SDS Posted November 3, 2004 Share Posted November 3, 2004 The mainstream media just suffered it's first post election credability casualty. I finally turned off NPR. I was listening to the arbiters of unvarnished truth tell me how Florida was, and would remain a swing state (Bush by 376,923). Pennsylvania swung decisively to Kerry (Kerry by 121,489) and was probably no longer a battleground state, while Bush eked out a narrow victory in Ohio (Bush by 136,218). That is a mighty fine piece of analysis. I wish I knew who the panel was... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon in Pasadena Posted November 3, 2004 Share Posted November 3, 2004 That is a mighty fine piece of analysis. I wish I knew who the panel was... 99827[/snapback] I think the argument is clearer, and even more obvious, if the numbers are expressed as percent of the respective state populations (more properly it would be percent of registered voters, but I assume that to be proportional). Then we get "swing" Florida=2.2%, "decisive" Pennsylvania=1%, "narrow" Ohio=1.2%. Yep, NPR is officially innumerate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Adams Posted November 3, 2004 Share Posted November 3, 2004 That is a mighty fine piece of analysis. I wish I knew who the panel was... 99827[/snapback] My wife has a friend who was driving back to her home state after cavassing for Kerry over the last few days. She was listening to NPR for about 4 hours during her drive, and was feeling great about the election results, which seemed to be going Kerry's way. Then her sister called her to commiserate about the loss. The NPR bubble woman was distraught to find out that basically everyone was giving the election to Bush when NPR had been leading her to believe that it was close and looked like Kerry would win. I like some shows on NPR and credit them for trying to bring the average level of radio discourse up from the talk show dregs of Rush, Hannity, and if there was a Liberal national name, I'd insert him here too, but you can't think they are an unbiased source of news. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted November 3, 2004 Share Posted November 3, 2004 My wife has a friend who was driving back to her home state after cavassing for Kerry over the last few days. She was listening to NPR for about 4 hours during her drive, and was feeling great about the election results, which seemed to be going Kerry's way. Then her sister called her to commiserate about the loss. The NPR bubble woman was distraught to find out that basically everyone was giving the election to Bush when NPR had been leading her to believe that it was close and looked like Kerry would win. I like some shows on NPR and credit them for trying to bring the average level of radio discourse up from the talk show dregs of Rush, Hannity, and if there was a Liberal national name, I'd insert him here too, but you can't think they are an unbiased source of news. 99992[/snapback] Al Franken was positively giddy yesterday. I didn't have the stomach to listen to him this morning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thurman's Helmet Posted November 3, 2004 Share Posted November 3, 2004 Al Franken was positively giddy yesterday. I didn't have the stomach to listen to him this morning. 99996[/snapback] In terms of pure Schadenfraude is was delightful. I could hear the veins popping in his head. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted November 3, 2004 Share Posted November 3, 2004 Florida was, and would remain a swing state (Bush by 376,923). Pennsylvania swung decisively to Kerry (Kerry by 121,489) and was probably no longer a battleground state, while Bush eked out a narrow victory in Ohio (Bush by 136,218). 99827[/snapback] how is 121,489 decisive while 136k eked out? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nobody Posted November 3, 2004 Share Posted November 3, 2004 That is a mighty fine piece of analysis. I wish I knew who the panel was... 99827[/snapback] Since the govt keeps reducing NPRs budget they have to hire PPP listers to do the analysis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverNRed Posted November 3, 2004 Share Posted November 3, 2004 Since the govt keeps reducing NPRs budget they have to hire PPP listers to do the analysis. 100182[/snapback] Why not just reduce their budget to zero and put them out of their misery? Seriously, these guys couldn't even get counting right. That's one of the first things you learn in elementary school. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuckincincy Posted November 3, 2004 Share Posted November 3, 2004 That is a mighty fine piece of analysis. I wish I knew who the panel was... 99827[/snapback] Other than C-Span and simple, local, relating of news facts, all media is show business. PBS and NPR will kill for a buck like anyone else in the game. One of the world's shortest lists is what the media will not do for $$$. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts