Slashdot Mirror


67% of Americans Use Social Media To Get Some of their News

Shan Wang, writing for Neiman Lab: Sixty-seven percent of Americans report getting some of their news via social media at some point, according to a Pew Research survey of just under 5,000 U.S. adults conducted last month and published Thursday. That overall percentage is only up slightly from 62 percent in 2016, in the run-up to the November election. But among specific demographics, using social media for news has increased: 74 percent of non-white U.S. adults now get news from social media, up from 64 percent of that group who got news that way in 2016. Fifty-five percent of Americans 50 and older say the have gotten news from social media, up from 45 percent (older people are also driving the increasing percentage of people who get news via mobile). Facebook is still the dominant social media source for news. But when Pew looked at the percentage of users on each social media platform who were using it for news, it was Twitter, Snapchat, and YouTube that saw increases (remember that user bases are vastly different sizes, from YouTube to Facebook to Tumblr to Twitter):

71 comments

  1. Well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That explains so many of the misinformed idiots I've met.

    1. Re:Well... by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      > That explains so many of the misinformed idiots I've met.

      You do realize that ALL the major media outlets publish on Facebook, right?

      It's not all just dank memes from The 98% and it's dopplegangers.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    2. Re:Well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You do realize that ALL the major media outlets publish on Facebook, right?

      You do realize that ALL the major media outlets just report on stuff from Facebook and Twitter right? Nobody actually does really reporting anymore.

      A strange loop comes to mind...

  2. Is /. social media? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Is /. social media?

    1. Re:Is /. social media? by penandpaper · · Score: 1

      I would argue that it is. Many come for the comments and discussions. /. helps facilitate those discussions by having articles to start the conversations as compared to following specific people or accounts to hear what they have to say.

    2. Re:Is /. social media? by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 1

      >> Is SlashDot social media?

      Can people add their thoughts/opinions and additional facts to the press releases, marketing blurbs and occasional actual reader submission that make up the "stories" here?

      >> Yes.

      Then...yes, SlashDot is social media. [Close: Solved]

    3. Re:Is /. social media? by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

      I would say yes also because the primary goal here is to read about the topic of the story rather than the story link itself.. there's pretty much no headline I see on Slashdot I've not already seen elsewhere.

      --
      "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    4. Re:Is /. social media? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would argue that it is. Many come for the comments and discussions. /. helps facilitate those discussions by having articles to start the conversations as compared to following specific people or accounts to hear what they have to say.

      But you didn't comment while informing us about how many times you used the bathroom today, or posting a youtube video of your cat. Most folks would consider that anti-social behavior.

    5. Re:Is /. social media? by penandpaper · · Score: 1

      My apologies. Ima go take a shit. I will be sure to post pictures for those demanding proof.

    6. Re:Is /. social media? by HornWumpus · · Score: 2

      /. is antisocial media, you festering malodorous gob.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    7. Re:Is /. social media? by penandpaper · · Score: 1

      The basement is a cold and lonely existence indeed.

    8. Re:Is /. social media? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Social media is shit. Slashdot is shit. Therefore, Slashdot is social media.

    9. Re:Is /. social media? by penandpaper · · Score: 1

      One mans shit is another mans fetish.

    10. Re:Is /. social media? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And all animals are cats.

    11. Re: Is /. social media? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And Ray Charles is God.

    12. Re:Is /. social media? by WrongMonkey · · Score: 1

      Is /. news? By the time a story hits /., it's closer to history than news.

    13. Re:Is /. social media? by hey! · · Score: 1

      But you didn't comment while informing us about how many times you used the bathroom today, or posting a youtube video of your cat.

      No, but I do have some choice comments about the uptime of my linux server.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    14. Re:Is /. social media? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Judging by the first post on this very story, yeah, probably.

    15. Re:Is /. social media? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      He's a spy. Blow him up.

    16. Re:Is /. social media? by penandpaper · · Score: 1

      lol, thanks for the giggle.

      Would you be able to comment on emacs?

    17. Re:Is /. social media? by mjwx · · Score: 1

      Is /. social media?

      Also... what counts as news?

