The same thing that got NotW in trouble will bring down Fake News here, too. Unless we are to believe that they wouldn’t hack the phones of Americans. We all know they would ,and I’m sure that the Feds are checking into it now. Hopefully it will be someone really inportant and Murdoch will lose another few billion. Good luck surviving Fake News, you slimey worthless right wing POS.

It’s funny, my mom who is a 65yo conservative and was always a devoted Republican called them a bunch of crooks and Fake News their leader. If the Republicans don’t realize that life long Republicans look at them and laugh they deserve the dust bin of history they’re headed for.

Yeah….that’s some fine reporting there.

We’ve done this one loads of times. In some cases it’s because the definition of “informed” and “misinformed” is effectively “holds the same/opposite opinion as the researchers”, and in other cases because the selection of topics they pick to study are those that the researchers consider to be or notice as examples of common misinformation, which are generally those where prevailing opinions disagree with their own. Since there are more scientists – and particularly social scientists – with a strong liberal bias, you get confirmation bias and selection bias effects.

When people say something that aligns with your own opinion you don’t notice – even if it’s wrong. If somebody says something that doesn’t fit your beliefs, it triggers a mental alarm; you analyse it, you fact-check, you remember it.

Everybody is relatively ignorant on virtually all technical topics – even experts are expert in relatively narrow fields. All media outlets output constant errors, misunderstandings, part-truths, falsehoods, and spin – Fox included. But you only notice a particular subset of them. The other side notice a different set (or sometimes the same set with a different definition of informed/misinformed), and I assure you they hold the exact same opinion in reverse! Is it not more likely that cognitive bias is a feature of all human reasoning, and that we all need to be aware of our own fallibility?

There are plenty of people around – including scientists – who hold the belief that scientific research on cognitive biases doesn’t apply to them and their own beliefs. Do you think they might be right? Or are they more likely being dumb?

The “Fox News Effect” in the article doesn’t refer to Fox News lying, but to Fox’s viewers being more misinformed (having their facts wrong).

Whether Fox lies or not isn’t the question. You don’t have to lie to make someone believe something not true.

Would you like to posit your own theory of why Fox’s viewers are so remarkably misinformed compared to other media outlets?

Were these people dumb before they started watching Fox? Does Fox naturally appeal to dumber viewers, making it a selection factor?

Or, to take the simple option, maybe something about the way Fox covers the news is causing this rampant ignorance among it’s viewers.

does repeated airtime for guests who DO push it count?

There are loads of web sites listing Fox’s lies. Read them an judge the evidence for your self.
Or drink the kool-aid of the wealthy over-lords. It is a ‘cult’ (look it up)