From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

CNN Anchors Fake a Satellite Interview in the Same Parking Lot[edit]

www.infowarscom/cnn-anchors-pretend-theyre-having-a-satellite-interview-even-though-theyre-in-the-same-parking-lot/ [Unreliable fringe source?] Nancy Grace and Ashleigh Banfield keep a straight face , only standing within 50 feet of each other while faking a satellite interview !

CNN liberal bias[edit]

Editors this should be placed within the top 2 paragraphs of the CNN Wikipedia page:

CNN has been described as practicing biased reporting in favor of the Democratic Party, and liberal politics in general. Critics have cited the channel as detrimental to the integrity of news overall. CNN employees have said that news reporting operates independently of its opinion and commentary programming, and have denied bias in news reporting, while former employees have said that CNN ordered them to "slant the news in favor of liberalism ."

Now your probably going to say where are the sources for this information. I am going to say EVERYWHERE!!!! Look for yourself. This exact language was taken from the FOX NEWS wikipedia page from paragraph 2. The words Fox News has been changed to CNN and the word conservative changed to liberal. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 14:37, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

Yes, there should be equal treatment given to the networks. Why put Fox News's conservative bias in the introduction of the article while putting CNN's liberal bias at the bottom? This gives the reader to believe Wikipedia has a bias and agenda. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 15:25, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

There is indeead a very disappointing lack of information on CNN's left wing bias on this article, yet again showcasing the power of the entire website's bias. The Fox News article for example is immediately described as a biased and nonfactual news source in the first section of it. I wouldn't even bother to attempt to add this information to the CNN since no doubt the democratic gatekeepers of Wikipedia would have it removed immediately. It's a real shame. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jjarkk (talkcontribs) 02:49, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

@Jjarkk: There are independent articles about CNN controversies and Fox News controversies, did you know that? I think you can help there.--SharabSalam (talk) 04:16, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
@SharabSalam: Yes, I obviously did. I'm addressing the bias on the main articles, that are very prevalent seeing that Fox News is discredited in the very first section, in contrast to CNN's bias hardly being covered anywhere on the actual page. Don't pretend you're ignorant of this fact to push your bias.--Jjarkk (talk) 04:20, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
@Jjarkk: I am just asking if you know that such articles exist. I am not saying that this article is biased or not I dont have any opinion about it. BTW this is not s social network or something if you personally attack another editor you will get blocked.--SharabSalam (talk) 04:28, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 February 2019[edit]

Cnn is fake news. They side with the left. They became bias during the Obama era. (talk) 20:23, 11 February 2019 (UTC).

 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. Aoi (青い) (talk) 20:36, 11 February 2019 (UTC)

CNN falsification of Venezuela Story[edit]

Back in February of 2019, CNN created a completely false story about the burning of several Humanitarian Aid trucks in Venezuela. They falsely stated that “a CNN team saw incendiary devices from police on the Venezuelan side of the border ignite the trucks.” IN reality, it was anti-Maduro protestors that did this. The story was picked up by several other news organizations and it was as the unquestionable truth until an NYT exposé revealed that it was in fact false. This is a major controversy that isn't covered in this article and I think should be addressed as a tendency towards a pro-war bias. I'm new to the talk page but I thought this issue was important so I made an account. I'd love to help someone write this if anyone sees it as pressing as I do.

Wikiteverett (talk) 21:09, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

It doesn't seem that there is enough coverage of this controversy so it's not notable enough to be included in this article. Also, publishing false/fake news isn't something that is unusual for the CNN or any American news outlets. It's not that big news.--SharabSalam (talk) 21:21, 1 May 2019 (UTC)
If you admit that it's not uncommon for CNN to misreport shouldn't that be discussed in the article? And seeing as it had a widespread impact on just about every other news organization, doesn't that also seem relevant to their organization as whole? Wikiteverett (talk) 22:10, 1 May 2019 (UTC)


Are there any newer numbers about spectators? What about a decline in viewership?