After analyzing 20 years’ worth of data, Yale University’s Dr. Justin Farrell has found that there is a connection between corporate funding and messages that are likely to polarize and cast doubt on the issue of climate change. Not only that, but those organizations that got their money from the corporate sector were also more likely to be influenced on what they actually write. In other words, funders were swaying the actual content of the climate countermovement.
His work looked at two separate data sets. The first was a network of over 4,500 people who had links to 164 organizations that have been skeptical of climate change. The second was a collection of every single text that these same organizations have produced about climate change from 1993 to 2013, and included almost 50,000 policy statements, press releases, articles, and published papers. Dr. Farrell’s overall conclusion was that corporate funding has been influencing the actual language and thematic content of polarizing messages.
While this is unsurprising news to many, the study has been able to highlight in stark terms how corporate powers have been making it look as if there is more of a debate around climate change than actually exists, muddying the waters and leading to public uncertainty and policy stalemate. “The contrarian efforts have been so effective for the fact that they have made it difficult for ordinary Americans to even know who to trust,” Dr. Farrell, whose research has been published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, told The Washington Post.
No cure available. Just subdue the affected patient with 2 aspirins and 48 hours of Fox news.
I see from the post's rating that 2 people are in favor of blaming all muslims and punishing the innocent. Given Fox news allusion, these people are likely to be right-wingers.
The Gov. have been impeccable is preventing terrorist attacks on US soil since 9-11.
The recent shooting massacre is now determined as a terrorist attack, but the structure of the attack is a common occurrence in the US, due to the 2nd Amendment. So the Gov.'s record on preventing terrorist attacks is easy considered as intact.
A Public Policy Poll asked GOP primary voters if they would support bombing Agrabah, the fictional country from the 1993 Disney film Aladdin. 30% said yes while only 13 percent oppose bombing a nation that doesn't exist. 19% of Democrats said they would favor bombing Agrabah.
It was the Founding Fathers that "threw" GOD out of the schools.
When will people realize that it is Sanders that's the current DNC frontrunner.
Fancy calling the Founding Fathers tards. Surely thats pure treason.
A new study shows that negative ads targeting President Obama in 2008 depicted him with very dark skin, and that these images would have appealed to some viewers’ racial biases.
The finding reinforces charges that some Republican politicians seek to win votes by implying support for racist views and ethnic hierarchies, without voicing those prejudices explicitly. The purported tactic is often called “dog-whistle politics” — just as only canines can hear a dog whistle, only prejudiced voters are aware of the racist connotations of a politician’s statement, according to the theory.
Bias in the Flesh
Skin Complexion and Stereotype Consistency in Political Campaigns
Solomon Messing*, Maria Jabon and Ethan Plaut
Oxford Journals, Social Sciences Public Opinion Quarterly, Advance Access10.1093/poq/nfv046