Jump to content

Talk:Sunny Hostin

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

Education, and Early History

[edit]

Mrs. Hostin evidently graduated from the N.Y. State University of Binghamton, one of the colleges in the New York Public system, and one of the best. It is, however, not referred to as "Binghamton University" but "The State of New York, University at Binghamton", or more informally, SUNY Binghamton. (John G. Lewis (talk) 18:29, 21 March 2016 (UTC))[reply]

Personal Life

[edit]

Editor continually reverting Hostin's personal life section to selectively omit context from her 2018 racial harassment episode that the harassers were children. The information is exceptionally vague for and is salacious to ambiguously stoke racial animosity. The current edit does not omit that Hostin alleged herself to have been the target of racial epithets, but notes that the alleged perpetrators were children. Prior revisions gave even more context, including Hostin's response on The View to these allegations, but the other editor has repeatedly deleted all attempts at providing context to the racial harassment issue.

@96.241.151.80: What does it matter that the alleged perpetrators were children? There were no charges brought to any children. There were no independent reports of the incident aside from her account. Anything more than a brief mention would give the incident undue weight. KyleJoantalk 04:38, 22 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If the event is only deserving of a "brief mention," we want to avoid giving it "undue weight," if no charges were brought, and if the identity of the perpetrator is immaterial, there is no relevance in including the information at all. It is vague. Removed the factoid for these agreed upon reasons.

As a follow up, to properly contextualize this episode, I would agree to include that she "spoke of being the target of racial epithets from children on The View in 2018" or something similar to that. It is disingenuous to include the fact at all without any context.

After user reverted article to their own standard without using any input from other editors, I reverted the changes to include the suggested language regarding the racial harassment episode, meeting the other editor halfway. It provides information from the cited source necessary to contextualize the factoid without unnecessarily stoking racial resentment.

User KYLEJOAN repeatedly reverts edits without adding necessary context to claim that Hostin was the target of racial epithets FROM CHILDREN in New York, and that she discussed these allegations on the view.

@96.241.151.80: You added that 1. she recalled the incident on The View and 2. the alleged perpetrators were children. Why are these two details so imperative? What does it matter whether she recalled the story on The View or Maury or Judge Judy? What does it matter whether the alleged perpetrators were teenagers or millennials or baby boomers? KyleJoantalk 15:26, 22 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think it is imperative because I came to Wikipedia to read about Hostin, being largely unfamiliar with her. I saw that she was the target of racial epithets in her personal life section, clicked the cited source, and saw that she talked about it on The View - her job and the place I came to learn of her - and that it involved children - not adults more capable of judging the rightness of their actions - who when confronted about the allegations denied them. This is more elucidating on the scenario than vaguely saying, "target of racial epithets," which provides zero context for outcome, resolution, location, situation, or ANY other pertinent information. Instead, the ambling reader would see the personal life section, and likely assume the worst without clicking the source cited. To me, this all seems like an attempt to evoke sympathy for Hostin through her Wikipedia page, which should aim at being as factually accurate instead of pushing a narrative.

If this incident is not worth the attention or the details, my question to you is why include it at all?

@96.241.151.80: Ah, I understand. You believe that we need to qualify the incident with the description that children were the alleged perpetrators because children are not capable of judging the rightness of their actions. Why didn't you say that before? In addition, saying that she said the incident took place is factually accurate. If the details are sparse and you would like to learn more, fun fact: you can click on the source the way you did. Regarding the incident being worth the attention or the details, Wikipedia is not indiscriminate, so it should not be a complete exposition of all possible details, but a summary of accepted knowledge regarding its subject. It's interesting you only brought up the incident and nothing else in the article, as in you never asked where readers can listen to her podcast or what time The View airs or how many episodes said podcast has aired. By your standard, this entire article should not exist, no? KyleJoantalk 15:54, 22 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You are intentionally misrepresenting this fact and attempting to limit information to elicit racial sympathy for Sunny Hostin. I am for including the fact, but with context. You're arguments in response to my concerns are straw men and examples of reductio ad absurdum, so I do not feel they warrant a response further than that.

@96.241.151.80: I am for including facts with context as well. With that in mind, the article only lists her birthdate and city of birth, therefore, we should remove both information because we're not stating what time, in which hospital, and in what color blanket she was born. KyleJoantalk 16:13, 22 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No, what you would like it to read, by analogy, is "She was born."

@96.241.151.80: I've never feel more understood in my life. Cheers! KyleJoantalk 16:21, 22 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Journalist?