      I get a lot of car news via facebook. New model releases, updates, spectacular crashes, so on and so forth from various sites I've subscribed to. Every now and then you even get something news worthy through that no-one else picked up on like that time a few million quid of Jaguar/Land Rover engines got stolen. The Daily Mail and their ilk were too busy with a massive story in France where SOMEONE IN A BURKA stole a hundred Euro to bother with a piffling story such as millions of pounds of JLR engines being brazenly stolen in broad daylight.

      A lot of my friends get their sporting news from FB although like me, for serious news they'll generally go to a legitimate source like the BBC for national and world events.

      I'm not surprised people are turning to facebook and Twitter for their news, just look at the shite published in something like the Sun. Clickbait headline, Celebrity Gossip, Page3 girl (basically soft porn, for those on the other side of the pond), more celebrity gossip, clearly biased political story, possibly another Page 3 girl, clickbait sports headline. It's little wonder fake news has become indistinguishable from actual news, people have been force fed it from tabloid rags for decades now.

      But I digress, does it really matter that a lot of people now get their sports updates and celeb goss from Facebook and Twitter instead of ESPN and E!? I think a better question is, how many people get all their news from social media and how many dont fact check?

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
  3. And Russia Exploited That by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Russia spread lies using social networks and gullible people, and influenced our election. Trumpers can't stand when it's pointed out they are complicit in helping Russia attack our country and our system of government. Treasonous.

    1. Re:And Russia Exploited That by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Weak obvious troll. Please try again.

    2. Re: And Russia Exploited That by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Russia Russia Russia!

    3. Re:And Russia Exploited That by jedidiah · · Score: 0

      > Russia spread lies using social networks and gullible people,

      Quite frankly, I found the nonsense that Democrats were posting on Facebook to be far more influential. The appalling nonsense made me want to have nothing to do with them.

      They managed a level of bat shit insane craziness that none of my fundie tea bagger relatives could match.

      Its funny that liberals think that tea baggers and fundies or even moderate Republicans were ever going to vote for Hillary.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    4. Re:And Russia Exploited That by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Russia spread lies using social networks and gullible people, and influenced our election. Trumpers can't stand when it's pointed out they are complicit in helping Russia attack our country and our system of government. Treasonous.

      I thought it was that Hillary got more of the popular vote and was cheated out of victory by the right-wing Electoral College? As it is you're diluting your spleen, which can't be a good thing.

      Sad times, when Russians have better taste than our esteemed Democrats.

  4. In related news, 95% of all people are stupid by HBI · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I imagine the other 28% probably can't read.

    More seriously, the only way to gauge news today is to read a wide variety of sources and ignore the slanted ones. Deduce the slant from the verbiage, such as god-like pronouncements or emotional hot button words. It's not that hard.

    It's interesting, though, that reading historical documents, one is struck by the use of emotional language in such places as Victorian-era memoirs and diaries, and in Soviet government documents. It sticks out like a sore thumb. I find that Korean to English translations also have this feature. How much we have changed. That same style of verbiage in modern English reportage would be disbelieved prima facie.

    --
    HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
    1. Re:In related news, 95% of all people are stupid by Ksevio · · Score: 2

      Like this article for example. "Use social media to get some of their news"? Well I definitely do get a lot of news from Facebook, but it's not the primary source I use. I guess I'm included in the stat though since it's "some"

    2. Re:In related news, 95% of all people are stupid by HBI · · Score: 1

      I'd recommend reading elsewhere. Most of the social media news is highly slanted and mostly inaccurate. Like today, I had someone on my mother-in-law's FB account saying that the wildfires in Montana were just as bad as hurricanes in Texas based on some slanted post someone wrote there. It turns out the wildfire season is about average taken overall across the country this year, and the amount of people affected is far less than the Texas or putative Florida hurricane will impact. This is a fairly tame example.

      --
      HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
    3. Re:In related news, 95% of all people are stupid by Ksevio · · Score: 2

      I do read elsewhere, but I still come across (usually local) stories that show up on facebook before other sources. If it's something interesting, I might look for more info, but if it's something like "shark does bad job dancing at superbowl", I might just go "huh." and move on.

