Talk:Fox News

Skip to table of contents

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Fox News article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40: 30 days

This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Template:Vital article

The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.

Discussions on this page often lead to previous arguments being restated. Please read recent comments, look in the archives, and review the FAQ before commenting.

view · edit

Frequently asked questions

Concern: The introduction mentions alleged bias or other controversial information.

WP:LEAD - The lead should be capable of standing alone as a concise overview of the article, establishing context, explaining why the subject is interesting or notable, and briefly describing its notable controversies. It is appropriate to overview the controversies and allegations of bias, as these are substantial.

Concern: The introduction mentions allegations of conservative bias but I've seen studies that say Fox News is centrist and/or liberal. Shouldn't these viewpoints be mentioned in the lead as well?

Although there are studies with various viewpoints on Fox, the view that Fox is conservative dominates. For the lead we restrict ourselves to the dominant view, conservative bias, while noting that this viewpoint has dissenters. The lead should only briefly summarize the notable controversies. The notability of this particular controversy is measured by studies, documentaries, films, boycotts from influential persons based on the perception of bias, and numerous pop culture references to the alleged conservative bias. No other viewpoint has gained as much currency, and therefore including them in the lead would violate WP:FRINGE; WP:NPOV and WP:LEAD.

Concern: Does the article take any position regarding the allegations of bias?

Wikipedia takes no position on whether Fox News is biased. The introduction highlights the existence of a notable controversy concerning the perception that the network promotes conservative political positions. Neither the introduction nor the article takes a position on whether such a perception is accurate, we merely reflect the consensus of reliable independent sources.

Previous discussions: See archives 21, 19, 18, 17, 16 (Includes RfC) and 15.

This page is not a forum for general discussion about Fox News. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Fox News at the Reference desk.

This article is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.

Companies C‑class Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of companies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CompaniesWikipedia:WikiProject CompaniesTemplate:WikiProject Companiescompany articles

C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Companies To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Wikipedia:Requested articles/Business and economics/Companies
Assess : Category:Unassessed company articles
Copyedit : Category:Company articles needing attention
Infobox : Category:Company articles needing infoboxes
Maintain : Portal:Companies
Stubs : Help expand stub articles located at Category:Company stubs
Other :
- Tag company articles with the {{portal|Companies}} template
- Tag company talk pages with the {{WikiProject Companies}} project banner
- Answer requests for comments

Conservatism C‑class Mid‑importance

	Conservatism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Conservatism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of conservatism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ConservatismWikipedia:WikiProject ConservatismTemplate:WikiProject ConservatismConservatism articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Journalism C‑class High‑importance

	Journalism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Journalism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of journalism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.JournalismWikipedia:WikiProject JournalismTemplate:WikiProject JournalismJournalism articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Radio C‑class Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Radio, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Radio-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.RadioWikipedia:WikiProject RadioTemplate:WikiProject RadioRadio articles

C

This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

To-do List:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Create: Missing years and articles in radio, National Association of Radio Distress-Signalling and Infocommunications (Hungary)
Assess : Unassessed Radio articles; Unknown-importance Radio articles
Cleanup : Radio articles needing attention
Expand : Midweek Politics Bob Crane
Maintain : Portal:Radio
Stubs : Expand: Radio stubs
Verify : Unreferenced BLPs
Other : Collaboration of the Week:
Requests for Radio peer review:

Media C‑class Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Media, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Media on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MediaWikipedia:WikiProject MediaTemplate:WikiProject MediaMedia articles

C

This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Media To-do List:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Mackay Radio
Cleanup : Media influence, Video game culture, Sound bite
NPOV : Content (media and publishing)
Verify : Multimedia, Alternative media, Alternative newspaper
Other :
- Answer requests for comments

New York City C‑class Mid‑importance

	New York City portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York City, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New York City-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.New York CityWikipedia:WikiProject New York CityTemplate:WikiProject New York CityNew York City articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Politics: American C‑class Low‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by American politics task force.

Television: Stations C‑class Mid‑importance

	Television portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Television stations task force (assessed as High-importance).

United States: Television C‑class Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Television portal This article is supported by American television task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

Warning: active arbitration remedies

The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:

You must follow the bold-revert-discuss cycle if your change is reverted. You may not reinstate your edit until you post a talk page message discussing your edit and have waited 24 hours from the time of this talk page message

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

Further information

Enforcement procedures:

Violations of any of these restrictions should be reported immediately to the arbitration enforcement noticeboard.
Editors who are aware of this topic being designated a contentious topic and who violate these restrictions may be sanctioned by any uninvolved administrator, even on a first offense.

