Talk:Raw Story

"Junk news" and "hyperpartisan"

I looked at Fox News and "junk" is not a word found in that article. "Hyperpartisan" is also not found in that article.

So why the discrepancy? And "junk news" is not defined in the article. --Timeshifter (talk) 07:13, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Timeshifter. I added a section regarding junk news below and would love your input. [Please note that while my username discloses my conflict of interest, I would again point out my conflict of interest as a point of fairness in trying to achieve consensus or fair agreement.] Thanks in advance for any consideration. JByrne404 (talk) 04:56, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

JByrne404. I don't have a lot of time nowadays for Wikipedia.

Looks like Grorp has since replied, and thoroughly covered the issues.

The current sentence in the first paragraph of the article would never be allowed as is in a biography article. Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons. So why should we use lesser standards here?

Raw Story is considered a hyperpartisan media outlet and has been described as junk news.

It is an attack on a media organization in Wikipedia's voice. It violates WP:NPOV.

The correct way is A describes B as C. Based on ...

That lets the readers decide.

And it should not be in the lede after everything Grorp has found.

--Timeshifter (talk) 18:06, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

You (and i mean all of the partisan hacks disguised as editors) are not really seem to be care about non leftist people and media organizations. Just read any lead in articles of non leftist ppl or media orgs.

For example this lead is nice and neutral and then there s a damn long section called false claims. Why this is not called fake news etc? I just saw ISI96 contributed to this article largely yet his other erticles are considered a crusade against non leftist media orgs.

What do you call someone who always depicts leftist ppl and orgs nice or neutral at worst and non leftist ppl and orgs bad, unaceptable or neutral at best?

U r all biased partisan hacks as the whole wikipedia project by now. 94.21.109.32 (talk) 23:12, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

94.21.109.32. You call me a partisan hack based on nothing. We get a lot of complaining IP editors like you who only see what they want to see. Get a user name so we can see how you edit. Look at my edits and you will see that I fully respect WP:NPOV (Wikipedia:Neutral point of view).

The lead paragraph here says "progressive". The lead paragraph at Fox News says "conservative". They are generally accurate terms as far as those otherwise meaningless terms can be.

Fox News article has many false claims and controversies.

"Junk news" and "hyperpartisan" are just insults desired by people like you. At Wikipedia we let readers make up their own minds.

"Progressive" and "conservative" are general terms that are meaningless in many cases. Single payer healthcare for example is the more fiscally conservative form of healthcare, and people live longer under it on average. A more effective use of dollars. Thus conservative.

And political parties change over time. Abraham Lincoln was a Republican. In the United States, the first progressive federal income tax was established by the Revenue Act of 1862. The act was signed into law by Lincoln. It replaced a flat tax. See: Progressive tax. So was the Republican Party of 1862 a progressive or conservative party, or a mixture of both, as we know the terms today? They are general terms.

Wikipedia presents the facts as backed up by references. Readers can label things as they please. WP:NPOV. --Timeshifter (talk) 10:39, 8 November 2022 (UTC)

Hi Timesshifter. I posted on another of your pages but in case I screwed up (not a member of Wiki) I thought I'd post the same thing here for you and Grorp. PLEASE let Wikipedia readers make up their own mind about Palmer Report too. There is no source that I could find for labeling them a partisan fake news site in the header.

Here is what I wrote to you on the other page. Timeshifter hi. Question. I am hoping I am doing this correctly. I saw your comments on Raw Story and agree with them.I am sorry but I do not have an account and hope this is the correct place to respond. I will also answer you on the other page.

Can you PLEASE --- whenever you have time take a look at Palmer Report? There has been a Wikipedia attack from some republican editors. They are a political site -- a good one and I am a fan.

For months (years) scores of people have been pleading with the editors there to take the "hyper partisan, fake news website" out of the header. It is not accurate. It was put there by the same person who muddied up Raw story -- a republican. I along with dozens -- literally dozens of people protested. We felt it was an attack, a vicious one. The response was always send some reliable sources to counter it.

