New Stanek poll: Who is America's most trusted newscaster?

poll%20graphic%20correct%20size.bmpI have a new poll question up:

A Time magazine poll just named Jon Stewart "the most trusted newscaster in America." Who would you choose?

Here are the results of my previous poll. Given the anticipated ideology of the bulk of the readers on my blog, the #1 answer wasn't a surprise. But pro-lifers apparently didn't automatically pick human embryo experimentation as their #2 answer...

poll 7-25 slide 1d.jpg

Here were your votes. Click to enlarge to find your own brightly colored flag...

poll 7-25 slide 2.jpg

poll 6-25 slide 3.jpg

As always, make comments to either this or last week's poll here, not on the Vizu website.


Comments:

That's odd. Who else is in The Natural State besides me? I know I didn't choose homosexuality.

Posted by: xalisae at July 25, 2009 9:49 AM


"Who is America's most trusted newscaster?"

I liked Brit Hume and Brett Baier. And Raymond Arroyo from EWTN.

Posted by: Jasper at July 25, 2009 10:22 AM


Seriously I thought Jon Stewart was a comedian and when I heard that poll result I thought it was further showing how uneducated the American public was.

Posted by: Maria at July 25, 2009 2:11 PM


Seriously I thought Jon Stewart was a comedian and when I heard that poll result I thought it was further showing how uneducated the American public was.
Posted by: Maria at July 25, 2009 2:11 PM

It is, Maria. I like to tease the liberals when they start mocking Fox News by telling them, "Well, at least I don't gather the information I use to form my world view from a comedian." Most either immediately deny getting their news from The Daily Show, or defend Jon Stewart's journalistic integrity. I then point out that I didn't mention any name of any particular comedian or show, thereby proving that they do indeed get their news from that source. They then shoot back with some canned propaganda answer/slogan, and much lol'ing by yours truly ensues.

Posted by: xalisae at July 25, 2009 2:21 PM


Jon Stewart IS a comedian, not a "newscaster". His name should not have appeared in the poll.

On the other hand, I voted for Bill O'Reilly, and he's not a newscaster either, he's a commentator.

But I guess the lesson here is that it all depends on which website posts the poll as to what the results will be.

Posted by: Doyle Chadwick at July 25, 2009 7:07 PM


Brian Williams. :)

Posted by: Vannah at July 25, 2009 7:46 PM


John Stewart is *not* a newscaster; however, people who watch him think he is, which is indeed very sad. That people even think they're getting news from a comedy show, well, what can be said about that?

Oh, yeah, Charlie Gibson, trying to stump Palin with his question about "the Bush Doctrine," now that was a great piece of work.

I love O'Reilly, but he really doesn't qualify as a newscaster as his show is opinion.

Posted by: Luana at July 25, 2009 8:27 PM


Brit Hume I trust implicitly.Brett Baier 2nd. Nobody else at all.

Posted by: April Lorier at July 25, 2009 9:43 PM


xalisae: "Most either immediately deny getting their news from The Daily Show, or defend Jon Stewart's journalistic integrity. I then point out that I didn't mention any name of any particular comedian or show, thereby proving that they do indeed get their news from that source. They then shoot back with some canned propaganda answer/slogan, and much lol'ing by yours truly ensues."

"Oh, yeah? Well...you watch FAUX News. Didja hear me? I said FAUX News. Not FOX News. FAUX News. Uh, No One Died When Clinton Lied! No Nukes! My Other Car Is A Rolls-Royce! My Kid Beat Up Your Honor Student!"

Posted by: bmmg39 at July 26, 2009 10:43 AM


All good comments above. Jon Stewart a newsman? Bill O'Reilly? Both are in the commentary/opinion business.

But having said this, a viewer/listener can pick up a lot of what is REALLY happening when the host gives his/her insights based upon a broader review and analysis of the happenings and events of the day. We see this clearly in the health care debate, the MSM commentators/propagandists largely carrying the administration's water on this, while the info and analysis talk shows delve into the nitty gritty and expose the "devil in the details." Here is where people like Bill O'Reilly, Rush, and the others act as better "newsmen" than do the so-called newsmen foisted upon us by the largely left leaning MSM.

When watching Leno's hillarious/sad "man on the street" interviews one has to wonder where they get their news--my guess is it isn't from a daily dose of conservative talk shows.

In fact, thanks to the Pew Reseach Center's study showing who is the better informed, we do not have to rely on polls to guess the answer. Viewers and listeners of Rush, Hannity, and O'Reilly are at the top. Horror of horrors--they even outsmart the NPR crowd.

http://pewresearch.org/pubs/993/who-knows-news-what-you-read-or-view-matters-but-not-your-politics

Posted by: Jerry at July 26, 2009 10:44 AM


lol

Posted by: xalisae at July 26, 2009 5:48 PM


"Uh, No One Died When Clinton Lied!"

