The problem is: it would be accurate to say he “falsely takes credit,” because it has nothing to do with him. To simply say that he “takes credit” on some level implies that he has the right to do so, when he doesn’t.
4 Likes
I don’t think this is the one I remember, since it covers a lot more than geography and in general is more of an international survey (done by Roper for National Geographic): http://www.nationalgeographic.com/roper2006/findings.html
Here’s the actual PDF: http://www.nationalgeographic.com/roper2006/pdf/FINALReport2006GeogLitsurvey.pdf
You’ll see that on page 28:
Young Americans knowledge of the geography of the United States is only marginally better than their knowledge of other countries around the globe. Each of the participants in this survey was shown a map of the continental United States (Map D, next page) – the same map used in the 2002 and 1988 surveys – and asked to identify seven states. On average, young Americans can accurately locate about half (3.4) of these states. One in five (20%) get all seven right, and just 3% can’t find any of these states on the map.
Nine in ten young adults can find California and Texas, and more than six in ten can find Nevada. Half of 18- to 24-year-olds can find New York State, and half cannot. Only four in ten (43%) can identify Ohio.
If you keep reading, you’ll see that identification of southern states is even lower.
I think what I was remembering was the average, rather than each state having equally bad numbers. Thanks for letting me delve into that and get it more accurately represented!
In a similar vein, Newsweek did a survey about civics/politics and came up with 70% of U.S. citizens not knowing basic facts about the Constitution: How ignorant are Americans? An alarming number of U.S. citizens don't know basic facts about their own country | Daily Mail Online
14 Likes
Also, Al Jazeera and The New Republic.
1 Like
So I wonder – in what way are the public school systems excelling these days?
1 Like
We have a winner.
6 Likes
That was pre-Twitter. Now it is news because he tweeted it. You can’t just ignore it.
If you’re suggesting we storm the Twitter HQ and burn it to the ground, let me go pick out a new pitchfork and I’ll be right there.
3 Likes
Personally, I’ve noticed that the people in my circles who brag about their school systems excelling are in Texas, Indiana, Florida, etc. It floors me, every time.
8 Likes
When I was in 3rd grade, my teacher would have us present Current Events. We had to select a newspaper article (our choice, perhaps within a particular section or within a general topic) and present the info to the class. We would also occasionally watch a PBS show called What’s New in the News. It had the format of a newscast, but instead of the actual news, the “anchor” would “report” for example on the components of a news article (byline, dateline etc.). (Aside: it came on after Vegetable Soup, so we’d watch the ending with the singing spoon – years later I found out that was Bette Midler’s voice)
ETA, hit the button too soon:
I wish there were still something like that. It didn’t teach critical thinking, or skepticism etc. but it did familiarize kids with the news. Few of us read a newspaper anymore, but most of us still read the news. I can’t remember either of my kids having to look up something in the news (granted, one of them’s only in 2nd grade). If kids aren’t used to reading news now they’ll be less inclined to do so later. Maybe it will be Bluetoothed right into our cerebella but in the meantime I guess this is something else the kids & I need to work on together.
9 Likes
What I’m saying is, non-biased reporting IS NOT POSSIBLE. It is inherent. Deal with it! Go to many sources, create your own reality.
5 Likes
People will report a story from their own perspective. But it is possible to report the facts with reasonable objectivity. It just requires more work. Checking multiple sources to determine facts would be a big start. Journalism should be a profession where accurate presentation of facts is the most important virtue, and when those facts are not verifiable, it should be very clearly noted that is the case. One of the basic components of a profession is a code of accepted practices, compliance to which is required for membership.
It is absolutely possible to report an event using objective, provable facts, with the addition of properly cited witness statements.
I suggest that we also stop the practice of headlines in the form of rhetorical questions. At our house, we usually watch the network evening news. I find it almost impossible to watch ABC because they spend so much of their time asking questions of the audience. Once I started noticing it, the practice became too annoying to stand.
1 Like
I don’t disagree that some outlets are much better than others. However, utterly stark fact-based reporting? That would fall apart for many types of issues. At a certain point, I am fine with my media taking a stance on something. I’d rather see more of it, and often these days, just reporting facts IS taking a stance.
3 Likes
NOBODY READS SNOPES.
FFS, people believe the first thing they read. They do not follow up. They don’t give a fuck about debunking. The debunking is “bias” from “lib’ruls”.
The media is failing us at a more rapid pace, we only lucked out before because they hadn’t yet gleefully propped up such an effective manipulator in the past.
I am going to guess here that your idea of “reasonable objectivity” of fact (as pertains to systemic applications of violence on Black America and other topics) may indeed be subjective.
Exactly. We need biased and factual reporting (without factual, we’d have a liberal Fox news, which relatively few persons want.)
“Objective” is a smokescreen for one’s ideology of choice.
14 Likes
No, they don’t need to use the word liar, but they should explicitly note if his claim is false - as that is the key issue. Their post should have said: “NYT: Trump Falsely Takes Credit for Sprint Plan to Add 5,000 Jobs in U.S.”
But as to the supposed distinction between lies and BS, that is largely BS. Trump’s lies may be pathological, but that doesn’t make them anything other than lies.
3 Likes
This is the problem, isn’t it? It’s like that Washington Post Chrome plugin for fact-checking Trump’s tweets.
If you’re concerned enough about what Trump says to know to install a plug-in to check what he’s saying, you don’t need it.
It’s like how retractions are seen by a tiny percentage of those who see the original headlines.
Most of the “lib’rul” media is nothing of the sort, anyway. It’s just motivated by profit. I can’t believe the kicking that CNN is getting from Trumpeteers, when it was paying Lewandowski throughout the election to be Trump’s mouthpiece. They were doing all they could to get the man elected.
13 Likes
One of the big reasons major media can’t say “so-and-so lies about…” is because it risks being proven untrue. Whereas it’s a powerful condemnation when valid, evidence to the contrary arising after making that accusation as few as once or twice can be equivalently self-destructive to an institution. Imagine the NYT grovelling an apology to Trump after evidence comes up that he wasn’t lying. That’s why they hedge with weaselly words, so “takes credit for” is equally applicable to whether Trump was or wasn’t involved.
Cool, maybe all the 70 year olds can work those jobs when their medical and social security gets fucked.
3 Likes
I had a unit in middle school where we learned how to read a newspaper. That unit is now completely irrelevant.
3 Likes
Bootstraps, grandma!
Not that these jobs will necessarily include medical insurance…
4 Likes
The Birthday and Christmas present every grandparent will need in the Trump Era. See, growth industry! Trump 2020!
/s
Woah, what are you some sort of communist? (Well, that would be fine if you are a rich communist dictator who, just maybe, holds some Trump related purse strings. But not if you are one of those dirty hippy kind of “people need access to reasonably priced healthcare” sort of commies!!!1!!!)
1 Like