    4. Re:In related news, 95% of all people are stupid by Known+Nutter · · Score: 1

      but if it's something like "shark does bad job dancing at superbowl", I might just go "huh." and move on.

      Sadly, many people do not move on, and that's all it takes for Left Shark to become reality.

      Full disclosure: I'm a fan of Left Shark. Really liked his work there.

      --
      Beware of the Leopard.
    5. Re:In related news, 95% of all people are stupid by evilsofa · · Score: 1

      More seriously, the only way to gauge news today is to read a wide variety of sources and ignore the slanted ones.

      I guess you'll be ignoring /. then. That / is definitely slanted.

    6. Re:In related news, 95% of all people are stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      More seriously, the only way to gauge news today is to read a wide variety of sources and ignore the slanted ones.

      I guess you'll be ignoring /. then. That / is definitely slanted.

      Yes, but it leans to the right...

  5. depends upon the definition of "news" by turkeydance · · Score: 2

    and, of course, frequency.

  6. 5000? by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 1

    5,000 people seems a bit small to actually be representative of 300,000,000 people. I would also point out that this is only representative of people that actually agree to take a survey. I'm not saying their claim is incorrect, I'm just saying one small survey shouldn't be taken as gospel.

    --
    Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
  7. Sample sizes of ~700 are enough for polls... by HBI · · Score: 2

    At least, the garbage polls for 2016 that had Hillary in the lead by 8-10 points.

    --
    HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
    1. Re:Sample sizes of ~700 are enough for polls... by Kjella · · Score: 1

      At least, the garbage polls for 2016 that had Hillary in the lead by 8-10 points.

      The sample size is big enough that it almost certainly was not a statistical fluke. If people didn't answer truthfully because Trump was such a controversial candidate you could have called 7000 or 70000 or the whole fucking country and you'd still have a poll that was way off compared to the voting booth. It's a limitation of polls, not of the sample size.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    2. Re:Sample sizes of ~700 are enough for polls... by HornWumpus · · Score: 2

      Or it was intentional (oversampling Ds, non-representative). To swing the 1 or 2% that simply want to have voted for 'the winner'.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    3. Re:Sample sizes of ~700 are enough for polls... by No+Longer+an+AC · · Score: 1

      It seems to me that the polls made people overconfident that Clinton would win. I'm not sure what's important about voting for "the winner" but maybe that appeals to some people.

      I think it's more likely people who wanted Clinton (or just didn't want Trump to) to win didn't bother to vote because they believed she was a shoe-in.

    4. Re:Sample sizes of ~700 are enough for polls... by HBI · · Score: 1

      I actually agree when we are talking about a typical random sample poll done at a point in time, but you might want to look at the methodology of the one poll that was calling it correctly the whole cycle: the 2016 USC Dornsife/LAT poll. They also called 2012 correctly - or at least much more correctly then the regular newspaper polls, but under the name of the Rand Corporation Continuous Election Poll. You might not remember this, but Romney was slightly ahead in several polls rolling into Election Day. Not in the Rand one, though - they had shown Romney considerably behind the whole cycle, essentially.

      Their methodology was to stick with the same group of people for the whole election cycle (~6000) and get metrics on them periodically. If you watch their trend, you can see the key moments - Comey letting Hillary off the hook, Hillary collapse, pussy grab, late Comey letters.

      --
      HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
    5. Re:Sample sizes of ~700 are enough for polls... by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      I don't understand it either, but about 1 or 2% of the population treat elections like 'big games'. They just want bragging rights for having voted for 'the last 6 winners'.

      You know 100% voted Hillary.

      'They' were overconfident, it did come down to turnout. The elephant in the room is that racist black voters didn't turn out for a crooked white woman like the did for a crooked black man.

      It was close enough, I don't think many stayed home (in most states) because they thought it was a done deal. They just didn't like the bitch. Who can blame them?

      I live in CA, not voting for Vermin Supreme would have been a waste of my vote.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    6. Re:Sample sizes of ~700 are enough for polls... by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Bad polling is something the people involved try to avoid. It's embarrassing, and leads to reduced credibility.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    7. Re:Sample sizes of ~700 are enough for polls... by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Internal polls attempt accuracy. Public polls are glorified ads.

      If what you said was true, would the 'push poll' even exist? Polls are used to push agendas all the time. It's all how they ask the question. can get any answer they want.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    8. Re:Sample sizes of ~700 are enough for polls... by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Most organizations that live on their polling results live off their reputations. This shouldn't be confused with organizations that live on something else and use slanted polls to try to convince people.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  8. Makes sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Idiots are on social media, idiots read news that's not real, idiots go vote. That's how we got Obama and Trump two completely incompetent presidents in a row with little experience in how to govern and both extremely partisan.

    I'd guess the next president will probably be an inanimate carbon rod.

  9. accounts or users??? by kiviQr · · Score: 1

    Are we talking about accounts or users :)

  10. 67% of Americans are STUPID. by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 0

    Truth hurts, doesn't it? Get your act together, America.

    1. Re:67% of Americans are STUPID. by aaarrrgggh · · Score: 1

      ...says another /. reader in response to a news story...

    2. Re:67% of Americans are STUPID. by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

      It's not like we haven't all read pretty much the same thing several times from regular news sources.

    3. Re: 67% of Americans are STUPID. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And 3,3% conspire constantly to bullshit the 67% for the wicked evil 3,3% Agenda of war and bankster rule.

  11. No wonder Facebook's decition to make Trump... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    our ruler worked. This is just sad. So now when Zuck wants to rule us, he'll just have to order his minions to spew ads that will bring votes like he brought votes to Trump.

    1. Re: No wonder Facebook's decition to make Trump... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You seriously believe this lie around FB Ads ?

      The Internet is much bigger than FB.

  12. Re:GNAA - GAY NIGGERS ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA by DoctorVic · · Score: 1

    Wow. I remember this crap from back in the old days.

  13. Re:GNAA - GAY NIGGERS ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA by nukenerd · · Score: 1

    what the heck is this crazy stuff?

    You must be new here.

  14. Is it really "News"? by s.petry · · Score: 2

    I see people say that, and then try to talk to them to see what they know. They tend to have a great grasp of memes and basic fallacies like ad hominem and appeals to emotion, but no facts. "News" is supposed to provide you facts so that you can form an opinion. We seem to have lost that very special distinction over a pretty short time.

    Just to one up your use of social media for news, I had a guy tell me all kinds of crazy stuff a particular politician said in a speech. I went and listened, it took all of 10 minutes, and said "none of that crazy stuff was in the speech." I then asked "did you listen to it?" Answer: No, I read about it on Buzzfeed, Vox, Huffpo, and watched a CNN clip and MSNBC clip on it. This person spent 2 hours gathering other people's opinions without ever hearing the actual words or reading a transcript. When I asked them to watch the speech and perhaps we can talk about the content, I was met with a firm refusal to do so.

    GGP is correct, 95% of all people are stupid and refuse to do anything about it.

    --

    -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    1. Re: Is it really "News"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      95% of Mainstream Media supported cheneys wmd hoax. And the war that destroyed iraq.

      Who is now the Problem ?

  15. urgent: mouse wanted to baby bell the word "news" by epine · · Score: 1

    There are many places on the Internet where I stick a wet finger in the air, to assess weather conditions.

    Where I "get" my meteorology is from professionals over a broad spectrum (I actually prefer Chris Wallace and Shepard Smith over Joe and Mika when Chris and Shep are taking their jobs seriously). And then I often cross-check the professionals against Wikipedia (mostly for leaving important shit out) and Google Scholar (for careful treatment of what they chose to include).

    Where it comes to meteorology, half of these social media bumpkins couldn't even write down the ideal gas law (though for many, it's surely Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh and Tucker Carlson in a perfect storm of Hurricane Beangeflato).

    For me, the continental divide—between swamp and non-swamp—is approximately George Will: I find myself on board with exactly half of what he says. David Frum is also a fairly reliable coin flip: I just never know if I'm going to agree or not, sentence by sentence.

    By way of contrast, I only agree with about 1/3 of what Chomsky says, though it's a pretty important one third. From time to time I nail myself to a cross and drink his vinegar (no, I'm not self-aggrandising—this was, for the most part, a thoroughly plebeian pastime in ancient Rome).