Which president was it that authorized the bombing of Belgrade [and accidently hit the Chinese Embassy resulting in the deaths of some embassy personel] and then there was that 'aspirin factory' in the Sudan that was bombed [where people died and no evidence of 'nerve gas' was ever found] both of which were 'coincidental' with blowback from a female white house intern 'hoin' around the oval office and sharing cigars with one Bill Clinton who never had sex with that woman, but someone his semen got on her blue dress and left a stain.

Does, "I did not have sex with that woman, ms. Lewinsky" ring any bells in your convienent memory.

I know that these are just messy little details that liberals love to overlook.

Then there is that long list of people who knew or had dealings with bill and hillary clinton and the one 'other' thing they all have in common is that they are all dead, some under some very unusual circumstances.

yor bro ken

Posted by: kbhvac at July 26, 2009 6:36 PM


Then there is that long list of people who knew or had dealings with bill and hillary clinton and the one 'other' thing they all have in common is that they are all dead, some under some very unusual circumstances.

ROFL. Ken, you're always good for a laugh. Probably not for the reasons you might hope, though.

Posted by: Penny Dreadful at July 26, 2009 9:59 PM


A Time magazine poll just named Jon Stewart "the most trusted newscaster in America.

"Who would you choose?"

-----------------------------------------------------
1. Bob Scheiffer CBS NEWs

2. Britt Hume Fox NEWs

3. Seth Myers on Saturday Night Live's 'Weekend Update'


yor bro ken

Posted by: kbhvac at July 26, 2009 10:05 PM


I'm not really a TV news junkie, but if I had to answer, I'd say:
1. Rosanne Rosannadanna
2. Father Guido Sarducci
3. Ted Baxter

Because I trust that whatever they say is in jest.

Posted by: Janet at July 27, 2009 10:38 AM


xalisae: It is, Maria. I like to tease the liberals when they start mocking Fox News by telling them, "Well, at least I don't gather the information I use to form my world view from a comedian." Most either immediately deny getting their news from The Daily Show, or defend Jon Stewart's journalistic integrity. I then point out that I didn't mention any name of any particular comedian or show, thereby proving that they do indeed get their news from that source.

And this, I suppose, is what passes for wit where you come from.

It says more about the state of the media in this country than it does about The Daily Show that it actually functions as a reasonably informative source of news.

Posted by: grendelkhan at July 27, 2009 2:31 PM


"...defend Jon Stewart's journalistic integrity..."

I rest my case.

Posted by: xalisae at July 27, 2009 3:58 PM


xalisae, try and work on your reading comprehension. I wasn't defending Stewart's journalistic integrity; I was insulting everyone else's. Again: it's a damning statement that the regular news generally fails to meet the standards of a comedy show. I'm not saying that Stewart is awesome; I'm saying that pretty much everyone else is terrible.

Posted by: grendelkhan at July 27, 2009 6:26 PM


grendelkhan: "And this, I suppose, is what passes for wit where you come from. It says more about the state of the media in this country than it does about The Daily Show that it actually functions as a reasonably informative source of news."

The Stewartistas certainly become rather defensive, don't they...

Posted by: bmmg39 at July 27, 2009 6:33 PM


Yes, bmmg39, they do. That's why it's so much fun to mess with them.

And I'm sorry, grendelkhan, I guess you can only see how partisan Jon Stewart is if you disagree with him. Silly me!

Posted by: xalisae at July 27, 2009 10:37 PM


And all I have is one little lousy UCLA study to support my side. Whatever will I do!

*sscnet.ucla. edu/polisci /faculty /groseclose/Media.Bias.8. htm

Posted by: xalisae at July 30, 2009 2:44 AM


Xalisae, please post a working link! lol..

Bill O' is in the lead here. I'm shocked! The same guy whos says that the birther conspiracy is being pushed by.......THE WHITEHOUSE.

You've got to be kiddin' me.

The same guy that calls media matters website...hate speech..lol

Oh, thank God for Jon Stewart. We just lol @ the sheer stupidity of you guys sometimes.

Posted by: soonerman at July 30, 2009 5:58 PM


So, Jon Stewart is our most trusted newscaster, and Rep. Conyers of Michigan says he does not see the point of reading the healthcare bill (video here: http://allhands-ondeck.blogspot.com/2009/07/rep-john-conyers-sees-no-point-in.html).

And I thought I was pessimistic about the future of this country before this week came along.

