When 120% Makes Sense: Fox & Friends Defends Poll Display

video

by Steve Krakauer | 10:04 am, December 9th, 2009

» 27 comments

We’re 100% sure this story is going to get a little complicated.

Last night on The Daily Show, Jon Stewart highlighted a graphic on Fox & Friends relating to global warming and, loosely, Climategate. But the numbers didn’t add up – or did they?

This was first brought to light by Media Matters yesterday. The image in question is a full-screen graphic of Rasmussen poll results on Fox & Friends December 4. It seems to show that 59% of respondents said it is “somewhat likely” that “scientists falsify research to support their own theories on Global Warming,” 35% say “very likely” and 26% say “not very likely.” Here’s exactly what co-host Steve Doocy said while reading the results: “About 60 percent of you say somewhat likely, 35 percent say very likely, so you got 90…you got a lot of people right there thinking…it is likely, although 26 percent say not very likely.”

As Stewart says: “So attacking scientists for falsifying data to support their theories on global warming, you’ve cited a poll that adds up to 120%.”

So it’s a mistake – the numbers add up to 120, let’s move on. Except Fox News is defending it. Lauren Petterson, executive producer of Fox & Friends, tells Politico “she sees no error in the graphic.” Petterson says, “We were just talking about three interesting pieces of information from Rasmussen. We didn’t put on the screen that it added up to 100 percent.”

The problem with this explanation is it ignores that the poll actually gave those answers as possibly responses, and, obviously, the numbers were different than F&F showed. As TVNewser points out, here are the actual results:

35% Very likely
24% Somewhat likely
21% Not very likely
5% Not at all likely
15% Not sure

Those numbers are completely different. The “somewhat likely” figure is actually just 24% while the “not very likely” number is 21%. Instead, someone decided to combine the somewhat and very likely percentage and conclude that equals “somewhat likely” and add up “not very” and “not at all” to get the “not very likely” figure. Why? Cynics would say it makes it look like more people believe “scientists falsify research to support their own theories.” Or you could chalk it up to a simple mistake. But it’s strange to see an outright defense of such a misleading graphic. (Petterson told Politico: “The mistake I do see is we could have been a little clearer here.”)

The rest of the Daily Show segment was spent with Stewart “exposing” that Fox & Friends co-host Gretchen Carlson is actually really smart – which is not always on full display on the show. “From now on I want to see you give it 120%,” he joked.

Here’s The Daily Show last night:

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart

Mon – Thurs 11p / 10c

Gretchen Carlson Dumbs Down

www.thedailyshow.com

Daily Show
Full Episodes

Political Humor

Health Care Crisis

—–
» Follow Steve Krakauer on Twitter

Climategate, fnc, Fox & Friends, fox news, Jon Stewart The Daily Show, Rasmussen

ImNotBlue

Here is the same story, reported by Politico’s Michael Calderone:

http://www.politico.com/blogs/michaelcalderone/1209/Fox_producer_No_error_in_graphic.html

The interesting thing is that he provides this quote as the source of the graphic:

Indeed, here’s the paragraph from Rasmussen’s article that Fox was referring to with the graphic:

Fifty-nine percent (59%) of Americans say it’s at least somewhat likely that some scientists have falsified research data to support their own theories and beliefs about global warming. Thirty-five percent (35%) say it’s Very Likely. Just 26% say it’s not very or not at all likely that some scientists falsified data.

So, it appears that’s the source of the information directly.

Now, in the graphic presented by Politico, it does look like there is a little extra space between the 59% and the 35%… more space than the 35% and the 26%. However, not enough to be dramatically different.

In short… it looks like Media Matters wants to may hay over this (because that’s what they do), while FNC was technically correct (at least according to the Rasmussen report), but very unclear in the presentation of that information.

Slap on the wrist… and the world moves on…
ImNotBlue

I’m going to retract my previous statement about the top line of the graphic being a little more spread out than it’s supposed to be. Not because I’m wrong… I’m not… but because I just saw some other similar graphics put on screen, and the top most line of data was ALSO just a little bit too high. Therefore, they weren’t trying to separate out the data by information, rather the template appears to be incorrectly positioned.

Bring the top line down just a little bit, and you’ll line up better.
rmbltmbl

That is quite confusing.. but.. anybody paying attention to that might.. oh I forgot all Fox News viewers are mindless lemmings marching hopelessly to the end, right? This doesn’t even come close to how the liberal morning shows deliberately ignore news stories.. but that’s okay.
tjl

ImNotBlue: hahahaaaa. The hits keep coming! You’re making it easy on the liberals and progressives in this country to call folks like you ignorant and uneducated. You’re trying to say that there is extra space in there?? Hahahaa. You are too precious.

