Comments on: Zogby’s Ziegler is ‘a f*cking idiot’ http://collegian.csufresno.edu/2008/12/08/zogby-is-%e2%80%98a-f-cking-idiot%e2%80%99/ Serving California State University, Fresno since 1922. Sun, 22 Nov 2009 20:24:06 -0800 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8 hourly 1 By: add3heads http://collegian.csufresno.edu/2008/12/08/zogby-is-%e2%80%98a-f-cking-idiot%e2%80%99/comment-page-1/#comment-35156 add3heads Fri, 09 Jan 2009 19:35:50 +0000 http://collegian.csufresno.edu/?p=8099#comment-35156 One important point seems to have gone unaddressed:neither the possibility that the media may have been biased in Obama's favor nor the possibility that the average voter is ill-informed means he wasn't the more qualified candidate. It also does not eliminate the possibility that media coverage -- fairly or unfairly -- may have favored Obama and Biden because they simply presented themselves better in public than McCain and Palin did. (Palin's interviews on Mr. Ziegler's website are no more impressive than the ones she did with Gibson and Couric -- and JZ is a very sympathetic interviewer to say the least.) As for the Zogby survey in question: not to sound self-back-patting, but I actually knew the answers -- even though at least one of the questions was unclearly worded -- and during the campaign I made a point of watching all the debates in order to view the candidates provide uncut, unedited, relatively unrehearsed exchanges. Moreover, I made a point of visiting each candidate's website on a weekly basis and reading as many planks in as many platforms as I could. I may not know all the intricacies of bill passage, but I did what I could. A lot of folks in my neighborhood did the same. And yes, I ended up voting for Obama -- not because I think he's anybody's messiah or because I made up my mind ahead of time, but because I sincerely believed I had enough information to make a decent choice. Several of my friends would say the same regarding their votes for McCain, as would my friends who voted for Kerry or Bush or Gore in years past. It's easy to tut-tut and accuse those who disagree with you of "not doing their homework," but that's a dodge. The bottom line is that we now have four years to 1) ponder why our candidate won or lost, 2) gripe about the various media instead of exploring alternatives, boycotts, or whatever, or 3) buckle up and evaluate the new administration on its own merits. I prefer #3, but to each her/his own. One important point seems to have gone unaddressed:neither the possibility that the media may have been biased in Obama’s favor nor the possibility that the average voter is ill-informed means he wasn’t the more qualified candidate. It also does not eliminate the possibility that media coverage — fairly or unfairly — may have favored Obama and Biden because they simply presented themselves better in public than McCain and Palin did. (Palin’s interviews on Mr. Ziegler’s website are no more impressive than the ones she did with Gibson and Couric — and JZ is a very sympathetic interviewer to say the least.)

As for the Zogby survey in question: not to sound self-back-patting, but I actually knew the answers — even though at least one of the questions was unclearly worded — and during the campaign I made a point of watching all the debates in order to view the candidates provide uncut, unedited, relatively unrehearsed exchanges. Moreover, I made a point of visiting each candidate’s website on a weekly basis and reading as many planks in as many platforms as I could. I may not know all the intricacies of bill passage, but I did what I could. A lot of folks in my neighborhood did the same.

And yes, I ended up voting for Obama — not because I think he’s anybody’s messiah or because I made up my mind ahead of time, but because I sincerely believed I had enough information to make a decent choice. Several of my friends would say the same regarding their votes for McCain, as would my friends who voted for Kerry or Bush or Gore in years past.

It’s easy to tut-tut and accuse those who disagree with you of “not doing their homework,” but that’s a dodge. The bottom line is that we now have four years to 1) ponder why our candidate won or lost, 2) gripe about the various media instead of exploring alternatives, boycotts, or whatever, or 3) buckle up and evaluate the new administration on its own merits. I prefer #3, but to each her/his own.

]]> By: junior1781 http://collegian.csufresno.edu/2008/12/08/zogby-is-%e2%80%98a-f-cking-idiot%e2%80%99/comment-page-1/#comment-34977 junior1781 Fri, 12 Dec 2008 17:05:18 +0000 http://collegian.csufresno.edu/?p=8099#comment-34977 I must admit that was some pretty detailed research by Howell and the Pew. Thanks for that post Anna. I must admit that was some pretty detailed research by Howell and the Pew. Thanks for that post Anna.