Posted by: Mr. H at July 30, 2009 8:54 PM


And the more educated among us laugh just as often as you.

I'm not sure I'll call Media Matters "hate speech," but it's obvious MM is an organization completely comprising left-wing shills.

Posted by: bmmg39 at July 30, 2009 10:34 PM


Once again soonerman proves his (lacking) intelligence. Posts with links in them are no longer working. Just add a "www." in front, and remove the spaces.

"It is better to weep with wise men than to laugh with fools."

Enjoy your laughter while you can.

Posted by: xalisae at July 30, 2009 11:01 PM


Mr.H @ 8:54,

"... Rep. Conyers of Michigan says he does not see the point of reading the healthcare bill.."

Isn't that unbelievable? Term limits for Congress. Now. Please.

Posted by: Janet at July 31, 2009 4:36 PM


soooooooooooooonerman/mam

Sooner what than what?

One of the Senators from Oklahoma asked Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor a question which she failed/declined/refused to answer:

"Do americans have the right to defend themselves?"

I would venture that 99.9% of Okies (no matter what their ethnicity and/or gender) know the only correct answer to that question.

Self defence is a fundamental human right, some would argue a personal responsibility and civil obligation to defend yourself and others, using violent, even deadly force if necessary.

(A wise asian dude told me so.)

This 'wise latina', wiser than, presumably even 'wise latinos' danced the rhumba, the tango and the cha cha cha, but she would/could not even offer a personal opinion on a question of fundamental importance to every human being.

(Maybe the 'wise latina' took a cue from the Obama playbook and determined the answer to that was question was above that 'wise latinas' pay grade.)

That ought to concern you Sooooooonerman/mam. I know the vast majority of your fellow Okies would be concerned if they knew.

yor bro ken

Posted by: kbhvac at August 1, 2009 10:24 AM


Balance on the court Kenny boy. That's what we need.
Replace a liberal with a liberal and a conservative with a conservative. It's what is best for the country. There are multiple viewpoints in lifestory. Sometimes yours is right, sometimes it is wrong but, it isn't one way or the other 100% of the time. That is why, you have to have balance on the SCOTUS.
Also, Ken, it's not 99.9% of okies. It's more like 60%. There are a lot more liberals here than you think. It's the rural areas that keep dolts like Inhoff in office. (I like Coburn. He's, at least respectable, to his political opponents. Inhoff is totally disrespectful and, therefore, earns no respect from me.)

As for MM being leftwing shills, its the internet counterbalance for right wing radio and Faux. Either way, they just have video and audio of what you guys say, nothing made up and not edited completely out of context to make a point (i.e. see Shammity -sean hannity).

Xalisae,

Did you even read the report...lol?

Look @ this chart on distance from centrist reporting.

1 Newshour with Jim Lehrer
55.8

2
CNN NewsNight with Aaron Brown
56.0

3
ABC Good Morning America
56.1

4
Drudge Report
60.4

5
Fox News' Special Report with Brit Hume
39.7


I see something funny here based on your world view. I see something very funny! I see CNN, ABC AHEAD of Faux news, the mosr fair and balanced news organization according to you guys. However, I guess the report is from UCLA and it is the left coast so I guess even it must be bias. And, you mock my intelligence...?


Posted by: Soonerman at August 2, 2009 11:59 PM


"If viewers spent an equal amount of time watching Fox's 'Special Report' as ABC's 'World News' and NBC's 'Nightly News,' then they would receive a nearly perfectly balanced version of the news," said Milyo, an associate professor of economics and public affairs at the University of Missouri at Columbia.

Ok, if you think you're going to get perfectly balanced coverage of everything from every single outlet, you're dumber than I thought. But I guess it's only ok to slant it if it slants YOUR way, huh soonerman? Personally, I usually watch the NBC evening news, then Special Report.

But, my point was that NEARLY EVERY MAJOR MEDIA OUTLET is biased left, besides the radio and known conservative-leaning Fox, which, by the way, was said was "...The fourth most centrist outlet was "Special Report With Brit Hume" on Fox News, which often is cited by liberals as an egregious example of a right-wing outlet. While this news program proved to be right of center, the study found ABC's "World News Tonight" and NBC's "Nightly News" to be left of center. All three outlets were approximately equidistant from the center, the report found." EQUIDISTANT. Again, I suppose it's only ok to lean if they lean YOUR way, huh? And, the report said SRw/BH was 4th, not 5th. Is lying a reflex action for you? But anyway, you couldn't even get a balanced message AT ALL if Fox News didn't exist!

Posted by: xalisae at August 3, 2009 12:21 AM