Contents

Talk:MSNBC: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 15:16, 18 January 2010

Skip to table of contents

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the MSNBC 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. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

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

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4Auto-archiving period: 90 days

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

This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

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 Low‑importance 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. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Journalism C‑class Mid‑importance 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. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Television C‑class Mid‑importance 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 page is not a forum for general discussion about MSNBC. Any such comments may be removedorrefactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about MSNBC at the Reference desk.

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.

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.

Something could stand to be added about MSNBC's false reporting on supposedly racist statements that Rush Limbaugh turned out to later have not said at all. Jtrainor (talk) 00:52, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

yes, that is a good point. they came out with that report asap. as i said in the post below, the tea bagger statements should be included, as well as janine garafollow's comments should too. i wont hold my breath however, wiki seems very hesitant to ackowledge any kind of popular resistence to obama and the "democrats". 136.160.191.18 (talk) 16:29, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"popular resistance" seems a little dramatic... - 63.239.65.10 (talk) 15:16, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

yea, just pointing out that msnbc came under scrutiny when they called protesters "tea baggers". i personally havent heard the phrase since highschool, so it sort of calls into scrutiny the credibility of journalists who not only bash protesters of obama, but to use an obscene phrase in doing so. also, janine garaffolow appeared on air calling anyone against the president a racist. i know wiki has a strict policy of trying to supress any anti obama sentiment, but to be somewhat credible i would include it. 136.160.191.18 (talk) 16:31, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

wiki's in general supress dissent, or just wikipedia? - 63.239.65.9 (talk) 15:14, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why is it neccesary to repeat this through out the article? Seems it's covered in the "Criticism and controversy" section. - 63.239.65.9 (talk) 15:14, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]