I refer you (and other readers) to the discussions following these sectional abstracts:

Page 16:

Misperceptions According to Level of Attention to News
While it would seem that misperceptions are derived from a failure to pay attention to the news, overall, those who pay greater attention to the news are no less likely to have misperceptions. Among those who primarily watch Fox, those who pay more attention are more likely to have misperceptions. Only those who mostly get their news from print media, and to some extent those who primarily watch CNN, have fewer misperceptions as they pay more attention.

Page 17:

Misperceptions According to Political Position
The level of misperceptions varies according to Americans’ political positions. Supporters of the President are more likely to have misperceptions. Republicans are also more likely, but this appears to be a function of support for the President. Misperceptions are not only the result of political bias: a significant number of people who oppose the president have misperceptions and within the groups that support or oppose the President, misperceptions vary sharply according to news source.

and this (not an abstract), from page 18:

Political Bias Not Full Explanation
It is tempting to assume that political bias can explain variations in misperceptions and can account for variations in those who get their news from various news sources. However, this idea is contradicted by the data on several fronts.

Supporters of a Democratic nominee also have significant misperceptions. Almost a third—31%--did believe that the US has found clear evidence Saddam Hussein was working closely with al-Qaeda. If this misperception was simply a function of a political position, one would not find it held by such a large proportion of those who do not intend to vote for Bush.

Also, while Bush supporters are more likely than supporters of a Democratic nominee to have misperceptions, for both groups, respondents’ choices of a news source make a significant difference in how prevalent misperceptions are. For example, 78% of Bush supporters who watch Fox News thought the US has found evidence of a direct link to al-Qaeda, but only 50% of Bush supporters in the PBS and NPR audience thought this. On the other side, 48% of Democrat supporters who watch Fox News thought the US has found evidence of a direct link to al-Qaeda, but not one single respondent who is a Democrat supporter and relies on PBS and NPR for network news thought the US had found such evidence.

[alll from the PIPA report; see my link in the first post of this thread]

And now... back to Tom:
Again, this entire survey measures only one thing really accurately: how closely the respondents agree with the views of NPR/PBS.

On the contrary, the majority results indicate close agreement with Fox News' "fair and balanced" (and egregious*) reportage, regardless of the party affiliation of the respondents, whom they might support in the next election, or - most importantly - whether or not the respondents agreed with/supported the war itself.

Oh yeah. There are no socialists at NPR or PBS*. Maybe you can add that to the list of misperceptions on the next test.

Wave a couple of sheets of blank paper and tell us about that list you have, Tom . . .

____________________________________________________________________
[ * - egregious: (adj) Conspicuously bad or offensive. See synonyms at flagrant. [American Heritage Dictionary, 4th Ed.]