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.
Concern: The introduction mentions alleged bias or other controversial information.
WP:LEAD - The lead should be capable of standing alone as a concise overview of the article, establishing context, explaining why the subject is interesting or notable, and briefly describing its notable controversies. It is appropriate to overview the controversies and allegations of bias, as these are substantial.
Concern: The introduction mentions allegations of conservative bias but I've seen studies that say Fox News is centrist and/or liberal. Shouldn't these viewpoints be mentioned in the lead as well?
Although there are studies with various viewpoints on Fox, the view that Fox is conservative dominates. For the lead we restrict ourselves to the dominant view, conservative bias, while noting that this viewpoint has dissenters. The lead should only briefly summarize the notable controversies. The notability of this particular controversy is measured by studies, documentaries, films, boycotts from influential persons based on the perception of bias, and numerous pop culture references to the alleged conservative bias. No other viewpoint has gained as much currency, and therefore including them in the lead would violate WP:FRINGE; WP:NPOV and WP:LEAD.
Concern: Does the article take any position regarding the allegations of bias?
Wikipedia takes no position on whether Fox News is biased. The introduction highlights the existence of a notable controversy concerning the perception that the network promotes conservative political positions. Neither the introduction nor the article takes a position on whether such a perception is accurate, we merely reflect the consensus of reliable independent sources.
Previous discussions: See archives 21, 19, 18, 17, 16 (Includes RfC) and 15.
Please stay calm and civil while commenting or presenting evidence, and do not make personal attacks. Be patient when approaching solutions to any issues. Ifconsensus is not reached, other solutions exist to draw attention and ensure that more editors mediate or comment on the dispute.
This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of companies 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.CompaniesWikipedia:WikiProject CompaniesTemplate:WikiProject Companiescompany articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Conservatism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of conservatism 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.ConservatismWikipedia:WikiProject ConservatismTemplate:WikiProject ConservatismConservatism articles
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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Radio, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Radio-related subjects 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.RadioWikipedia:WikiProject RadioTemplate:WikiProject RadioRadio articles
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
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
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
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
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.
The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:
You must follow the bold-revert-discuss cycle if your change is reverted. You may not reinstate your edit until you post a talk page message discussing your edit and have waited 24 hours from the time of this talk page message
Violations of any of these restrictions should be reported immediately to the arbitration enforcement noticeboard.
Editors who are aware of this topic being designated a contentious topic and who violate these restrictions may be sanctioned by any uninvolved administrator, even on a first offense.
Latest comment: 1 year ago4 comments3 people in discussion
Fox News is listed by the TV Guide - a property, coincidentally, owned by Rupert Murdoch - as an “entertainment” channel. In 2007, Roger Ailes said that Fox News’ direct competitors were entertainment channels, citing TBS and USA as examples. In Canada, Fox must label its broadcast “for entertainment purposes”. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sgardn14 (talk • contribs)
What change are you proposing to the article. ValarianB (talk) 16:06, 1 March 2023 (UTC)Reply
The HuffPo article clearly states that it is an April Fool’s joke. Also TV Guide does not list Fox as entertainment. Was not able to find any article featuring Ailes comparing Fox to TBS or USA. I was only able to find people repeating these claims, verbatim, elsewhere on the web without sources. Check TV Guide’s live TV listings and it lists multiple FNC shows as “newscast” as it does for ABC, CBS, CNN and NBC. https://www.tvguide.com/listings/Gerlandosss (talk) 14:45, 28 March 2023 (UTC)Reply
As for the claim that Fox is listed as entertainment in Canada all I could find was this from Snopes: “The claimed distinction that Fox News Channel is only allowed in Canada due to its being classified as an "entertainment" channel rather than as a "news" channel is a meaningless one, as those classifications only apply to Canadian media outlets, and Fox is an American company.” https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/canadian-fox/Gerlandosss (talk) 14:48, 28 March 2023 (UTC)Reply
The Dominion controversy was in their analysis and entertainment shows, not in their journalistic reportingedit
Latest comment: 12 days ago4 comments4 people in discussion
This was FOX's official position in court, and it has been accepted by every actor involved in the controversy and case. It is important to explain clearly that it wasn't FOX's journalistic reporting and journalistic standards that were in question, but instead, their entertainment shows, which operate under different standards, including contractually. 201.207.239.205 (talk) 07:20, 17 October 2023 (UTC)Reply
Fox has "journalistic reporting and journalistic standards" ? when did this happen? ValarianB (talk) 12:39, 17 October 2023 (UTC)Reply
Fox lost. So, I don't know that their "official position" had much credence. O3000, Ret. (talk) 13:12, 17 October 2023 (UTC)Reply
How relevant is the difference between the journalistic, i.e. "news reporting", and the political commentary parts of Fox? I guess the most pertinent question to ask here is, "Is Fox News characterized predominantly by their journalistic arm or their commentary arm?", or, put another way, "When people think of Fox, are they thinking of the news room or the opinion section?". I think the fact that the Fox News organization is not a monolith is a lot less important than that Fox is heavily identified with Tucker Carlson, Sean Hannity, Jesse Waters and Fox's other opinion hosts, rather than Fox's news hosts. 67.180.148.167 (talk) 07:03, 14 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 5 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Martial arts cannot stop someone with an assault rifle firing several rounds per second. It’s simply not true! 2601:190:500:6652:B02D:4523:91D7:5A2B (talk) 02:15, 28 October 2023 (UTC)Reply
level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
