Search This Blog

About this Blog

During the semester, I shall post course material and students will comment on it. Students are also free to comment on any aspect of American politics, either current or historical. There are only two major limitations: no coarse language, and no derogatory comments about people at the Claremont Colleges. This blog is on the open Internet, so post nothing that you would not want a potential employer to see. Syllabus: http://gov20h.blogspot.com/2023/08/draft-introduction-to-american-politics.html

Tuesday, September 17, 2013

Following Up from Yesterday

From the "first reports are always wrong" file, a RealClearPolitics summary: [Click links in the story for other examples.]
During the chaotic aftermath of Monday’s deadly shooting at the Washington Navy Yard, two major news networks misidentified the alleged gunman and issued retractions shortly afterward, part of an early coverage period marked by confusion and misinformation. It was also a reprise of erroneous reporting seen after the Sandy Hook and Boston Marathon attacks.

CBS News’ Charlie Kaye tweeted shortly after 12:50 p.m. that Senior Correspondent John Miller “says shooter was retired Navy chief petty officer, about 50 years old.” Kaye, again relaying information from Miller, then falsely identified the shooter as Rollie Chance.
The reports were instantly retweeted and regurgitated on cable news and various digital outlets and newspaper websites. They were followed by subsequent reports that Rollie Chance had been recently laid off from his job.

Just eight minutes later, however, CBS retracted the report and deleted the incorrect tweets.

Shortly after the retraction, this appeared on the official NBC News Twitter account: “Identity of shooter at D.C. Navy Yard is Rollie Chance, sources say.” Five minutes later, NBC News Political Director Chuck Todd issued a retraction on Twitter: “NBC News: we are now NOT reporting name of shooter; retracting that report. deleting those tweets.”
By country (2006), belief that evolution is true or false:



Gallup surveys on evolution:
Forty-six percent of Americans believe in the creationist view that God created humans in their present form at one time within the last 10,000 years. The prevalence of this creationist view of the origin of humans is essentially unchanged from 30 years ago, when Gallup first asked the question. About a third of Americans believe that humans evolved, but with God's guidance; 15% say humans evolved, but that God had no part in the process.
Trend: Which of the following statements comes closest to your views on the origin and development of human beings? 1) Human beings have developed over millions of years from less advanced forms of life, but God guided this process, 2) Human beings have developed over millions of years from less advanced forms of life, but God had no part in this process, 3) God created human beings pretty much in their present form at one time within the last 10,000 years or so
Gallup has asked Americans to choose among these three explanations for the origin and development of human beings 11 times since 1982. Although the percentages choosing each view have varied from survey to survey, the 46% who today choose the creationist explanation is virtually the same as the 45% average over that period -- and very similar to the 44% who chose that explanation in 1982. The 32% who choose the "theistic evolution" view that humans evolved under God's guidance is slightly below the 30-year average of 37%, while the 15% choosing the secular evolution view is slightly higher (12%).

No comments: