Jump to content

Talk:CNN

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 50.250.214.1 (talk) at 16:19, 4 April 2023 (→‎Add CNN clearly shows left wing bias: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:Vital article

Wiki Education assignment: Communication and Culture

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 2 February 2021 and 14 May 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Brookebetancourt99 (article contribs).

Semi-protected edit request on 15 August 2022

Two executives listed in the CNN Sidebar no longer work for the company: Brad Ferrer and Andrew Morse. The page in general really needs an update.

Beme is shutdown. CNN Films is nearly closed. The CNN+ information is incomplete. And on and on.

I did not write the above, but the user did not sign their edit request.  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. Actualcpscm (talk) 20:23, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 26 December 2022

Please remove "30303" from the headquarters address in the info box. It is in the incorrect address format, and zip codes are not included for other organization addresses. It should simply read:

1 CNN Center Drive Atlanta, GA 2600:6C51:7C7F:8D66:AC20:AEFA:7237:CEA1 (talk) 02:10, 26 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Done casualdejekyll 19:01, 26 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Does it really make sense to have "CNN has also been accused of having had a liberal bias during the Trump administration"?

Not for nothing but anyone can accuse anyone of anything, there's only one citation, and one there is is only a secondary source to the statement being made. At the very least we should be citing one of these accusations instead of citing coverage about the accusations. 76.243.104.169 (talk) 16:17, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your input. I have added multiple media bias ratings and references. Wlwl0623 (talk) 03:44, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Wlwl0623, what makes you think Ad Fontes Media is a reliable source? WP:RSP clearly states "Ad Fontes Media and their Media Bias Chart should not be used in article space in reference to sources' political leaning or reliability." I have reverted your edit. — Nythar (💬-🍀) 05:43, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Nythar why did you not only remove this reference then? why revert the whole change? Wlwl0623 (talk) 06:43, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I have removed reference deemed unreliable by Wiki community. Please respond here first if you disagree, to avoid an edit war.
Respectfully, cheers. Wlwl0623 (talk) 07:04, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Wlwl0623, because the other sources aren't reliable either. Wikipedia's consensus's on All Sides (WP:ALLSIDES) states "reliability varies among the website's articles and should be determined on a case-by-case basis." You shouldn't look for sources that support a certain narrative and then just cite them without an analysis. Stop adding sources that have not been deemed reliable, as you did here when you added a Biasly citation, and the NYT source has nothing to do with bias in CNN. — Nythar (💬-🍀) 07:08, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Nythar thank you for your input. I will modify the reference considering your suggestion. meanwhile feel free to modify as you see fit. Simply reverting shouldn't be the way to go. looking for resources to support a narrative is by definition what references are used for so I don't agree with you on that. Wlwl0623 (talk) 07:20, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This is about the inclusion of unreliable sources. I haven't even gone into WP:ONUS or WP:UNDUE yet. — Nythar (💬-🍀) 07:23, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Nythar please refer to Fox and MSNBC page and I'd be happy to discuss with you why bias information shouldn't be included or why it's not neutral to point out that certain analysis shows its bias. I'd also be happy to work with you to add opposing analysis if any. Wlwl0623 (talk) 07:28, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia generally doesn't like the various sites that exist to highlight media bias. They've pretty much all come under scrutiny for their methodologies and tend to reduce something complicated, which varies over time and even from hour to hour, into a single metric. Some are better than others, but I'm yet to see there be consensus to include them anywhere. The other reason I've reverted are the section headings. The claim about "false balance" isn't necessarily (or even primarily) about liberal bias, and we shouldn't have a subsection without citations. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 12:27, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Add CNN clearly shows left wing bias

with EVERY article concerning news outlets that are not left leaning, Wikipedia adds verbiage concerning support of Republicans, anti republican statements, and anti right verbiage. Every article on Left leaning news outlets contain no such biased language. Either remove any and all politically biased statements, or include the same criticism in you articles concerning leftist news outlets.

Wikipedia is clearly a left leaning site, that doesn't bother to hide its bias. 50.250.214.1 (talk) 16:19, 4 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:CNN&oldid=1148189046"