[edit]

Where did she attend journalism school? Dec212012 (talk) 18:51, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Adding User:KyleJoan here. Hostin is many things, a television talk show host, social commentator, author, and legal analyst, but she has never been a journalist. To my knowledge, she never attended journalism school, she's never been hired as a journalist for a newspaper or magazine or has ever been a news anchor or reporter. She has been a commentator, and appeared on various programs to offer her social commentary or legal opinions but she herself is not a journalist. The Hill also described her as being a "social commentator".[1] Her own website says she's known as a social commentator. Many articles reference her work as a social commentator and legal analyst both of which don't make you a journalist. Yes she's been on news programs but as a contributor not as a journalist.
On her own website she name drops she's a journalist but I couldn't find any specific examples of it. It references her Emmy wins and I found out that, "She won two Emmys for her work as a correspondent for ABC’s Good Morning America and one for her work as a correspondent for the ABC News Special, The President and the People."[2] Correspondent seems pretty vague and with the "The President and the People: Race in America" it seems as if she served in a commentator role. Regardless that was a while ago and not who she currently is now. So I would be fine with saying "Television personality", "Legal analyst", "Political commentator", etc. I think within the body of the article if you find sourced concrete examples of her being a journalist you could add them but it would be inaccurate adding it as a description of who she is now.
In the Westchester Magazine it labels her as "network commentator", "legal analyst", "Senior Legal Correspondent and analyst". Yes The Hill lists "Lawyer", "columnist", social commentator" as well as journalist. On her her own website it specifically says, "She is widely known as a social commentator and has covered many of the major legal, political, and cultural community stories of today". Its more appropriate to describe her as a social commentator than a journalist. The One I Left (talk) 11:51, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Reliable secondary sources describing Hostin as a journalist:
  • CBS News ("Black History Month honoree Sunny Hostin is an attorney and multi-platform journalist.")
  • Deadline Hollywood ("Most recently she released her debut book, I Am These Truths: A Memoir of Identity, Justice and Living Between Worlds (HarperOne), which features ... her path to becoming a successful television journalist.")
  • Forbes ("It wasn’t an easy feat for a journalist used to telling others’ stories.")
  • The Hollywood Reporter ("Emmy-winning legal journalist and The View co-host Sunny Hostin...")
  • The Independent ("Sunny Hostin has explained how fellow TV journalist Nancy Grace...")
  • New York Daily News ("The veteran legal journalist didn’t mince words...")
  • People ("This is the question that Sunny Hostin, Emmy Award-winning journalist and co-host of ABC’s The View, has been asked her whole life.")
  • Variety ("As a young girl, “The View” co-host and Emmy Award-winning legal journalist...")
This list clearly demonstrates that "journalist" is more than due, while your proposal to exclude the term has been mainly based on how you do not consider her a journalist. If you'd like to continue the discussion, rather than write another long explanation, please post on Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard to determine which term should be used. KyleJoantalk 12:25, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I just don't understand how they can broadly say she's a journalist. She never received a journalism degree, she never was a news anchor, or wrote for newspapers or magazines. She's been on TV as a commentator but that doesn't make you a journalist. In The Independent it also lists Nancy Grace as a journalist lol.The One I Left (talk) 12:35, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So now the sources are the issue. That doesn't change our findings that we now have ten sources describing Hostin as a "journalist" and three that describe her as a "commentator". Tell us again why (other than "The One I Left says so") the latter should be used over the former. KyleJoantalk 12:40, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Lmao I mean the sources don't explain why she's a journalist, they just cite it as so. What makes her a journalist? Is just being on TV and saying your opinions make one a journalist? I mean I could spend hours listing every source that labels her as commentator, including her own where she says she's mainly a commentator. Many of the websites I'm sure you listed also mention her as being a commentator lolThe One I Left (talk) 12:44, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So now your subjective analysis is more reliable than what we have determined to be reliable sources per WP:RSP? Are you sure you're on the right platform? And do you know what would be more beneficial than insinuating you could provide sources? Providing sources. If not, goodbye. KyleJoantalk 12:51, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's about undue weight lmao. She is more known as a commentator than a journalist.The One I Left (talk) 13:03, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Are there sources supporting that or is it just your personal opinion? The sources provided by KyleJoan suggest that Hostin is regularly referred to as a journalist by reliable sources, so we should probably do the same Caeciliusinhorto-public (talk) 14:22, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi User:Caeciliusinhorto-public! Hostin definitely is a well known legal analyst, former lawyer, social commentator and talk show host but I was surprised when she was referenced as a journalist. On her own website it mainly describes her as being "widely known as a social commentator and has covered many of the major legal, political, and cultural community stories of today". I know KyleJoan has provided sources that reference her as a "Journalist", I just haven't seen any sources detailing of her education or experience as a Journalist but more so as a commentator, analyst and legal correspondent. I would be okay with changing it to "legal journalist".
If the preponderance of RS said that she was a purple elephant, that's what she should be called on Wikipedia. BubbaJoe123456 (talk) 18:46, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ "Sunny Hostin". The Hill. Retrieved April 17, 2024.
  2. ^ "Sunny Hostin". HIV Is Not a Crime. Retrieved April 17, 2024.

Trump new ad using Sunny Hostin's interview with Kamala Harris.

[edit]

Sunny's interview with Harris used by Trump. IMPORTANT SHE KNOWS. 2601:40D:681:DDB0:41F6:FDBE:BF27:AC84 (talk) 22:11, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Sunny_Hostin&oldid=1251582985"