Talk:Barack Obama tan suit controversy

This article was nominated for deletion on 2 April 2020. The result of the discussion was no consensus.

United States Stub‑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
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Politics Stub‑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
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

A classic fake controversy

Bottom line: In reality, there simply was no significant backlash to Obama's suit in right-leaning media. Every single story about this issue quotes Rep. Peter King (NY) and TV personality Lou Dobbs. Why? Because those were the only significant people to criticize Obama for it. Outside of those two, no one cared. Articles and Youtube videos about it end up trying to buttress the King and Dobbs quotes with quotes from random Twitter accounts. But that is meaningless: You can find random Twitter accounts to support literally any position. The question is, outside of King and Dobbs, was this opinion in fact widespread among conservative media? No. It is a classic "fake controversy," criticizing conservatives for a "backlash" that never actually happened.

This Wikipedia article is, in fact, a perfect example. There are literally only two quotes in support of the claim. One is the obligatory King quote. The other is from The Hill article, but if you actually go the article ... it's an unsourced claim! Again, there are no actual critical quotes! This Wikipedia article implies additional criticism, but doesn't actually offer up any evidence it exists.

Republicans Pounce!

This article is yet another blatant example of the pervasive bias that makes Wikipedia an absolute joke. Please follow reference #10 for an example of what the author claims is a reliable source (Showbiz CheatSheet): "15 ridiculous moments Fox News attacked Barack Obama". Note that Fox News itself is not included within the 27 references.

"Republicans Pounce" is a well known meme in right-leaning media and this "controversy" might be an example. Of course, until Showbiz CheatSheet decides what is truth and what is important, any speculation on my part or on Fox News would be OR. E.g., quote Rep. Peter King (who might be a living person being slandered):

“For him to walk out — I’m not trying to be trivial here — in a light suit, a light tan suit, saying that first he wants to talk about what most Americans care about, and he said that’s the revision of second quarter numbers on the economy,” King continued, operating at Peak Peter King. “This is a week after Jim Foley was beheaded, and he’s trying to act like, you know, real Americans care about the economy, not about ISIS and not about terrorism. And then he goes on to say that he has no strategy.”

OR would be my saying some media would rather talk about tan suits than ISIS or the economy.

Deepfrieddough (talk) 13:17, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It is a valid point that "Showbiz CheatSheet" isn't a reliable source, so I've removed that citation. Surely there are valid sources out there for Fox's negative coverage of the suit. CAVincent (talk) 21:37, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]