    By way of contrast again, I agree with Sam Harris 75% of the time, but it's the least important 75%, so I pretty much stopped tuning him in.

    Slashdot mainly serves to keep my finger wet.

  16. Re:GNAA - Gnumb Nuts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They get their news from social media...

  17. Re:urgent: mouse wanted to baby bell the word "new by epine · · Score: 1

    Slashdot mainly serves to keep my severed finger wet.

    Doh!

    Somewhere inside I just knew I was one word away from the perfect ending. I stared and stared at the video replay until I finally got it. Damn. Two beautiful bumps from Chomsky and Harris, and then I flubbed the spike.

    And no, it wasn't an accident that team Chomsky, Harris and Will were lined up against Hannity, Limbaugh, and Carlson—those shrill wind-up drawls that blow nobody good—(Frum Jr. must then, perforce, be the odd-man-out stripe-swapping zebra).

    You can bet team CHILL has a frostier bench—true meteorology is rarely a pleasant lark on a bark through a park (Houston, we're short of birch slabs).

  18. Re:GNAA - GAY NIGGERS ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    G_N_A_A (G.A.Y N1GGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) is the first organization which
    gathers G.A.Y N1GGERS from all over America and abroad for one common goal - being G.A.Y N1GGERS.

    Are you G.A.Y ?
    Are you a N1GGER ?
    Are you a G.A.Y N1GGER ?

    If you answered "Yes" to any of the above questions, then G_N_A_A (G.A.Y N1GGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) might be exactly what you've been looking for!
    Join G_N_A_A (G.A.Y N1GGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) today, and enjoy all the benefits of being a full-time G_N_A_A member.
    G_N_A_A (G.A.Y N1GGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) is the fastest-growing G.A.Y N1GGER community with THOUSANDS of members all over United States of America. You, too, can be a part of G_N_A_A if you join today!

    Why not? It's quick and easy - only 3 simple steps!

    First, you have to obtain a copy of G.A.Y N1GGERS FROM OUTER SPACE THE MOVIE and watch it.

    You can watch G.A.Y N1GGERS FROM OUTER SPACE on Youtube.

    Second, you need to succeed in posting a G_N_A_A "first post" on slashdot.org , a popular "news for trolls" website

    Third, you need to join the official G_N_A_A irc channel #G_N_A_A on EFNet, and apply for membership.
    Talk to one of the ops or any of the other members in the channel to sign up today!

    If you are having trouble locating #G_N_A_A, the official G.A.Y N1GGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA irc channel, you might be on a wrong irc network. The correct network is EFNet, and you can connect to irc.secsup.org or irc.easynews.com as one of the EFNet servers.
    If you do not have an IRC client handy, you are free to use the G_N_A_A Java IRC client by clicking here.

    If you have mod points and would like to support G_N_A_A, please moderate this post up.

    This post brought to you by Penisbird , a proud member of the G_N_A_A

    G_____________________________________naann_______ ________G
    N_____________________________nnnaa__nanaaa_______ ________A
    A____________________aanana__nannaa_nna_an________ ________Y
    A_____________annna_nnnnnan_aan_aa__na__aa________ ________*
    G____________nnaana_nnn__nn_aa__nn__na_anaann_MERI CA______N
    N___________ana__nn_an___an_aa_anaaannnanaa_______ ________I
    A___________aa__ana_nn___nn_nnnnaa___ana__________ ________G
    A__________nna__an__na___nn__nnn___SSOCIATION_of__ ________G
    G__________ana_naa__an___nnn______________________ ________E
    N__________ananan___nn___aan_IGGER________________ ________R
    A__________nnna____naa____________________________ ________S
    A________nnaa_____anan____________________________ ________*
    G________anaannana________________________________ ________A
    N________ananaannn_AY_____________________________ ________S
    A________ana____nn_________IRC-EFNET-#G_N_A_A________ ________S
    A_______nn_____na_________________________________ ________O
    *_______aaaan_____________________________________ ________C
    Gary Niger gary_niger@G_N_A_A.us G_N_A_A Corporate Headquarters 143 Rolloffle Avenue Tarzana, California 91356
    Enid Al-Punjabi enid_al_punjabi@G_N_A_A.us G_N_A_A World Headquarters No.33 Kyutei Bld. 2F, Shinjuku 2-11-7, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo, Japan ????????2??11-6
    Copyright (c) 2003-2015 G.A.Y N1GGER Association of America

    Ich Bindawalross (London) - G_N_A_A (NYSE:

  19. Re:GNAA - Gnumb Nuts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    G_N_A_A (G.A.Y N1GGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) is the first organization which
    gathers G.A.Y N1GGERS from all over America and abroad for one common goal - being G.A.Y N1GGERS.