]]> By: Anna Jacobsen http://collegian.csufresno.edu/2008/12/08/zogby-is-%e2%80%98a-f-cking-idiot%e2%80%99/comment-page-1/#comment-34952 Anna Jacobsen Thu, 11 Dec 2008 20:44:39 +0000 http://collegian.csufresno.edu/?p=8099#comment-34952 The reason the majority of the voters are unaware of real issues and gravitate toward slogans may be quite simple: the press is falling down on their job of providing the public with fair and unbiased reporting. In her Nov 8 article in The Washington Post, Deborah Howell says, "readers have been consistently critical of the lack of probing issues coverage and what they saw as a tilt toward Democrat Barack Obama. My surveys, which ended on Election Day, show that they are right on both counts." She goes on to say that, in reference to The Post's election coverage, "there were no broad stories on energy or science policy, and there were few on religion issues." Ms Howell goes on to detail the unfair reporting conducted by The Post in Obama's favor. She lists statistics that reference the number of stories per candidate and the tone of those stories (from November 11, 2007, until November 8, 2008, 946 stories covered Obama and 786 covered McCain). Photos featuring Obama also outnumbered photos featuring McCain. The Washington Post was not alone in their slant. The Pew Research Center's Project for Excellence in Journalism verified that Obama's coverage in the media overall was more positive than coverage of McCain's candidacy. Read the Washington Post article at http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/11/07/AR2008110702895.html Read the Pew Research article at http://www.journalism.org/node/13307 The reason the majority of the voters are unaware of real issues and gravitate toward slogans may be quite simple: the press is falling down on their job of providing the public with fair and unbiased reporting. In her Nov 8 article in The Washington Post, Deborah Howell says, “readers have been consistently critical of the lack of probing issues coverage and what they saw as a tilt toward Democrat Barack Obama. My surveys, which ended on Election Day, show that they are right on both counts.” She goes on to say that, in reference to The Post’s election coverage, “there were no broad stories on energy or science policy, and there were few on religion issues.”

Ms Howell goes on to detail the unfair reporting conducted by The Post in Obama’s favor. She lists statistics that reference the number of stories per candidate and the tone of those stories (from November 11, 2007, until November 8, 2008, 946 stories covered Obama and 786 covered McCain). Photos featuring Obama also outnumbered photos featuring McCain.
The Washington Post was not alone in their slant. The Pew Research Center’s Project for Excellence in Journalism verified that Obama’s coverage in the media overall was more positive than coverage of McCain’s candidacy.

Read the Washington Post article at http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/11/07/AR2008110702895.html

Read the Pew Research article at http://www.journalism.org/node/13307

]]> By: junior1781 (senior writer) http://collegian.csufresno.edu/2008/12/08/zogby-is-%e2%80%98a-f-cking-idiot%e2%80%99/comment-page-1/#comment-34938 junior1781 (senior writer) Thu, 11 Dec 2008 07:44:32 +0000 http://collegian.csufresno.edu/?p=8099#comment-34938 Did you know that in the early days of the newspaper, they did serve as cheerleaders, if not for a candidate than for a political or social principle that was entirely one-sided, and I'm not just talking about the Revolutionary War. It was expected that through the hodgepodge of information and opinions citizens would be able to decide what is fair and correct. Obviously, that view did not carry over well into modern times and I think its because the world got so big and even more outlets and types of media flooded the market. And so what you have is conglomeration of channels where no analysis is more important than another. Companies choose to assimilate for the convenience of reaching a large audience, and money probably has a lot to do with it. So if you perceive that the media is bias, remember there was a time where that was the norm and I''m not sure when it changed. But I wonder what we sacrificed for going down that road. Perhaps a unity in groups, a more bold opinion and a diversity of viewpoints. Whaddaya mean there's no conservative bias in the media? Millions of people listen to Rush Limbaugh every day. And Sean Hannity. It seems history is repeating itself in the Republican Party if you catch my drift.. Did you know that in the early days of the newspaper, they did serve as cheerleaders, if not for a candidate than for a political or social principle that was entirely one-sided, and I’m not just talking about the Revolutionary War.

