a much more intellectually sophisticated conservative criticism of the news media began to emerge," Bagdikian said. "His criticisms were so stereotyped that they didn't carry the information that backed his accusations. It was an indictment without individual charges."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A58852-2004Nov17.html?noredirect=on