    Are you G.A.Y ?
    Are you a N1GGER ?
    Are you a G.A.Y N1GGER ?

    If you answered "Yes" to any of the above questions, then G_N_A_A (G.A.Y N1GGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) might be exactly what you've been looking for!
    Join G_N_A_A (G.A.Y N1GGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) today, and enjoy all the benefits of being a full-time G_N_A_A member.
    G_N_A_A (G.A.Y N1GGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) is the fastest-growing G.A.Y N1GGER community with THOUSANDS of members all over United States of America. You, too, can be a part of G_N_A_A if you join today!

    Why not? It's quick and easy - only 3 simple steps!

    First, you have to obtain a copy of G.A.Y N1GGERS FROM OUTER SPACE THE MOVIE and watch it.

    You can watch G.A.Y N1GGERS FROM OUTER SPACE on Youtube.

    Second, you need to succeed in posting a G_N_A_A "first post" on slashdot.org , a popular "news for trolls" website

    Third, you need to join the official G_N_A_A irc channel #G_N_A_A on EFNet, and apply for membership.
    Talk to one of the ops or any of the other members in the channel to sign up today!

    If you are having trouble locating #G_N_A_A, the official G.A.Y N1GGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA irc channel, you might be on a wrong irc network. The correct network is EFNet, and you can connect to irc.secsup.org or irc.easynews.com as one of the EFNet servers.
    If you do not have an IRC client handy, you are free to use the G_N_A_A Java IRC client by clicking here.

    If you have mod points and would like to support G_N_A_A, please moderate this post up.

    This post brought to you by Penisbird , a proud member of the G_N_A_A

    G_____________________________________naann_______ ________G
    N_____________________________nnnaa__nanaaa_______ ________A
    A____________________aanana__nannaa_nna_an________ ________Y
    A_____________annna_nnnnnan_aan_aa__na__aa________ ________*
    G____________nnaana_nnn__nn_aa__nn__na_anaann_MERI CA______N
    N___________ana__nn_an___an_aa_anaaannnanaa_______ ________I
    A___________aa__ana_nn___nn_nnnnaa___ana__________ ________G
    A__________nna__an__na___nn__nnn___SSOCIATION_of__ ________G
    G__________ana_naa__an___nnn______________________ ________E
    N__________ananan___nn___aan_IGGER________________ ________R
    A__________nnna____naa____________________________ ________S
    A________nnaa_____anan____________________________ ________*
    G________anaannana________________________________ ________A
    N________ananaannn_AY_____________________________ ________S
    A________ana____nn_________IRC-EFNET-#G_N_A_A________ ________S
    A_______nn_____na_________________________________ ________O
    *_______aaaan_____________________________________ ________C
    Gary Niger gary_niger@G_N_A_A.us G_N_A_A Corporate Headquarters 143 Rolloffle Avenue Tarzana, California 91356
    Enid Al-Punjabi enid_al_punjabi@G_N_A_A.us G_N_A_A World Headquarters No.33 Kyutei Bld. 2F, Shinjuku 2-11-7, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo, Japan ????????2??11-6
    Copyright (c) 2003-2015 G.A.Y N1GGER Association of America

    Ich Bindawalross (London) - G_N_A_A (NYSE:

  20. Scary number or...? by Manqueman · · Score: 1

    Other questions for a little context: What percentage of Americans get news from the corporate media? We hear how awful the Facebook newsfeed is, but how does it compare to actual corporate media? What percentage of Americans know enough to understand whether reportage is at all accurate? ~67% relying on social media is a scary number. I just wonder whether there's scarier numbers out there.