Liberals Doctor the Data

[del]

Does this smack of the same kind of procedures the ‘warmists’ dabble in?

Uh...Arbitron has apparently failed to disclose their records and data. You want such things released from scientists regarding global warming but not from a corporation?

I feel that you are, as usual, full of shit.

Any post beginning with the oh so hyperbolic "Uh..." is, as in this case- to use your low level language, "full of shit."

I know it's early for you, but try to follow these points:

1. conservatives use actual data to decide how to act.

2. Arbitron is a private company,not YET owned by the government

3. No one is forced to use the services of Arbitron.

4. Democrats have developed 'Identity Politics,' behaving in an obsequious manner to certain selected groups, those they have determined will keep them in power.

5. PPM is more accurate than the diary system for determining data.

6.The effect of accurate data is to impact negatively on the protected (Democrat) group.

7. Government:"we better threaten the private company to see that they doctor the data."


Have someone explain this to you.

conservatives are no more or less likely to act rationally than liberals.
see: palin, sarah

arbitron data is used to set advertising rates in the electronic media.
that media is no more forced to use it than a trucking company is forced to buy diesel.

republicans have used identity politics to at least the same extent as democrats.
see: evangelicals, whack job and activists, antiabortion.

have someone explain this to you.

 

[PoliticalChic]

The scientists in question in England also work for a private university.

Your entire premise is a failure.

Hope your feelings aren't too badly hurt, PC.

Usually your deflections are not as transparent.

Slowing down?

It is clear that you cannot defeat, not even compete with the thrust of the OP.


Try again?

Technology improved the accuracy of the Arbitron rating system.

Minority stations were hurt by the new system.

Democrats and the less principled (read: Ravi) sprung to their defense.

 

[uscitizen]

1. conservatives use actual data to decide how to act.

LOL, yeah actual data like some guy named 8ball or ignore an official report on yellowcake and go with the spin in the state of the union message?

 

[PoliticalChic]

The Left Hates real science, they have no stomach for it; they only like hearing the sound of their own stupid ideas repeated back to them

CF, I have a pet theory, that is similar in import to your post:
Libs live in an echo chamber, discussing mostly with folks of their ilk, and hearing only lib ideas...
The MSM and broadcast TV validate these same ideas.

My theory is that libs are not bad people, it's just that we on the right have considered both sides and the libs basically get only the lib view.

Ever hear of the Hundredth Monkey Theory? Has to do with the critical mass needed to made a certain new behavioral trait standard throughout the group.

The 100th (Hundredth) Monkey - story about social change (wowzone.com) WOW Poetry, lyrics, music, stories, classics Wish Only Well

Modern Libruls are proof of the 100 Communist Monkey Theory, they have no idea that they parrot anti-American crap on a 24/7 basis, even going as far as to call the Iraq War "Lossssst!" It's group behavior at its finest

So, by that theory, if enough of us present the other side, some will see the error of their ways?

Unfortunately, that appears not to be the case with some of the 'older' ones- too late for them?

 

[uscitizen]

LOL, the younger ones just think they have it figured out.
They will learn.

 

[Ravi]

The scientists in question in England also work for a private university.

Your entire premise is a failure.

Hope your feelings aren't too badly hurt, PC.

Usually your deflections are not as transparent.

Slowing down?

It is clear that you cannot defeat, not even compete with the thrust of the OP.


Try again?

Technology improved the accuracy of the Arbitron rating system.

Minority stations were hurt by the new system.

Democrats and the less principled (read: Ravi) sprung to their defense.

Then why won't Arbitron release the data? You want transparency in one place but not in another. Silly. Your premise is silly and so are you.

 

[PoliticalChic]

The scientists in question in England also work for a private university.

Your entire premise is a failure.

Hope your feelings aren't too badly hurt, PC.

Usually your deflections are not as transparent.

Slowing down?

It is clear that you cannot defeat, not even compete with the thrust of the OP.


Try again?

Technology improved the accuracy of the Arbitron rating system.

Minority stations were hurt by the new system.

Democrats and the less principled (read: Ravi) sprung to their defense.

Then why won't Arbitron release the data? You want transparency in one place but not in another. Silly. Your premise is silly and so are you.

Why should they?

Most private corporations won't release proprietary information.

For your edification: Information that is not public knowledge (such as test results or trade secrets), conveyed by a manufacturer to an external party due to its position in the procurement process. The recipient is generally duty bound to desist from making unauthorized use of the proprietary information.

You have inadvertently exposed the warped thinking of the liberal: big government solutions over private enterprise, the collective over the individual, equality over liberty.

 

[Ravi]

Usually your deflections are not as transparent.

Slowing down?

It is clear that you cannot defeat, not even compete with the thrust of the OP.


Try again?

Technology improved the accuracy of the Arbitron rating system.

Minority stations were hurt by the new system.

Democrats and the less principled (read: Ravi) sprung to their defense.

Then why won't Arbitron release the data? You want transparency in one place but not in another. Silly. Your premise is silly and so are you.

Why should they?

Most private corporations won't release proprietary information.

For your edification: Information that is not public knowledge (such as test results or trade secrets), conveyed by a manufacturer to an external party due to its position in the procurement process. The recipient is generally duty bound to desist from making unauthorized use of the proprietary information.

You have inadvertently exposed the warped thinking of the liberal: big government solutions over private enterprise, the collective over the individual, equality over liberty.

You're really stretching.

The ratings affect advertising dollars. If the radio stations are suspicious of the data they have a right to know that the information isn't doctored.

That's all there is to it.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Does this smack of the same kind of procedures the ‘warmists’ dabble in?

Uh...Arbitron has apparently failed to disclose their records and data. You want such things released from scientists regarding global warming but not from a corporation?

I feel that you are, as usual, full of shit.

Any post beginning with the oh so hyperbolic "Uh..." is, as in this case- to use your low level language, "full of shit."

I know it's early for you, but try to follow these points:

1. conservatives use actual data to decide how to act.

2. Arbitron is a private company,not YET owned by the government

3. No one is forced to use the services of Arbitron.

4. Democrats have developed 'Identity Politics,' behaving in an obsequious manner to certain selected groups, those they have determined will keep them in power.

5. PPM is more accurate than the diary system for determining data.

6.The effect of accurate data is to impact negatively on the protected (Democrat) group.

7. Government:"we better threaten the private company to see that they doctor the data."


Have someone explain this to you.

Which actual data did conservatives use to oppose stem cell research?
To invade and occupy Iraq?
To deny climate change?
To oppose health care reform?
[data is not a slogan, though not so to many on the right]

Which actual data do conservatives use to prove a private sector approach is always better than a public sector approach?
What rational do conservatives use to accept deficit spending between 2001 and 2007, but since the Democrats supplanted the Republicans in power, deficit spending has become evil?

 

[PoliticalChic]

1. conservatives use actual data to decide how to act.

LOL, yeah actual data like some guy named 8ball or ignore an official report on yellowcake and go with the spin in the state of the union message?

Based on your inability to resposd to the thrust of the OP,

Ii seems, then, that we can agree that the following points are beyond reproach:

Technology improved the accuracy of the Arbitron rating system.

Minority stations were hurt by the new system.

Democrats and the less principled (read: Ravi) sprung to their defense.

 

[PoliticalChic]

He was refuting your opening statements by making a point that conservatives will in fact form policy based on feeling. He succeeded.

Bogus.

His post: "Yep the cons were sure of the mushroom clouds and WMD's"

All available intelligence data, from evey nation that contributed same, as well Democrats such as President Clinton informed the policy.

Even Joe Wilson, who fabricated the NYTimes Op-Ed where he claimed there was no yellow cake connection, agreed that Iraq had sent agents for purchase in Chad, thus contributed to the data.

