Talk:CNSNews.com

This page was proposed for deletion by Lindjosh (talk · contribs) on 4 September 2020.

Conservatism Low‑importance

	Conservatism portal This redirect 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
Low	This redirect has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Websites: Computing Low‑importance

	This redirect is part of WikiProject Websites, an attempt to create and link together articles about the major websites on the web. To participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page.WebsitesWikipedia:WikiProject WebsitesTemplate:WikiProject WebsitesWebsites articles
Low	This redirect has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.
	This redirect is supported by WikiProject Computing.

It's looking better. A better job at analyizing their stories could be done. For instance, to pick through the journalistic standards, and then review stories. Just an idea.

Experience working for CNSNews.com

I used to work for CNSNews.com. Sure, there's a bias, but that comes down to what stories get covered, but I constantly had it drilled into me by David Thibault and Scott Hogenson that I wasn't supposed to editorialize. They even fired people for doing so. BTW, I proudly can say that ConWebWatch never flagged one story I wrote for CNSNews.com during my tenure. --68.45.161.241 14:57, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Usable as RS?

Any luck with using this as a WP:RS? Seems that any news source that isn't liberal biased can't be used in WP unless backed up by another liberal source. Bachcell (talk) 20:42, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe as a source for conservative opinion. But it would be on a case by case basis. Dougweller (talk) 21:10, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You would be better off asking at WP:RSN. But they would tell you no anyways. Grsz¹¹ 01:34, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Always a cheerful response as expected. Bachcell (talk) 17:01, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, just trying to help. But it should have been pretty obvious that asking a question about the use of the subject on Wikipedia is pretty irrelevant on the article talk page. Grsz¹¹ 01:28, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

When did it become Cybercast News?

Seems like a relevant piece of information. --Bertrc (talk) 17:13, 12 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That's a good observation. The URL http://www.conservativenews.org ends up at a placeholder page with the Media Research Center banner, as does http://www.cybercastnews.org. The CNSNews History page says Cybercast News Service was launched on June 16, 1998, which is the same date as "Conservative News Service", according to The New York Times citation in the article. It's possible that the founders toyed with several names at the time, finally settling on the more generic CNSNews.com moniker a year and a half later. — Quicksilver^{T @} 16:09, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV dispute

Cybercast News Service's website was registered under the name: Conservative News Service. The founder, L. Brent Bozell III is an American conservative writer and activist. Even so, in this article all we see is CNS's stance that, they put a "higher premium on balance than spin." In these talk pages one person who worked for them even admitted their bias. I think there is enough bias from CNS to warrant at least some inclusion of the controversy. See http://conwebwatch.tripod.com/blog/index.blog?topic_id=1015142.

I would suggest adding something to the effect of the line on Fox News Channel, "...has long been accused of promoting conservative political positions and it has been widely criticized for biased reporting. Commentators, news anchors, and reporters at Fox News Channel have responded that news reporting and political commentary operate independently of each other and have denied any bias in news reporting."— Preceding unsigned comment added by Takeda1 (talk • contribs) 17:20, 20 October 2014‎

I don't see much that could be considered non-neutral in this article. It's mostly a recitation of some dry facts. The only thing that is questionable is inclusion of opinions about CNS News from The Washington Post and Nancy Pelosi, neither of which have any credibility left as of late, especially the latter. As for you including a citation from a radical leftist hate site, conwebwatch.com, you're joking, right? — Quicksilver^{T @} 15:46, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Renaming

I've been bold and renamed the article. A quick Google search shows nearly 10 times the ghits for CNSNews.com than for the old name, a clear indication that CNSNews.com is the common name. - BilCat (talk) 23:53, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

CSD A7 note

Hey, a quick note on my CSD A7 nomination. All the citations in the article are from CNSNews.com itself, apart from two: one automatically generated Alexa.com search result, and an archived Washington Post article about a former editor in chief who happens to be a former US Marine disapproving of the Iraq war. Googling "CNSNews.com" shows up only results for where they've been quoted for a random figure or something. ItsPugle (please use {{reply|ItsPugle}}) 13:13, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]