Jump to content

Menu

How much do you know about current news?


creekland
 Share

Recommended Posts

I got 11/12. Missed the poverty level question- I thought it was higher than it is.

 

I can't believe three percent got zero right. I mean, even if you guessed on every single one, you should get at least one or two right just by luck.

 

Or just by the process of elimination.  I know who the Israeli Prime Minister is BUT even if I hadn't presumably he isn't English, Egyptian OR A DEAD MAN. 

 

:lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 116
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Or just by the process of elimination.  I knew who the Israeli Prime Minister is BUT even if I hadn't presumably he isn't English, Egyptian OR A DEAD MAN. 

 

:lol:

 

Right - even for ones where I thought it wasn't obvious, there were usually a couple of answers that were completely absurd. Except, apparently not to everyone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I missed the poverty one - I genuinely had no clue, but was glad it was not the 25% I guessed. I guessed on the spending one - I wasn't sure if it was Social Security or interest on the debt. I certainly knew it wasn't transportation or foreign aid though. Apparently a lot of people chose foreign aid. That's one where it's like... that wrong answer reveals more about what's wrong with our level of understanding of the news. Sigh.

My choices were between the same two but I picked the wrong one (interest). I knew it wasn't either of the other two but had a feeling many people would think we spend the most on foreign aid.

 

On this quiz (which they've done before) I generally find the US questions harder because they often involve numbers (the amount of the minimum wage, the percentage of poverty, etc.) which I have a terrible head for and financial news (like the head of the fed, though that I knew...) which I don't follow so much.

 

 

The three I missed were numbers, two of which were percents. Number stats don't stay in my head. I pay attention to when those things go up or down, but rarely remember the actual numbers.

 

I knew the minimum wage answer because, 1. I've been following stories of attempts to raise it. 2. Ds had a summer job that actually paid a bit more than minimum wage. Also, Florida's minimum wage is higher than the federal minimum.

 

Ok, I find it a little disappointing that fewer than 1/5 women know that the Fed currently has its first ever woman as the chair.

I knew that one. :)

 

 

I am disappointed that men scored better than women on everything except the minimum wage question. My guess is that more women have first hand knowledge of the minimum wage :(

Yes, that was disapppointing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am disappointed that men scored better than women on everything except the minimum wage question. My guess is that more women have first hand knowledge of the minimum wage :(

You'd think but then women were less likely to know the poverty rate. The news they asked about is primarily concerned with finance and national security. I would bet that older college graduates working in those areas are most likely to be male.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am disappointed that men scored better than women on everything except the minimum wage question. My guess is that more women have first hand knowledge of the minimum wage :(

 

It surprised me both that men knew more and that Republicans generally knew more.

 

I think I just have a number of well-educated women in my circle - and many who lean more left than right.

 

Hubby's circle probably contains more of the men/right, so I guess his circle is more representative than mine - pending how well they could answer this quiz, that is.  I don't think either of us plan on asking IRL, but I suspect my circle would do quite well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I only had 1 wrong, the gov't spending one, which I expected to answer "national defense", but that wasn't a choice. The debt is so high and SS payments so meager, I was sure it was the debt.

 

I actually can't stand watching or following the news. I want to know what's going on in the world, but prefer to spend the majority of my free time learning about human interest stories, etc.

 

My solution is to listen to NPR's "Here and Now" every day while doing dishes and cooking dinner. It gives me the general run-down on the news of the day, with first-person accounts of those directly involved or affected, helping to connect the headlines to real people.

 

I spend the rest of the day with On Point, Ted Radio Hour, This American Life, A Way With Words, etc.

 

So, interested in what is going on in people's lives around the world, but definitely not a news junkie. And I got 11/12 right. Hmm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not a news junkie now. Find me a homeschooling mom who has time to be a news junkie! I would say I've been a print news junkie in the past. I have never been much for TV news. In fact consistently my *only* dose of TV news is watching presidential election returns every 4 years at a friend's party. Obviously I see snippets here and there at the airport or in waiting rooms but nothing at home or anything like that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10/12 here. I missed two that were us specific though I managed to guess the percentage ones correctly. My first guess for Dakota was correct but then I thought it was far too obvious.

 

Like others if it was a celebrity quiz or a face guessing quiz or something I would be terrible. I also have to thank the hive for keeping me informed. I've lost count of how many things I've read here before on the news.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My solution is to listen to NPR's "Here and Now" every day while doing dishes and cooking dinner. It gives me the general run-down on the news of the day, with first-person accounts of those directly involved or affected, helping to connect the headlines to real people.

.

Another recommendation is the BBC Global News podcast. It's updated twice a day; I try to catch it first thing while I unload the dishwasher and the coffee brews. Probably more newsy than the NPR broadcast, but BBC still seems to understand human interest stories.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

...I listen to one or two NPR affiliates about 2 hours a day (mostly in the morning while cooking breakfast and doing chores and often while driving).  I listen to a few news related podcasts, mostly Radio Lab and Tavis Smiley. If I missed something I hear about it on Wait Wait Don't Tell Me. 

 

:lol: My brother's lived in Singapore since forever.  His only sources of US-specific news are WWDTM, Car Talk, and Jon Stewart.  He claims it gets the job done just fine.

 

 

I got two wrong -- North Dakota and US debt v. SS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I got 50% correct. Shame! Many were US-specific, and wanting specific numbers. However, in defense of myself...I would have done better 10 years ago (before kids and hs). Then, I had time to read the paper well, and watch TV news, and listen to news on the radio. Now, I don't watch TV and listen to radio news because I don't want to have to tell my 8 yo what "raped and murdered" means, etc. Or have her worried about ebola. Etc. I was terrified that the Russians were going to to come and take us over after dropping nuclear bombs when I was a child thanks to watching the evening news. Yes, I could read it all online, but that takes time. I'd rather be reading other things. My theory on it is, when something really important happens, I'll hear about it or DH will tell me, without all the little details. I need to know that there is unrest in Syria and the Ukraine. The minimum wage is relevant info. But I don't have to know every tiny detail of everything that I used to, when I could put on the TV all the time in the house. I find that I'm less anxious about world events too, because I don't know about all the things that could or might happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, I find it a little disappointing that fewer than 1/5 women know that the Fed currently has its first ever woman as the chair.

I got it right bc I knew she is the chair. I didn't know she was the first woman chair and woukdnt really care about it. I suppose there was probably hype about her being the first woman and I would have been, "Blahblahblah don't care, quit yapping about her being a woman and tell me why she is a good candidate for the job..." And flip the channel if they didn't get to that part fairly quick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I missed two - both American... I guess more are about American news than other, but it's folks not knowing some of the others that bugs me more so perhaps that's why I harped on it.

 

I thought they were trying to trick us on the spending one since Social Security is technically its own funding - not general tax dollars - so I guessed interest on the debt.

 

Then I got the percent below the poverty line wrong. I guessed too high. I was happy to be wrong on that one!

 

But how can anyone not know about ISIS/ISIL at this point?

I got those wrong, too. I also knew that Greenspan was out, but could not think of who was chair now.

 

I agree with you that it's quite worrisome when the general population knows so little about issues of major importance. I always think (though I think the polls themselves are mean-spirited), but the "man on the street" style questions, where ever-day folks are shown photos of the Speaker of the House, say, and have no idea who that is, but they can identify Snookie or some other dopey celeb. Or a name like "Dick Chaney" rings no bells for them.

 

I do grow weary of the news sometimes and I just plead with DH to switch to something more immediate, like traffic for the day, but OTOH, I do not want to grow so out of touch with current events that I wouldn't know what ISIS is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I got those wrong, too. I also knew that Greenspan was out, but could not think of who was chair now.

 

 

The options for that question were Greenspan, Yellen and two sitting SCOTUS justices.  It would have been more difficult to have the choices be the last 4 fed chairs- Yellen, Bernake (which I can recall but not clearly NOT spell!), Greenspan and Volcker. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The options for that question were Greenspan, Yellen and two sitting SCOTUS justices. It would have been more difficult to have the choices be the last 4 fed chairs- Yellen, Bernake (which I can recall but not clearly NOT spell!), Greenspan and Volcker.

Eh, yeah, I guess. I knew the one woman was a Supreme Court Justice and I knew Greenspan was former. I never got the memo that the chair was a woman now, or the first woman, so the name Yellen was not meaningful to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I got it right bc I knew she is the chair. I didn't know she was the first woman chair and woukdnt really care about it. I suppose there was probably hype about her being the first woman and I would have been, "Blahblahblah don't care, quit yapping about her being a woman and tell me why she is a good candidate for the job..." And flip the channel if they didn't get to that part fairly quick.

 

I think the fact that we now have reached a point in history where a woman COULD even have the requisite education and experience to become Fed chair is more than hype.  That's a pretty big cultural shift.  When I was born, there were probably no American women qualified for that job (PhD in econ + 35 years high level related experience) at all.  I recall more news discussing her qualifications than her gender, including a Yale PhD and a stint as Fed Vice Chair.  Firsts are news and I don't think that is for nothing.  The fact that about 1/3 of PhDs in Economics today are earned by women is great but the truth is that prior to about 1970 you could count the number of women earning PhDs in Economics on your fingers. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The options for that question were Greenspan, Yellen and two sitting SCOTUS justices.  It would have been more difficult to have the choices be the last 4 fed chairs- Yellen, Bernake (which I can recall but not clearly NOT spell!), Greenspan and Volcker. 

 

Yes, I completely agree.  I had no idea who Yellen was, but I knew who the others were and got it by process of elimination.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like NPR for pretty much everything except news, and even then they're definitely tolerable to this staunch conservative and much more thoughtful with world news selections than any of the broadcast news networks. But less is definitely more - one can remain informed and not totally burn out, but it takes active restraint and blocking out the most readily available and asily obtainable US news sources unfortunately ;)

I recommend not having a TV :-)

 

We have been TV free for 24 years. I get my news from cnn online+ the website of a German news magazine (5-10 minutes daily), NPR (once or twice a week I catch the news in the car), BBC (on occasional longer car drives), The Economist (weekly- but I don't read the entire magazine every week)

 

I do not find it time consuming or difficult to be informed and fail to understand people who actively avoid information about the world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We have a TV but it's a screen for accessing content we want, like DVDs, a few Wii games and streaming services like Netflix via their Wii apps. We haven't ever had cable or TV reception excepting a few short months we moved my mom in with us before she went to hospice. She was used to having it and we got it to make her as comfortable as possible.

 

I think TV news is a

horrible way to get news. I believe for instance that Fox News and MSNBC viewers score poorly on news quizzes.

http://www.forbes.com/fdc/welcome_mjx_mobile.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, I completely agree. I had no idea who Yellen was, but I knew who the others were and got it by process of elimination.

My husband just took this quiz and that's how he got that one right too. He said aloud, "former chair, Chief Justice, first Hispanic Justice, ok Yellen."

 

He got 9/12 but he's the absolute opposite of a world/political news junkie. His main news content is all centered medicine, science and IT.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I read a headline today that made me want to throw up, throw my laptop out a window, and swear off news forever...and I'm part of the media. People can be so vile. :( Reading the news (I don't watch TV news) can seem like too much at times, but I can't imagine not staying informed about what's happening in the world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I got 8 of 12. I hang my head in shame.

 

I do have to admit that even on the days I try to listen to the news much of it sounds like blah blah blah to me.

LOL. We were listening to NPR in the van and they were discussing banning cell phones in cars, even hand free use. The questions was how is it any different than having the radio on and the guy said, but you are talking back to and thinking of responses to the radio. And I shouted at the radio and the same time as two of my kids, "They obviously don't know me/mom!"

 

Most of it sounds like Blahblahblah to me too bc I get soooo frustrated with the reporters never asking what I think are real questions. It's always stupid lame questions that I feel sorry the person they are talking to has to explain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I feel like I stay generally informed. I mean....I don't want to be like the girl in my office.....

 

I came back from lunch and said, "hey did you hear they caught the Unibomber?" She said, "what is a Unibomber?"

 

I was gobsmacked that someone could be living in America and not have heard about the Unibomber.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most of it sounds like Blahblahblah to me too bc I get soooo frustrated with the reporters never asking what I think are real questions. It's always stupid lame questions that I feel sorry the person they are talking to has to explain.

I get frustrated because i think the topics are lame oftentimes. I am often saying, "who cares? Can we get to some news that matters???"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted Today, 08:19 PM

Danielle - I hear you! Do you have a preferred worldview angle on the news? If you're more centrist/left I think you'd find NPR and the Economist are great sources, both, if you don't already get them. I decided a few years ago that podcasts were the way to go for the news in the car, because the chatter available was quite obnoxious and I hate commercials

I do, but I don't think there is much out there that doesn't slant away from me in one way or the other. I get most of my news in the morning, when dh and I watch. It doesn't really suit me well, because I don't love that particular news outlet anymore, but DH still does. He will flip back to local news when I ask, but I just put up with the world news channel he wants to watch.

 

It's a bit of a sore spot, really, because we have moved away from each other on many political topics. I don't like to argue about politics, either. I just wish he would lighten up and see that there are other valid viewpoints in the world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We got the same score and it sounds like we got similar ones wrong!  How ironic.

 

Me three.  Though the minimum wage one (which I got wrong) was almost the answer for the minimum wage in my state (the number was slightly different).  And since I hear a lot about the minimum wage in my state in the news, that is what I responded to.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Npr is doing their annual money beg this week. And bragging on how diverse their reporting is from left to right. Bah. No. It really isn't.