The contentious topics procedure can be used against any editor who repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process. Contentious topics sanctions can include blocks, topic-bans, or other restrictions.

If you are unsure if your edit is appropriate, discuss it here on this talk page first. Remember: When in doubt, don't revert!

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Fox News article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40: 30 days

Please stay calm and civil while commenting or presenting evidence, and do not make personal attacks. Be patient when approaching solutions to any issues. If consensus is not reached, other solutions exist to draw attention and ensure that more editors mediate or comment on the dispute.

Newfound opposition to Trump, opposition

My recent edits on the new relationship between Trump/Trumpism and Fox News has been reverted. I understand that the lead should be a summary of the article, but I think these new developments (as well as the rise of Newsmax and OANN as far-right alternatives as a result of Fox's more critical stance on Trump, bolstered by Trump himself) should be mentioned as this issue has been mentioned a few times on the talk page. – Bangalamania (talk) 03:47, 17 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The problem here is that Fox News still counts a being pro-Trump, with its prime-time conspiracy theorists considering Mr. Trump to be the legitimate winner of the 2020 presidential election. It may be useful to note in the body of the article, however, that Fox News has been met with increasing criticism from right-wing watchers who do not consider it conservative enough and would prefer far-right media outlets. While that may be true, it would be ironic, considering that Fox News was the one that reflected and reinforced its viewers' anti-Democratic Party ideas. As much as I have been disgusted by its journalistic standards, I would actually feel bad to see it dissolve because it was not "conservative" enough. Free Media Kid! 01:05, 18 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Completely agree with you on all points there, although I would add that if it is mentioned in the body of the article that there should be a brief mention in the lead of Trump supporters' opposition to Fox ebbing away. And I do note the irony of seeing right-wingers calling out Fox for being "Faux News" because it isn't right-wing enough. --Bangalamania (talk) 13:58, 18 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello freemediakid!, can you provide a reliable independent source for you statement about conspiracy theorist. But I also agree with the OP, it could use an update as this is a big change in the way they are reporting. WILDGUN96 (talk) 04:36, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Editing practices that are antithetical to improving this article

A certain editor, whom I will not name, has as I see it showed an aversion to even slight improvements to this article. I plan to restore my most recent edit, which was already a compromise as I see it, as more than 24h has passed. Any editor who has an opposition to these is free to justify those here, in accordance with ArbCom remedies. Kind regards, thorpewilliam (talk) 00:54, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You are edit warring and not assuming good faith. Gain consensus for your edits. O3000 (talk) 12:01, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 18 December 2020

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

2603:9001:407:C800:56BD:79FF:FE4D:6E3D (talk) 18:16, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I personally find your "accessible reading material" on FOX NEWS is incorrectly based! FOX NEWS' contributions are open, clear, and informative for all open minded, clear thinking & true information seekers!

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. O3000 (talk) 18:24, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Fox's pattern of anti-semitic attacks on George Soros

At Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy)#NPOV_issues_on_wiki_with_regards_to_politics, @Masem: has suggested that the section Fox_News#Glenn_Beck's_comments_about_George_Soros should be expanded to cover the entire pattern of anti-semitic attacks that have been made by Fox hosts. I am starting this discussion here to work on wording and establish sourcing. IHateAccounts (talk) 16:21, 13 January 2021 (UTC)comments by this sock puppet are struck per wp:talko[reply]

More specifically, I suggest that the section talk in general about Fox's controversial hosts and the network's apparant continued support for them; touching briefly on any specific incidents with them on the assumption that the host's bio page would have more detailed coverage. It's not just Beck that is controversal at Fox, but also Tucker Carlson, Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity, etc. My point at the NPOV board is that this article gets a bit too focused on microscopic aspects when those aspects are better covered as part of the macroscopic picture of criticism of Fox. --Masem (t) 16:31, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