Data informs policy.


"The famous “16 words” in President Bush’s Jan. 28, 2003 State of the Union address turn out to have a basis in fact after all, according to two recently released investigations in the US and Britain."
•A separate report by the US Senate Intelligence Committee said July 7 that the US also had similar information from “a number of intelligence reports,” a fact that was classified at the time Bush spoke.
•Ironically, former Ambassador Joseph Wilson, who later called Bush’s 16 words a “lie”, supplied information that the Central Intelligence Agency took as confirmation that Iraq may indeed have been seeking uranium from Niger. "

FactCheck.org: Bush's "16 Words" on Iraq & Uranium: He May Have Been Wrong But He Wasn't Lying

In summary, both of you are misinformed, and neither has directed their guns on the OP.

 

[Ravi]

Why don't you explain to us, PC, why no one has the right to know if Arbitron's data is legit?

 

[PoliticalChic]

Then why won't Arbitron release the data? You want transparency in one place but not in another. Silly. Your premise is silly and so are you.

Why should they?

Most private corporations won't release proprietary information.

For your edification: Information that is not public knowledge (such as test results or trade secrets), conveyed by a manufacturer to an external party due to its position in the procurement process. The recipient is generally duty bound to desist from making unauthorized use of the proprietary information.

You have inadvertently exposed the warped thinking of the liberal: big government solutions over private enterprise, the collective over the individual, equality over liberty.

You're really stretching.

The ratings affect advertising dollars. If the radio stations are suspicious of the data they have a right to know that the information isn't doctored.

That's all there is to it.

Ah, once again a liberal blaming others for their flaws.

Whatever the view of Arbirton data, no one is forced to use it.

Only the government is threatening force, the liberal answer to discussion.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Why don't you explain to us, PC, why no one has the right to know if Arbitron's data is legit?

Us?

The use of 'us' is generally restricted to
1.Royalty
2. Newspaper editors
3. Those with a tapeworm

Best wishes for your recovery.

As for Arbitrion data, the industry finds it to be accurate.

That is why minority stations, Ed Towns, and Raver are squealing like stuck pigs.

 

[PoliticalChic]

1. conservatives use actual data to decide how to act.

LOL, yeah actual data like some guy named 8ball or ignore an official report on yellowcake and go with the spin in the state of the union message?

I believe that post #31 is dispositive, and puts you in your place.

 

[Ravi]

Why don't you explain to us, PC, why no one has the right to know if Arbitron's data is legit?

Us?

The use of 'us' is generally restricted to
1.Royalty
2. Newspaper editors
3. Those with a tapeworm

Best wishes for your recovery.

As for Arbitrion data, the industry finds it to be accurate.

That is why minority stations, Ed Towns, and Raver are squealing like stuck pigs.

In other words, you can't answer the question. Got it.

 

[Truthmatters]

Oh so now the right is claiming to Love science ?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAGHAHAHAHAH

 

[Dr.Traveler]

Libs live in an echo chamber, discussing mostly with folks of their ilk, and hearing only lib ideas...

You've turned a major blind eye on the Right side of the spectrum. Anyone that listens only to Fox and Right Wing Radio has chosen to live only an echo chamber. Those sources are incredibly biased. They're just as bad as folks that live in the similar left wing echo chamber.

That's why I'm willing to turn on the Radio and listen to Talk AM as well as turn on the TV at night and watch the Daily Show. Its why my news sources are diverse and include more media outlets as well as both sides of the spectrum here in the States. Otherwise, you get only one story.

As for the rest of the OP, I think the problem is that you've turned a blind eye towards the fact that every side of the political spectrum, and even the typically apolitical groups, are guilty of focusing on data that supports their point. For an example: Consider the tobacco industry and research on lung cancer. Do you really consider those guys liberals?

 

[PoliticalChic]

Libs live in an echo chamber, discussing mostly with folks of their ilk, and hearing only lib ideas...