It was expected that through the hodgepodge of information and opinions citizens would be able to decide what is fair and correct. Obviously, that view did not carry over well into modern times and I think its because the world got so big and even more outlets and types of media flooded the market. And so what you have is conglomeration of channels where no analysis is more important than another. Companies choose to assimilate for the convenience of reaching a large audience, and money probably has a lot to do with it.

So if you perceive that the media is bias, remember there was a time where that was the norm and I”m not sure when it changed. But I wonder what we sacrificed for going down that road. Perhaps a unity in groups, a more bold opinion and a diversity of viewpoints.

Whaddaya mean there’s no conservative bias in the media? Millions of people listen to Rush Limbaugh every day. And Sean Hannity. It seems history is repeating itself in the Republican Party if you catch my drift..

]]> By: el loco http://collegian.csufresno.edu/2008/12/08/zogby-is-%e2%80%98a-f-cking-idiot%e2%80%99/comment-page-1/#comment-34936 el loco Thu, 11 Dec 2008 05:59:37 +0000 http://collegian.csufresno.edu/?p=8099#comment-34936 "How or whether the media investigates and reports can make a difference and we should all expect and demand that they give us facts and information, not serve as cheerleaders." I agree with this entirely. I believe that people are not informed not because of the media but because they are simply not interested in having their views challenged. The resources are out there. The media is irrelevant because a significant amount of voters don't bother to be informed, even to vote. Even when the information is right at our fingertips. Google the results of the average voter knowledge of 2008 and you realize that an absurd number of people don't even know who Joe Biden is. The problem is NOT that the media gives us a one sided view, its that we swallow it without questioning. “How or whether the media investigates and reports can make a difference and we should all expect and demand that they give us facts and information, not serve as cheerleaders.”

I agree with this entirely.

I believe that people are not informed not because of the media but because they are simply not interested in having their views challenged. The resources are out there.

The media is irrelevant because a significant amount of voters don’t bother to be informed, even to vote. Even when the information is right at our fingertips.

Google the results of the average voter knowledge of 2008 and you realize that an absurd number of people don’t even know who Joe Biden is.

The problem is NOT that the media gives us a one sided view, its that we swallow it without questioning.

]]> By: gm http://collegian.csufresno.edu/2008/12/08/zogby-is-%e2%80%98a-f-cking-idiot%e2%80%99/comment-page-1/#comment-34927 gm Thu, 11 Dec 2008 00:12:31 +0000 http://collegian.csufresno.edu/?p=8099#comment-34927 What a troubling set of responses. So what if the media is biased? How fascinating that it isn't even disputed anymore. Let's just throw it in your face. Our side is right and yours is wrong so who cares? The problem with such a childish outlook is that the media may not always be biased in a way that you or I agree with. We heard the cries, after the fact, that the media was in bed with the administration on the run up to the war. So the media doesn't really do its job to investigate government claims, inform the public, and we end up in a war. Oh well, doesn't really matter does it? El loco, you seem to be arguing against yourself. You state that anyone that gets their news from only 1 country is ill-informed. Does that mean that you believe that most, or a significant number, or even more than a miniscule portion of the electorate do so? I think we all know the answer to that question, which is why bias is important. How or whether the media investigates and reports can make a difference and we should all expect and demand that they give us facts and information, not serve as cheerleaders. I'm as excited by the prospects of the Obama administration as I am happy that Bush will soon be gone, but I'm deeply troubled by a media that seems to have more invested in a candidate than in the interests of the public they are supposed to serve. What a troubling set of responses. So what if the media is biased? How fascinating that it isn’t even disputed anymore. Let’s just throw it in your face. Our side is right and yours is wrong so who cares? The problem with such a childish outlook is that the media may not always be biased in a way that you or I agree with. We heard the cries, after the fact, that the media was in bed with the administration on the run up to the war. So the media doesn’t really do its job to investigate government claims, inform the public, and we end up in a war. Oh well, doesn’t really matter does it?
El loco, you seem to be arguing against yourself. You state that anyone that gets their news from only 1 country is ill-informed. Does that mean that you believe that most, or a significant number, or even more than a miniscule portion of the electorate do so? I think we all know the answer to that question, which is why bias is important. How or whether the media investigates and reports can make a difference and we should all expect and demand that they give us facts and information, not serve as cheerleaders.
I’m as excited by the prospects of the Obama administration as I am happy that Bush will soon be gone, but I’m deeply troubled by a media that seems to have more invested in a candidate than in the interests of the public they are supposed to serve.

