Pensacola Discussion Forum
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

This is a forum based out of Pensacola Florida.


You are not connected. Please login or register

Pensacola Discussion Forum » Politics » Science proves why Progressives refuse to read opposing views while Conservatives DO read opposing views

Science proves why Progressives refuse to read opposing views while Conservatives DO read opposing views

+2
othershoe1030
Markle
6 posters

Go down  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Markle

Markle

Science proves why Progressives refuse to read opposing views while Conservatives DO read opposing views.... WHY?

People Choose News That Fits Their Views
by Jeremy Hsu | June 07, 2009 08:03am ET

[...]

Conservatives buck the trend

Some findings from both researchers suggest that individual confidence and certainty play a role in what people choose to read.

People with stronger party affiliation, conservative political views, and greater interest in politics proved more likely to click on articles with opposing views, according to the Ohio State study.

"It appears that people with these characteristics are more confident in their views and so they’re more inclined to at least take a quick look at the counterarguments," Knobloch-Westerwick noted.

http://www.livescience.com/3640-people-choose-news-fits-views.html

Markle

Markle

Since my Progressive good friends can find no argument for these studies, presumably they must agree with its findings.

Guest


Guest

They are defacto segregationists.

othershoe1030

othershoe1030

Markle wrote:Science proves why Progressives refuse to read opposing views while Conservatives DO read opposing views....  WHY?

People Choose News That Fits Their Views
by Jeremy Hsu   |   June 07, 2009 08:03am ET

[...]

Conservatives buck the trend

Some findings from both researchers suggest that individual confidence and certainty play a role in what people choose to read.

People with stronger party affiliation, conservative political views, and greater interest in politics proved more likely to click on articles with opposing views, according to the Ohio State study.

"It appears that people with these characteristics are more confident in their views and so they’re more inclined to at least take a quick look at the counterarguments," Knobloch-Westerwick noted.

http://www.livescience.com/3640-people-choose-news-fits-views.html



I must have missed the part where "science proves" anything. This was a report of findings from one survey of 157 college students tracked over a period of 5 minutes. It is interesting but hardly what the subject line of your thread suggests.

I also missed any indication in the report that the students "refused" to read opposing views only that they spent slightly more time reading views that they probably agreed with.

As a result, she found that participants spent 36 percent more time reading articles that agreed with their point of view. They had a 58 percent chance of choosing articles that supported their views, as opposed to a 43 percent chance of choosing an article that challenged their view.

Students also commonly spent time reading both sides on any given issue, according to the study, which is detailed in the June issue of the journal Communication Research. However, very few clicked just on articles that opposed their views.


I thought it was interesting that some people put more faith in the validity of political blogs, which, in my experience are usually opinion pieces and not a straight news report.

othershoe1030

othershoe1030

.

2seaoat



Silliness...... If that is science.....then T was right....we never landed on the moon.

Sal

Sal

2seaoat wrote:Silliness...... If that is science.....then T was right....we never landed on the moon.


How are you feeling, old man?

2seaoat



I have been running the Bobcat all week and it shakes my liver so....I am beat. I used a jackhammer to take out an old foundation so I could run the invert on some plumbing and my wife had to help me with the jackhammer....I was too weak to handle it without her help....the weakness is tough, but that is the deal with a liver tumor....I am breathing great as the four tumors which were debulked have given me new life. I thought about you tonight as I went by Navarre high School. The parking lot was full and the stands were full watching the high school baseball game. It made me remember playing adult softball for twenty years as the night games were fun....but not half as fun as your getting to watch your son.....would love to be able to watch my son pitch again....he decided to pole vault his freshman year and quit pitching....he was awesome, but he was all state in pole vault for two years and in the end he could have been doing tibblewinks and my wife and I would have been on the bleachers watching him.....we never missed a game.....one or both of us were always there.....cannot think of a better use of my time than enjoying my children and grandchildren playing.

othershoe1030

othershoe1030

Markle wrote:Since my Progressive good friends can find no argument for these studies, presumably they must agree with its findings.

Looks as if you've abandoned your position on this one? Why not just admit you grossly overstated the situation in the title?

Hospital Bob

Hospital Bob

I have liberal (or progressive or whatever the fuck you call it) friends who get all their input from PBS and NPR.

I have conservative (or right-wing or whatever the fuck you call it) friends who get all their input from Fox News.

Neither are "reading opposing views".

Guest


Guest

Extreme conservatives read blogs from extreme conservatives and call it "opposing views."

Just hype really.

othershoe1030

othershoe1030

SheWrites wrote:Extreme conservatives read blogs from extreme conservatives and call it "opposing views."  

Just hype really.  


Right, they're opposing reality! Just hype me! LOL

boards of FL

boards of FL

othershoe1030 wrote:
Markle wrote:Since my Progressive good friends can find no argument for these studies, presumably they must agree with its findings.

Looks as if you've abandoned your position on this one? Why not just admit you grossly overstated the situation in the title?


Here again, Markle isn't here to engage or discuss ideas. He is only here to spam headlines and then run away. The goal is simply to have extreme conservative headlines dominate the the top of the front page - it is not to engage or discuss anything with even a shred of intellectual honesty.


_________________
I approve this message.

Guest


Guest

boards of FL wrote:
othershoe1030 wrote:
Markle wrote:Since my Progressive good friends can find no argument for these studies, presumably they must agree with its findings.

Looks as if you've abandoned your position on this one? Why not just admit you grossly overstated the situation in the title?


Here again, Markle isn't here to engage or discuss ideas. He is only here to spam headlines and then run away. The goal is simply to have extreme conservative headlines dominate the the top of the front page - it is not to engage or discuss anything with even a shred of intellectual honesty.

Your MO on this forum is no better. If someone doesn't agree you just insult them and then when that doesn't seem to jerk their chain enough, you call for an outright ban. If you had cahones, you wouldn't put it to a vote spinmeister, you'd just do it. You won't because you are too insecure to make a decision on your own and want pats on the back for coming up with a poll. You are a sick puppy.

boards of FL

boards of FL

What? wrote:
boards of FL wrote:
othershoe1030 wrote:
Markle wrote:Since my Progressive good friends can find no argument for these studies, presumably they must agree with its findings.

Looks as if you've abandoned your position on this one? Why not just admit you grossly overstated the situation in the title?


Here again, Markle isn't here to engage or discuss ideas.  He is only here to spam headlines and then run away.  The goal is simply to have extreme conservative headlines dominate the the top of the front page - it is not to engage or discuss anything with even a shred of intellectual honesty.

Your MO on this forum is no better. If someone doesn't agree you just insult them and then when that doesn't seem to jerk their chain enough, you call for an outright ban. If you had cahones, you wouldn't put it to a vote spinmeister, you'd just do it. You won't because you are too insecure to make a decision on your own and want pats on the back for coming up with a poll. You are a sick puppy.



If my MO were to ban everyone who disagrees with me, wouldn't every conservative here be banned? Wouldn't there have been more than two bans in over six years?

Do you know what MO means, What?


_________________
I approve this message.

Sponsored content



Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Pensacola Discussion Forum » Politics » Science proves why Progressives refuse to read opposing views while Conservatives DO read opposing views

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum