Ich bin kürzlich auf diese Karte von „Morning Consult“ gestoßen, bei der Amerikaner auf eine Karte zeigten, um den Iran genau zu bestimmen, und laut der Umfrage können nur 23 % der Amerikaner auf den Iran zeigen. Aber wenn man sich die Karte ansieht, kann man nicht erkennen, dass es sich um eine echte Umfrage handelt, oder die Leute, die sie gemacht haben, haben getrollt. Mehr als 30 Menschen sagten allein beim Anblick, es sei im Meer, und eine gute Minderheit verwies auf Amerika. Nach allem, was ich gesehen und recherchiert habe, handelt es sich bei „Morning Consultant“ um eine überwiegend sachliche, etwas voreingenommene Nachrichtenquelle, und diese Karte wurde von vielen Leuten als echter Test für alle Amerikaner vermarktet. Kann mir jemand sagen, ob es sich hier um eine sachliche Karte handelt oder ob meine amerikanischen Landsleute wirklich so dumm sind? Oder gibt es vielleicht einen anderen Subreddit, den ich nach meiner Antwort fragen kann?
Von Additional-Listen627
18 Kommentare
It most likely is dependent on how the survey was conducted. An anonymous, Internet survey on social media or a click-bait website may not yield good results.
If you tied it to some meaningful reward people may be less likely to click in an odd place for a laugh or troll and actually take time to think about it before pointing. (e.g., Find Iran or get thrown off the boat.)
Morning consult is generally a reliable source. However, just like with any polls, you get some troll answers. With that said, it seems likely that the people who don’t know where Iran is are those most likely to troll, so even if you can’t take the data literally, the general conclusion is probably accurate.
When good methodology is used to make a diagram, the creators are usually eager to show off it off. When poor methodology is used, they try to hide that fact. As far as I know, this map has never been presented with its methodology. Take that how you will.
There’s literally dots in the ocean….
Probably. A lot of people genuinely suck at geography
I refuse to believe that somebody thought Iran was in Norfolk.
I think the consensus with this was that it’s not showing dot density, so you’re seeing 20 people who picked the US to troll, 23% of 2,000 who clicked inside Iran (460), and likely 500-1,000 in the immediate vicinity, the Middle East, Afghanistan, etc.
A lot of people were trolling. It’s really that simple.
I think the problem is that Iran so far away.
Missouri is a lot like Iran. Oppressed women, quite „religious“ and fairly warm.
Maybe Trump said to bomb Iran thinking it was in Greenland, and now he’s too embarassed to admit it! 😮
Why is the I-35 corridor so clearly visible on here? What is Kansas hiding from us?
This is why basically any survey someone presents is something I don’t trust. I wouldn’t be surprised if many of the people wouldn’t know Iran from Iraq, but most of these results are from people who think it’s funny to give weird results.
There’s this survey ecnomy where people are paid to do surveys, and doing them manually would take too much effort for too little gain, so many people automate it with scripts that just randomly selects. This might be how the nonsensical datapoints are collected.
I… hope not. Jesus. A large number of those dots are in america….
If recipients consist of just the USA, then I believe it’s real, for sure, 100%, no lies, no cappin‘.
If not… Then we are truly fucked.
[Lizardman’s Constant](https://slatestarcodex.com/2013/04/12/noisy-poll-results-and-reptilian-muslim-climatologists-from-mars/) is a thing, people who answer polls maliciously or randomly. I don’t think it accounts for 77%, but the pile of dots right in the middle of the USA was definitely people trying to make a snarky point.
Also, I’d give partial credit for the people who at least landed in the Middle East. They know where the shit is going down even if they haven’t double-checked a map recently.
A lot of these are street surveys or online bs where people just click somewhere to be done with it. There’s also a lot of trolls and a lot of people not paying attention to the question. There may also be issues with precision.