]]> By: Jack Bauer http://collegian.csufresno.edu/2008/12/08/zogby-is-%e2%80%98a-f-cking-idiot%e2%80%99/comment-page-1/#comment-34870 Jack Bauer Wed, 10 Dec 2008 04:30:21 +0000 http://collegian.csufresno.edu/?p=8099#comment-34870 The media didn't do its job in ensuring impartiality in the 2008 election-----they were pushing Obama's victory the entire time. They swept the black nationalist/bigot pastor, the domestic terrorist/academic, voter fraud and ineligibility, and Obama's more left-wing positions under the rug. What about an entirely untouched media topic-- The Obama campaign's out and out refusal to disclose foreign donor information and supress other details about anonymous internet-based contributions. And the media assault on Palin's qualifications versus an equally qualified (Obama) candidate. It seems the media dictates public diaglogue and discourse more than ever. The media wanted an Obama win and lop-sided election and almost got both. The media didn’t do its job in ensuring impartiality in the 2008 election—–they were pushing Obama’s victory the entire time. They swept the black nationalist/bigot pastor, the domestic terrorist/academic, voter fraud and ineligibility, and Obama’s more left-wing positions under the rug. What about an entirely untouched media topic– The Obama campaign’s out and out refusal to disclose foreign donor information and supress other details about anonymous internet-based contributions. And the media assault on Palin’s qualifications versus an equally qualified (Obama) candidate. It seems the media dictates public diaglogue and discourse more than ever. The media wanted an Obama win and lop-sided election and almost got both.

]]> By: Junior http://collegian.csufresno.edu/2008/12/08/zogby-is-%e2%80%98a-f-cking-idiot%e2%80%99/comment-page-1/#comment-34869 Junior Wed, 10 Dec 2008 01:57:12 +0000 http://collegian.csufresno.edu/?p=8099#comment-34869 And yet no one talks about how the media dropped the ball on Cynthia McKinney. Tisk, tisk. And yet no one talks about how the media dropped the ball on Cynthia McKinney. Tisk, tisk.

]]> By: texs http://collegian.csufresno.edu/2008/12/08/zogby-is-%e2%80%98a-f-cking-idiot%e2%80%99/comment-page-1/#comment-34868 texs Wed, 10 Dec 2008 00:19:40 +0000 http://collegian.csufresno.edu/?p=8099#comment-34868 I think instead of dismissing the poll maybe someone should do a poll of college students. Obama and McCain supporters and see how many of these question they can answer. Every time i asked a supporter of either side they never really could tell me why they where voting for that individual other than slogans i read on bumpers. McCain has the experience, Obama is for change. I believe that people are not properly educated on political subjects such as the economy, education, and national security. PS- I did not vote for Obama but i hope that he does make a positive change and puts America on the right path. I think instead of dismissing the poll maybe someone should do a poll of college students. Obama and McCain supporters and see how many of these question they can answer. Every time i asked a supporter of either side they never really could tell me why they where voting for that individual other than slogans i read on bumpers. McCain has the experience, Obama is for change. I believe that people are not properly educated on political subjects such as the economy, education, and national security.

PS- I did not vote for Obama but i hope that he does make a positive change and puts America on the right path.

]]> By: Samuel Adams http://collegian.csufresno.edu/2008/12/08/zogby-is-%e2%80%98a-f-cking-idiot%e2%80%99/comment-page-1/#comment-34815 Samuel Adams Mon, 08 Dec 2008 21:03:09 +0000 http://collegian.csufresno.edu/?p=8099#comment-34815 As scary as Obama's positions are, the uneducated and misinformed vote elevated the previous two presidents into office. So no big deal. As scary as Obama’s positions are, the uneducated and misinformed vote elevated the previous two presidents into office. So no big deal.