 

I don't even WANT left or right.

 

Just give me the facts please.

 

I don't think there are ANY news sources left at all that do that anymore.

 

It's frustrating to no end.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I missed the same one, and with the same incorrect answer, for the same reason. :D

I missed that one, for the same reason, as well. And I was waffling between Iran and Saudi Arabia for the Shia/Sunni question and buggered that. I don't even know why... I know that. (And I'm not sure, honestly, why I know that)

 

What's really sad is that I rarely listen to the news. Mostly, I only listen to Marketplace regularly. (Which is probably why I know about the oil boom, minimum wage, etc)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The idea that a news source CAN have no bias is silly and nearly uniquely American.

 

NPR is NOT to Rush style talk radio what MSNBC is to Fox News for instance.

 

Given the data on NPR listeners I linked above being generally well informed and much more well informed than the viewers of the politically slanted cable news networks, I think they come pretty close to covering the factual news that matters. And best of all basically no Kardashians, little sensational crime coverage etc. IME their more liberal elements are also shows their affiliate stations carry which are pretty clearly editorial in nature- like Tavis Smiley. People forget that NPR is a content provider to local stations and much of what you hear on your local station isn't from NPR. Morning Editon, All Things Considered, Weekend Edition, Here and Now are all pretty much just "here's what happened" type shows with a little arts and entertainment dabbled in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I feel like I stay generally informed. I mean....I don't want to be like the girl in my office.....

 

I came back from lunch and said, "hey did you hear they caught the Unibomber?" She said, "what is a Unibomber?"

 

I was gobsmacked that someone could be living in America and not have heard about the Unibomber.

 

I try not to be this way with true news.  I always watch the news on TV in the morning (local - NBC affiliate) as I want to know what's going on locally.  If I didn't, I could easily be lost at school.  I also check news headlines online using various sources (including Fox) to try to get multiple stories.  I'm usually doing this at the same time (multi-tasking).  Checking the Hive can help too.  ;)

 

However, I mentally skip over all pop culture stuff.  It just isn't even minimally interesting to me.  I've learned to be quiet when people are talking about Lady Gaga or Kardashians or ???  I couldn't pick them out of a lineup of two.

 

I did make a mistake of asking what twerking was when I heard it - and saw everyone look at me in disbelief that I wouldn't know.  I'm regretful that I asked, but not at all regretful that I didn't know.

 

Once in a while I try to catch a headline or two about sports - like who's in the Superbowl or things like that, but that's all I do is check scores/games via headlines.  I have no interest in watching sports aside from a Va Tech game (our Alma mater), The World Cup (soccer), the Triple Crown (horse racing), or the Olympics.  Hubby adds in sailboat racing when he can find it on TV.

 

I have no regrets about having a TV or satellite service though.  We tape oodles of shows we like to watch - travel shows, history shows, older shows, comedies, and a couple of newer shows - and watch them at our leisure.  Granted there are thousands of shows I'd never watch, but we enjoy what we do watch as long as we can do it on our schedule.

 

I don't even WANT left or right.

 

Just give me the facts please.

 

I don't think there are ANY news sources left at all that do that anymore.

 

It's frustrating to no end.

 

I don't think this ever happened.

 

Come to the Gettysburg National Military Park museum and read the newspapers from back then.  Their stories are more wildly different than today's left/right.

 

It's part of why when I read, I look at multiple sources.  Not only do I see the view from many sides, it helps me understand the overall issue so much better - and relate to others who hold those views.  Plus, different sources see different things as news at times.  Sources often don't report that which they disagree with.

 

I have no regrets not keeping up with Hollywood.  I can't fathom not keeping up on what's going on in the world at least to some extent.  But we also don't have news on 24/7.  I catch up once or twice a day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's part of why when I read, I look at multiple sources. Not only do I see the view from many sides, it helps me understand the overall issue so much better - and relate to others who hold those views. Plus, different sources see different things as news at times. Sources often don't report that which they disagree with.

 

I have no regrets not keeping up with Hollywood. I can't fathom not keeping up on what's going on in the world at least to some extent. But we also don't have news on 24/7. I catch up once or twice a day.

It's part of why I like to read newsy threads here, at WTM. It gives me perspectives from many different people, sometimes not Americans. It is rather like getting news from multiple sources, frequently with very astute commentary. I swear, this community includes some very intelligent people; it is better than anything on TV!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


Ă—
Ă—
  • Create New...