Bring the top line down just a little bit, and you’ll line up better…. too precious. Wrong is wrong, my friend. I remember when you tried to say that when Fox News is wrong you ride them for it. Here was your chance, and you blew it. We’ve already established that you’re no scientist, but it’s simple math. Send me your address and I’ll mail you a calculator.

Don’t forget to eat this afternoon… And don’t leave the house without your pants on. I know it’s written on your hand, but I figure you need a friendly reminder.
tjl

rmbltmbl: which stories are you talking about?
rmbltmbl

http://bit.ly/8b9f3E – Newsbusters ‘morning show ignore 2009
‘
Silly to think anyone would know that here, huh. And if you want to excuse how they spent two sentences on a subject two weeks later.. spare me.
rmbltmbl

Be sure to check out what they use airtime for instead as well, please.
ImNotBlue

tjl says:
December 9, 2009 at 11:54 am

Reading is fundamental, my friend. I said there is a little more space between those lines… that’s true. YOU may not be able to see it, but as a GRAPHIC DESIGNER, I may have a more acute view of such things… not a criticism of you, per se… just experience in this area. I ALSO said, however, that multiple graphics like that have the extra space… so it doesn’t appear that they were doing that on purpose. I ALSO said that even if the space was meaningful, it wasn’t enough and the board was unclear.

It is pretty obvious, however… that you’ve read NONE of this story, and not more than a word of two of my comments. If you did, you probably wouldn’t have said things so easily corrected.

Please try again.
roxsteady

I saw this last night and was speechless! I’m sorry but, no matter how you slice it, these idiots can’t add. There is no way to spin this because it’s simple, basic math. This is just another in a long line of stupidity comng from fox. Even yesterday, the dailykos pointed out that the Chyron on screen during fox’s broadcast of the President’s speech on job read:
$2 billion saved from TARP would go to jobs programs when the amount Obama stated was actually $200 billion. Each time that fox makes one of these errors it’s always against, not just reality but, it also always benefits the right. In this case they under cut the amout actually saved. It’s not a coincidence. It’s intentional. But, nice try on defense for those of you who were silly enough to eve try.
roxsteady

I have to say that what stunned me the most, was the fact that Carlson is Ivy League educated. And yes, that concern trolling is something they’ve all perfected. The dumbing down and out right pandering to the uneducated and ignorant to appear as one of them and push this faux outrage is pathetic. Carlson should be ashamed of herself. I’m sure her parents are thrilled that they spent all that money and she wound up whoring herself for some of the stupidest people in the country. Or maybe they think she’s doing god’s work?
straitshooter

Non-issue. Fox & Friends is No. 1 in the mornings and is a popular target. It will continue to be No. 1 and continue to be a target until some other network wises up and starts reflecting the views of most Americans.

In case you were wondering, here are the views of most Americans: We don’t give a shit about global warming. We either don’t believe it or don’t care about it. Name the last victorious candidate who made global warming his primary issue.
http://www.sailrabbits.com Magister

@straitshooter: Perhaps someone has the stats, but I sincerely doubt Fox & Friends beats at least the top two network morning shows, if not all three.
Ted

straitshooter – I just say some data from Fox that viewers of FandF broke down like so: 59% were morons, 48% were dumb asses 45% were idiots and 100% said they didn’t know anything about basic math.
Ted

Sorry, “say” should be “saw”. I have the day off…if you know what I mean.
Zakk

Why does a mis-labeled chart get more coverage then emails exposing the hoax of global warming?
straitshooter

Magister, I should have written with more specificity. You are right that Fox and Friends pales in comparison to morning shows. I was only referring to the cable competition.

Ted, nice to see you back on the Board. Enjoy your daw off.
http://www.sailrabbits.com Magister

@straitshooter: Naturally I assumed what you meant, but now that you’ve clarified, if I could get a little playful…

If more Americans get their morning news from Today, GMA, The Early Show, The Daily Buzz, America Morning, Morning Joe, Morning Express… shouldn’t FNC wise up and start “reflecting the views of most Americans”?
Zakk

Isn’t it possible that people watch ABC/NBC and CBS in the morning because they get local news dropped in where as with Cable news you don’t get your local weather and traffic.
I’m just saying….
straitshooter

Magister, I don’t think you can compare the networks and cable shows, it’s apples and oranges. Fox and Friends nearly beats the combined viewers of Morning Joe, Monring Express and American Morning.

I think my other point is pretty sound. Take a poll of 1,000 Americans and ask them about global warming, and they will agree it is real, it is horrible, and we should all do our part to save the world. But when it comes time to campaign and to vote, the issue is dismissed because it simply doesn’t resonate. People either don’t believe it is real, or they believe it but won’t give it any thought until the next pollster gives them a call.
ImNotBlue

roxsteady says:
December 9, 2009 at 12:38 pm

Again, it’s not FOX’s data… rather just their presentation.

roxsteady says:
December 9, 2009 at 12:50 pm

Hey, congrats! You waited almost 10 minutes between posts! That’s what, a record for you! Nice job!