]]> By: WTF http://collegian.csufresno.edu/2008/12/08/zogby-is-%e2%80%98a-f-cking-idiot%e2%80%99/comment-page-1/#comment-34813 WTF Mon, 08 Dec 2008 19:40:01 +0000 http://collegian.csufresno.edu/?p=8099#comment-34813 John, do you google your name every day to see how many people think you're lame? That's kinda pathetic. John, do you google your name every day to see how many people think you’re lame? That’s kinda pathetic.

]]> By: el loco http://collegian.csufresno.edu/2008/12/08/zogby-is-%e2%80%98a-f-cking-idiot%e2%80%99/comment-page-1/#comment-34811 el loco Mon, 08 Dec 2008 19:07:21 +0000 http://collegian.csufresno.edu/?p=8099#comment-34811 John, all voters are grown adults. The media bias is irrelevant. Anyone who gets all their news from the same source, even the same country! is ill-informed. Saying that Obama won because the audience is not informed is an insult to those who campaigned tirelessly on both sides. Its is also an incredibility elitist position to take, isn't that supposed to be Obama? John, all voters are grown adults. The media bias is irrelevant. Anyone who gets all their news from the same source, even the same country! is ill-informed. Saying that Obama won because the audience is not informed is an insult to those who campaigned tirelessly on both sides. Its is also an incredibility elitist position to take, isn’t that supposed to be Obama?

]]> By: junior http://collegian.csufresno.edu/2008/12/08/zogby-is-%e2%80%98a-f-cking-idiot%e2%80%99/comment-page-1/#comment-34809 junior Mon, 08 Dec 2008 17:42:39 +0000 http://collegian.csufresno.edu/?p=8099#comment-34809 Oh, and even if liberals do run the media, what does that prove? It proves they are the cream of the crop in this Darwinian society where popularity is king. If the public and the media both think conservatives are full of hot air, then maybe there's something to that. Anyone think eight years of Bush has something to do with it? Oh, and even if liberals do run the media, what does that prove? It proves they are the cream of the crop in this Darwinian society where popularity is king. If the public and the media both think conservatives are full of hot air, then maybe there’s something to that. Anyone think eight years of Bush has something to do with it?

]]> By: junior http://collegian.csufresno.edu/2008/12/08/zogby-is-%e2%80%98a-f-cking-idiot%e2%80%99/comment-page-1/#comment-34808 junior Mon, 08 Dec 2008 17:32:30 +0000 http://collegian.csufresno.edu/?p=8099#comment-34808 Who uses profanity in an interview, any interview? Completely uncalled for, no matter what the context. Who uses profanity in an interview, any interview? Completely uncalled for, no matter what the context.

]]> By: John Ziegler http://collegian.csufresno.edu/2008/12/08/zogby-is-%e2%80%98a-f-cking-idiot%e2%80%99/comment-page-1/#comment-34806 John Ziegler Mon, 08 Dec 2008 17:17:42 +0000 http://collegian.csufresno.edu/?p=8099#comment-34806 This is John Ziegler. Yes, that one. Nice headline! So the best you got is that a left-wing nut with an agenda writes a partial transcript of an "interview" he did with me that contains profanity and you use that profantity completely out of context and fail to see the irony or the hypocrisy in doing so. Man, you MUST be a liberal. As for who the idiot really is, perhaps you should have done even the slighest research before your wrote this. We DID do a poll of BOTH sets of voters and it totally vindicated that Zogby poll. But obviously facts don't matter to you. www.howobamagotelected.com This is John Ziegler. Yes, that one. Nice headline! So the best you got is that a left-wing nut with an agenda writes a partial transcript of an “interview” he did with me that contains profanity and you use that profantity completely out of context and fail to see the irony or the hypocrisy in doing so. Man, you MUST be a liberal.

As for who the idiot really is, perhaps you should have done even the slighest research before your wrote this. We DID do a poll of BOTH sets of voters and it totally vindicated that Zogby poll. But obviously facts don’t matter to you.

http://www.howobamagotelected.com

]]>