DougD's Blog

DougD recommended Emerging DC Meme by Josh Marshall

2008-11-06T20:10:59Z

DougD Commented on Obama's Win: A Death-Knell For 1960s Cultural Politics? by Greg Sargent

2008-11-05T18:32:47Z

I'm not sure this is a death knell for anything. It's easy to get mislead by the inflated differences in the electoral college figures and ignore the fact that the actual vote differences are not that great. It's wonderful that Obama won, but the campaign was quite silly. Most major issues were ignored (other than the economy), and the media allowed the conservatives to get away with most of their distortions (e.g., a $900 tax difference for someone making $280,000 marks the difference between capitalism and socialism). Given the magnitude of the Bush disaster, it's not at all surprising that the Democrats had a comeback. As someone with roots with the 60's, I'm afraid the conservative backlash will continue for many years.

DougD Commented on Rachel Maddow Turning Into Wolf Blitzer? by Craig Gurian

2008-10-30T07:33:12Z

You are probably right in that these shows provide a valuable service. However, admitting they are biased does not alter the fact that they are biased, it just means they are not hypocritical. Also, Olbermann and Maddow really don't balance out the Fox shows because they are not nearly as extreme or numerous. My personal view is that there aren't any objective or "balanced" news shows, and that virtually all are biased to the right.

By biased I mean that the reporting uses selectivity and distortion to promote its ideology. These "liberal" shows could be so much better if they limited these techniques, and cut the fun and games so that more could actually be covered. It's discouraging to see liberal positions presented in such a superficial and at times childish way.

Still, I admit that for some people they serve a valuable service in "presenting the other side". It's just that the "other side" is already available, presented in much more breadth, detail, and accuracy on the many liberal websites. Also, there is the danger of closed-mindedness resulting from the constant reinforcement viewers get from the biased shows.

DougD Commented on Rachel Maddow Turning Into Wolf Blitzer? by Craig Gurian

2008-10-30T05:19:07Z

Rachel is obviously intelligent and talented. But in my opinion hers is just another biased "news" show. The same goes for Olbermann. As someone pointed out above, such shows function primarily to reinforce our existing emotions and beliefs. I would like to be challenged, intellectually, something that never happens on either of these shows. They are humorous and that's about it. I wonder what these shows, along with TPM, are going to talk about after the election.

DougD Commented on How Media Polls "Manufacture" Public Opinion by David Moore

2008-10-27T21:35:34Z

I agree with the author that this is a huge problem that needs to and can be fixed.

What I don't understand is the difference between two of the major tactics listed in the second paragraph. It's clear that using forced-choice formats (yes/no) cause problems (Tactic 1). As I understand it, Tactic 3 (not using intensity measures) seems like pretty much the same thing. Academic researchers generally measure intensity by using a multiple-point scale with a neutral midpoint (e.g., strongly disagree, disagree, slightly disadgree, neither agree nor disagree, slightly agree, agree, strongly agree). It's easy to see how this seven-point scale will provide much more information than a forced-choice (disagree/agree) approach. The use of such a scale is quite easy, and it would solve the problems arising from Tactics 1 and 3.

In any event, we need to be much, much more "literate" regarding the various ways of manipulating information, and Mr. Moore has made a real contribution. He is exactly right in saying that the polls can do better -- they can do much, much better. Knowing what people really believe is extremely valuable information.

DougD Commented on Finally the Mainstream Media is Looking at the Palins' Secessionist Ties by Dread Head 718

2008-10-14T22:10:17Z

Jngara

Your rude and trivial attack on someone's spelling is totally out of place in this kind of a supposedly intellectual forum. Especially when you follow your rudeness with:

Now got READ the Constituion

DougD Commented on Palin Falsely Claimed Report Cleared Her of Legal Wrong-Doing]]> by Zachary Roth

2008-10-14T18:20:34Z

You are right charisma is in the eye of the beholder. But you miss the point that she is charasmatic to many right wingers, especially young right-wing females. My whole point was that this makes her especially dangerous.

DougD Commented on Palin Falsely Claimed Report Cleared Her of Legal Wrong-Doing]]> by Zachary Roth

2008-10-14T05:54:30Z

I've been a research psychologist studying temperament and motivation for several decades. Palin lies brazenly (e.g., about the ethics violation) and repeatedly (e.g. about the bridge to nowhere). She continues to pressure Monegan, even after being warned that the pressure is inappropriate. All of this suggests a pathological lack of fear or guilt (see TheraP above). This type of psychopathy is quite scary in itself. But in Palin, it is aggravated by her very strong power motivation and charisma. This combination of traits is like revving up the accelerator (the power motivation) and taking the brakes off (the lack of fear/guilt). (Bush also has the pathological lack of fear/guilt, but I don't think he is as ambitious and certainly not as charismatic). Palin's psychopathy may be further amplified by vindictiveness and lack of empathy (she seems more than willing to fire subordinates, and her use of the new baby as a stage prop in extremely loud, noisy settings is very disturbing).

I hope I'm exaggerating, but I think Palin's is the last type of personality we would want in a politician. She may crash and burn in the present election, but we need to make sure she doesn't rise from the ashes.

DougD Commented on Palin "Failed To Act"]]> by Zachary Roth

2008-10-13T17:00:10Z

I agree with Dr. Toketee rather than the ten-year-old above.

The simple finding, which is not reported in the article above, should be reported in each article so that readers don't get lost. The author dismissively claims "that's clear enough", but this is not helpful if someone doesn't read the first article. It might seem redundant, but it will only help clarify things, and there's no space limitations.

More important, the author seems to have botched the findings. The finding was that of an unlawful ethics violation in pressuring Monegan to fire Wooten, and not, as the author suggests above, in the actual firing of Monegan. The ethical violation involved the extensive pressure prior to the firing. The firing itself was legal given Alaska's authoritarian state rules.

This reporting is simply wrong and it really should be corrected.

The article above is too brief and emphasizes the idea that "Palin failed to act". This is problematic because it converges with the misleading republican spin that Sarah had nothing to do with violation and that all the pressure was applied by Todd. As "guest" points out above, the report states that Sarah, Todd, and other officials were all involved in applying the pressure (the source of the ethical violation), and not just Todd as this article suggests. This is an absolutely critical distinction given the upcoming spin campaign. Again, the reporting seems sloppy and misleading.