Now, let’s work on writing things constructive. Ready, set, go…

Ted says:
December 9, 2009 at 1:36 pm

Interesting stats… let me try: 50% of Ted’s comments are personal attacks, 30% are attacks of a group nature, and the remaining 20% is incoherent babble. Ooooh, percentages are fun!

Zakk says:
December 9, 2009 at 1:44 pm
Why does a mis-labeled chart get more coverage then emails exposing the hoax of global warming?

You know that answer to that. Hating FOX is easier than dealing with reality.
http://www.sailrabbits.com Magister

@Zakk & @ImNotBlue: I just punched “fox & friends” +graphic into Google News (including the quotation marks to indicate a phrase) and I limited the results to just those from the past week – The search produced 13 results.

Then I tried searching on the word climategate and once again, limited it to just the past week. – Google indicated that it had found about 8,176 articles.

Afterwards, I conducted the same searches via blogsearch.google.com – It found 1,976 results for the F&F terms and it claimed 147,999 blogposts for climategate.

It seems to me that the email subject is pretty well covered and it certainly dwarfs anything written about this (or any) Fox & Friends’ graphic.
ImNotBlue

Magister says:
December 10, 2009 at 4:56 am

What about on this site? You know… where we’re commenting.
http://www.sailrabbits.com Magister

@ImNotBlue: I think Mediaite has covered the media angle halfway decently. I have no interest in addressing the overall subject here, if I wanted to talk about it, I’d go to a news site and not one focused on media.

I mean, I’m sorry, but I’m not going to inquire about fixing my car on these pages because as I understand it, how-to advice wasn’t why this site was launched.
Correction

ImNotBlue, maybe you didn’t notice the words in caps below, from your citation of the Rasmussen data:

“Fifty-nine percent (59%) of Americans say it’s AT LEAST somewhat likely that some scientists have falsified research data to support their own theories and beliefs about global warming.”

That’s accurate when you add their original statistics for “very likely” (35%) and “somewhat likely” (24%).

You’ll notice that Fox didn’t include the words “at least,” which is a huge misrepresentation. When you listen to it, even the host fell for it, apparently, implying that if you added the “somewhat likely” and the “very likely,” over 90% of respondents thought it was at least somewhat likely. Which is obviously a blatant misreport of the data you quoted for us. Personally, I want my reporters to do a better job than that…which is why I don’t watch network news at all, but especially not Fox.
ImNotBlue

Correction says:
December 10, 2009 at 8:53 pm

Well, I think I said that.

The graphic was misleading… but not technically wrong. Whomever built it goofed… but it’s just that, a goof. It’s not a conspiracy, it wasn’t done with “intent”… it was just a mistake.

And if that’s enough for you to bail on all television news… oh, well then. Where do you get your news from? Who is flawless enough to do the reporting?
Correction

The graphic was misleading… but not technically wrong. Whomever built it goofed… but it’s just that, a goof. It’s not a conspiracy, it wasn’t done with “intent”… it was just a mistake.

The problem is the part where the Fox newscasters talk about it and make “technically wrong” statements as though the numbers should be added together. Maybe it wasn’t intentional, but if not they certainly didn’t catch the problem with adding the numbers together.

In any case, I don’t think you make a fair argument considering that when the “mistake” was pointed out, they defended it, and have taken no action to correct themselves on air. Maybe this one isn’t such a big deal, but they do it repeatedly. They routinely distort and misreport the news to support their own views, which is why it hurts America that people consider them journalists and tune into their false reporting as their only source of “news.”

I read a variety of things online and when something interests me I try to get the story from multiple sources and perspectives to get a well-rounded view. Which, in my opinion, should be the journalist’s job.

I think Media Matters does a good job tracking bad reporting:
http://mediamatters.org/search/tag/fox__amp__friends?tab=research
http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/video/
Ben Linus

Yeah, it’s funny watching the left-wingers go on and on about this mistake on Fox & Friends. They think stuff like this proves them right about Fox News, but the truth is every news channel makes mistakes.
Like you said, ImNotBlue, where will they get their news?

I guess they can’t get it from MSNBC:
oops
whoops
Oh, no!!!
Good one
Poor, Norah.
Turkmenistan at 045
wrong
Indiana, really, it is

They can’t get news from CNN, either:
Obama Osama Habit
Disputed so Disputed
The Sequel
Suicidal
another simple mistake
and again
poor airport
small tornado
France all over
CNN knows physics

Oh, with so many simple mistakes being made, where will we get our news.