You've turned a major blind eye on the Right side of the spectrum. Anyone that listens only to Fox and Right Wing Radio has chosen to live only an echo chamber. Those sources are incredibly biased. They're just as bad as folks that live in the similar left wing echo chamber.

That's why I'm willing to turn on the Radio and listen to Talk AM as well as turn on the TV at night and watch the Daily Show. Its why my news sources are diverse and include more media outlets as well as both sides of the spectrum here in the States. Otherwise, you get only one story.

As for the rest of the OP, I think the problem is that you've turned a blind eye towards the fact that every side of the political spectrum, and even the typically apolitical groups, are guilty of focusing on data that supports their point. For an example: Consider the tobacco industry and research on lung cancer. Do you really consider those guys liberals?

My theory about the leftist board members is that they are not evil, nor even misguided, it's just that they are not aware of all the material that we on the right are.

Your statement: "That's why I'm willing to turn on the Radio and listen to Talk AM as well as turn on the TV at night and watch the Daily Show"

Good point! More should do same.

It's one of the virtues of this board.

I have heard several mainstream broadcast media, anchors on the major channels, act surprised when a subject that roils us on the right, such as the news about ACORN, or questions about huge weaknesses in ObamaCare, and I believe that they are actually unaware of these questions.

Check this out:
"Stephanopoulos appeared on The Sean Hannity Show and New York radio station WOR's The Steve Malzberg Show, where both Hannity and Malzberg suggested to Stephanopoulos that he ask Obama about Ayers."
Right-wing radio hosts suggested "damn good" Ayers question to Stephanopoulos day before Dem debate | Media Matters for America

He didn't know about Ayers!!
If all were as familiar with our concerns, if they were covered by mainstream press and news outlets, everyone would be pretty much right wing.

 

[rdean]

A major difference between the worldviews of liberals and conservatives, is this:
For conservatives, data informs policy.
For liberals, feeling is as good as knowing.

Case in point: Arbitron is a radio audience research company in the United States which collects listener data on radio audiences similar to that collected by Nielsen Media Research on television audiences. Arbitron collects data by selecting a random sample of a population in roughly 100 metros throughout the United States. Everyone agreeing to participate is provided a diary for each member aged 12 and older for one week.

With the interest in the collection of more accurate ratings data, Arbitron has introduced the Portable People Meter (PPM). The PPM is a wearable portable device much like a pager or cell phone, that electronically gathers inaudible codes that identify the source of a broadcast, such as a radio station.

Now what happens if the data shows a drop in listenership of minority owned stations?

Washington, DC – Chairman Edolphus “Ed” Towns (D-NY) today announced that the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee is set to hold a hearing on Wednesday, December 2, 2009 to examine Arbitron's radio audience measurement device, the Portable People Meter (PPM), and its effect on diversity in radio broadcasting. Specifically, the Committee will examine whether the PPM technology and methodology accurately measure radio audiences and whether PPM has a disproportionately negative impact on radio stations owned by minorities or targeted toward minority listeners.

Moreover, the Committee will address such factors as the effect of PPM as currency in a radio market; the importance of diversity in broadcast media; the impact of PPM on minority broadcasters and communities; and issues affecting sample quality in PPM technology.
Oversight Hearing to Examine Minority Owned Radio Stations’ Ratings Decline

So, let’s review.
If more accurate data works to the detriment of protected groups, the government will legislate that different data be used.

Does this smack of the same kind of procedures the ‘warmists’ dabble in?
Or government sponsorship of NPR?
Or government discussions of subsidies to newspapers?

Here is the difference between equality and liberty.

For conservatives, data informs policy

Sure, for conservatives, data informs policy. That's because if they don't like the truth, they just make it up.

See "the Reagan Legacy project"

See "Magical Creation"

Better yet:

Feds Set to Eliminate Water Regulations for Toxin | Wired Science | Wired.com