~~"Specific incidents" would seem to also include specific long-term TARGETS of Fox's attacks, correct?~~ IHateAccounts (talk) 16:38, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The way I would envision a section would be "Controversial hosts" and would be read something like (not final wording, this is off the cuff) "Fox News has been criticized for its continued support of its controversial hosts of its various talk and opinion shows. Among such hosts include: (list format here to have two or three sentences on each) Glenn Beck, who has spent several years making anti-Semitic remarks and false conspiracy theories about George Soros. Fox has defended Beck's comments as..." with the understanding that if I went to Beck's page, there's probably a good full paragraph or three about this (and I see there is). Remember that this article (Fox News) should center on criticism of Fox News, and so in talking about Beck specifically, we need to establish just enough (his repeated attacks on Soros) to understand in reasonable depth why Fox is criticized for carrying Beck, not for why Beck is criticized. Leave details of the latter to Beck's page. --Masem (t) 22:43, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

~~@Masem: Asking you and others to help provide sources regarding anti-semitism by Fox hosts or regular contributors below. IHateAccounts~~ (talk) 18:18, 18 January 2021 (UTC) ~~===General background:===~~ [reply]

https://theintercept.com/2019/01/23/plot-george-soros-didnt-start-hungary-started-fox-news/

Possible WP:RSOPINION: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/11/15/why-fox-news-has-gone-wobbly-anti-semitism/

Possible WP:RSOPINION: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/12/03/fox-cant-shake-anti-semitism/

Letter to Fox News from ADL regarding anti-semitism's prevalence on the network - https://www.adl.org/news/media-watch/letter-to-fox-news-channel-on-use-of-antisemitic-tropes
~~Sources re: Glenn Beck~~
https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/why-the-conspiracy-theories-about-george-soros-dont-stack-up

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/george-soros-ss-nazi-germany/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-intersect/wp/2018/05/30/unpacking-the-george-soros-was-a-jew-killing-nazi-conspiracy-theory-that-roseanne-barr-spreads/

ADL Criticism - https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/11/11/adl-beck-soros_n_782420.html

ADL Criticism - https://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/12/us/12beck.html

Roger Ailes and Fox 'defense', including describing NPR as 'nazis' - https://www.theguardian.com/world/richard-adams-blog/2010/nov/18/roger-ailes-fox-news-npr-nazis
~~Sources re: Tucker Carlson~~
~~https://www.haaretz.com/world-news/fox-news-tucker-carlson-claims-george-soros-is-remaking-america-1.7362111~~
~~https://www.salon.com/2019/11/20/tucker-carlson-claims-he-didnt-use-anti-semitic-trope-despite-suggesting-vindman-has-a-dual-loyalty/~~
~~Sources re: Newt Gingrich~~
https://money.yahoo.com/newt-gingrich-asks-fox-news-035534018.html

https://www.thedailybeast.com/fox-news-hosts-get-real-awkward-when-newt-gingrich-tries-to-do-a-soros-dog-whistle
~~Sources re: "Fox & Friends"~~

~~https://forward.com/fast-forward/431143/fox-and-friends-airs-soros-migrant-conspiracy-theory-pegged-as-anti/~~

~~https://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/2016/11/13/fox-news-host-george-soros-funded-protests-are-anti-semitic~~

Fox News

Comment only. I like the information all being in one spot. (like a book). Don't break it all up please. 18:26, 14 January 2021 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:199:101:5F0:E455:40FF:2C22:563C (talk)

"and conservative columnists, such as Jennifer Rubin"

Jennifer Rubin does not identify as a Conservative and has sought to distance herself from that label. Should this sentence be rewritten? Juno (talk) 03:06, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well, Rubin was a conservative when she had the valor (the gall, I would call it, although that term has negative connotations, so it is best to avoid it) to criticize Fox News. While I do believe that she still considers herself to be a 1990s-kind conservative and not a right-wing populist, it is irrelevant to write down what she believes now. However, if she had cited Fox News as a reason for her denouncing current right-wing politics—which could be mistaken as 1990s conservatism—I could see someone clarifying in the Fox News article that she has since renounced the label, citing Fox News as one of the reasons. Free Media Kid! 09:09, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 20 February 2021

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

In the controversy section, there is a subsection called Journalistic ethical standards. This section should include the case of McDougal v. Fox News Network, LLC. This case determined that Tucker Carlson is NOT being a reliable source of facts. This is the argument of the Fox news lawyers. There are many articles about this case including the judge of the case:

https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/new-york/nysdce/1:2019cv11161/527808/39/

https://www.npr.org/2020/09/29/917747123/you-literally-cant-believe-the-facts-tucker-carlson-tells-you-so-say-fox-s-lawye 2600:1009:B016:9143:8967:869:58E4:22A0 (talk) 15:51, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Melmann 15:57, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mentioning of fake news and alternative facts in the introduction

The current introduction is not very perspicuous when it comes to the fact, that Fox News had repeatedly spread fake news and alternative facts. The Fox-News wiki-article in other wiki-language-Versions are more straight forward in their introductions of fox news. I at least recommend for other users here, to go for example to the french or german fox-news-wiki artice and use a translator-app, to see how they describe fox-news in the introduction. besides a report in a scientific-journal^[1] the sources being used are huffpost^[2], forbes^[3], Los Angeles Magazine^[4], CNN^[5], Le Monde^[6], Die Zeit^[7] and Slate france^[8]. Well I guess that if some of the mentioned sources (for example: cnn, Huffpost, Forbes) would be used for mentioning fake news and alternative facts in the introduction of fox news, the editing would most probably be reverted. but what if we would use - next to the scientific report - the english-based Los Angeles Magazine or the french "le monde" or the german "Die Zeit"? With translation programs everyone can check the non-english-sources themselves. So there is no boundary, when it comes to the use of those, right? ----LennBr (talk) 05:54, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Fox News and unreliability for politics

I was overhearing some discussions down at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard #New York Post and found this link. I dunno if it's any helpful, but I just wanted to ask if there is any worth in mentioning more about Fox News and its unreliability surrounding politics-related topics. Qwertyxp2000 (talk | contribs) 05:30, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 8 May 2021

It is requested that an edit be made to the semi-protected article at Fox News. (edit · history · last · links · protection log)

This template must be followed by a complete and specific description of the request, that is, specify what text should be removed and a verbatim copy of the text that should replace it. "Please change X" is not acceptable and will be rejected; the request must be of the form "please change X to Y".

The edit may be made by any autoconfirmed user. Remember to change the |answered=no parameter to "yes" when the request has been accepted, rejected or on hold awaiting user input. This is so that inactive or completed requests don't needlessly fill up the edit requests category. You may also wish to use the {{ESp}} template in the response. To request that a page be protected or unprotected, make a protection request.

add Ron DeSantis to Regular guests and contributors

see https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/05/06/desantis-gives-fox-news-exclusive-signing-new-voting-restrictions-into-law/ https://www.tampabay.com/news/florida-politics/2021/05/06/fox-news-didnt-ask-for-an-exclusive-on-desantis-bill-signing-network-says/ https://www.businessinsider.com/fox-news-exclusive-desantis-florida-election-bill-signing-2021-5 71.173.64.11 (talk) 10:44, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

^ "Propaganda, Persuasion, or Journalism?: Fox News' Prime-Time Coverage of Health-Care Reform in 2009 and 2014". journals.sagepub.com.
^ "Jon Stewart Calls Out Fox News Over Obama Tape Edit (VIDEO)". Retrieved April 28, 2021.
^ "Meet The Fox Board That Doesn't Want To Talk About Fox News' Conspiracy-Theory Habit". Retrieved April 28, 2021.
^ "Fox News Can't Stop Running Faked Images of Seattle's Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone". www.lamag.com.
^ "Fox has a conspiracy theory problem".
^ "Fox News, accusée d'avoir publié de fausses informations sur demande de Trump, est assignée".
^ Adrian Daub. "Three days of alternate reality with Hannity, Carlson and Ingraham". zeit.de (in German).
^ "Oui, il faut mépriser Fox News".

[1] "Propaganda, Persuasion, or Journalism?: Fox News' Prime-Time Coverage of Health-Care Reform in 2009 and 2014". journals.sagepub.com.

[2] "Jon Stewart Calls Out Fox News Over Obama Tape Edit (VIDEO)". Retrieved April 28, 2021.

[3] "Meet The Fox Board That Doesn't Want To Talk About Fox News' Conspiracy-Theory Habit". Retrieved April 28, 2021.

[4] "Fox News Can't Stop Running Faked Images of Seattle's Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone". www.lamag.com.

[April_28,_2021-5] "Fox has a conspiracy theory problem".

[6] "Fox News, accusée d'avoir publié de fausses informations sur demande de Trump, est assignée".

[7] Adrian Daub. "Three days of alternate reality with Hannity, Carlson and Ingraham". zeit.de (in German).

[8] "Oui, il faut mépriser Fox News".

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]