Only nobody ever used the term "hyper-partisan, fake news website" in the first place. I spent four hours trying to find a source and asked several times. There are some obscure republican sources. They never used, to the best of my knowledge any of those terms.

They also locked the page when people tried to change it and called it vandalism. But everyone I saw came in good faith. The Palmer Report is not fake news and is very much like Raw Story. I had a source -- Brian Williams from MSNBC did a segment several tears ago and used information from their site. I was told that was not interesting enough to put on the site and then they ignored me and all the others. You an easily see this through old Talk pages because there are over a dozen complaints.

I hope you are not upset that I posted such a long post but I think what is happening makes Wiki look very bad and I liked what you said on the raw story site. I do not want to name the person less it be thought of as a verbal attack but you can see all this quite easily. Please if you can do anything, please research this and please look seriously at the "hyperpartisan, fake news" entry. Because that is not neutral.

Thank you,

Norah 2600:6C65:7E7F:B93E:AD3C:1976:2DA8:EAB2 (talk) 00:33, 7 February 2023 (UTC)

This page was last edited on 5 February 2023, at 00:11 (UTC). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:6C65:7E7F:B93E:AD3C:1976:2DA8:EAB2 (talk)

I replied on my talk page. --Timeshifter (talk) 01:04, 7 February 2023 (UTC)

Additional citation for domestic extremism

• Specific text to be added or removed: The site was also the first to report on the indictments of the founders of the Rise Above Movement, a California white nationalist group known for actively seeking out and engaging in street brawls.
• Reason for the change: This sentence fleshes out additional coverage of white nationalism, which Raw Story has been credited for.
• References supporting change: https://www.vice.com/en/article/3adm3j/robert-rundo-indictment-rise-above-movement

Thanks for your consideration! JByrne404 (talk) 22:33, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

 Done. Grorp (talk) 06:37, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

Thank you! Happy New Year! JByrne404 (talk) 16:17, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

Raw Story hires new editors

• Specific text to be added or removed: In 2023, Raw Story named Dave Levinthal, formerly deputy editor at Insider, as Editor-in-Chief, with the goal of expanding investigative and enterprise reporting. Prior to Insider, Levinthal served at OpenSecrets, Politico and The Dallas Morning News. The site also named Adam Nichols as Executive Editor, formerly Managing Editor at Patch.
• Reason for the change: The new editors replace editors listed in the infobox. They also reflect a change in focus for the site and indicate the site is hiring senior editors from competing news sites. I suggest this change for the history section and the infobox.
• References supporting change: https://www.politico.com/newsletters/playbook-pm/2023/01/09/what-the-three-amigos-are-looking-for-00077044 https://talkingbiznews.com/media-moves/raw-story-makes-two-top-editorial-hires/ https://www.rawstory.com/about-us/masthead/

Thanks in advance for your consideration! JByrne404 (talk) 17:33, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

 Done. Grorp (talk) 07:53, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

Report on $690,000 theft from Sen. Jerry Moran (R-KS)

• Specific text to be added or removed: In January 2023, Raw Story's Dave Levinthal was the first to report that cyberthieves stole $690,000 from the Senate campaign of Jerry Moran (R-KS). He also revealed that $150,000 was stolen from Trump ally Rep. Troy Nehls (R-TX).
• Reason for the change: The reports are scoops that demonstrate Raw Story's investigative reporting, cited in the hiring of new Editor-in-Chief Dave Levinthal, referenced in the History section.
• Suggestion for cleanup: Because the end of the content section includes another "first to report" sentence, perhaps the Rise Above Movement sentence can be shortened and blended into the prior paragraph, also about domestic extremism. [Perhaps revising to read: ‘Raw Story was the first to report on the re-indictments of the founders of the Rise Above Movement, a California white nationalist group known for actively seeking out and engaging in street brawls.’]
• References supporting change (first sentence): https://apnews.com/article/politics-kansas-city-jerry-moran-77b20f856652279c4756f24f6bb29beb https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2023/01/20/politics/jerry-moran-campaign-cybercriminals-fbi/index.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/01/23/latest-cyberattack-health-care-shows-how-vulnerable-sector-is/ https://www.axios.com/2023/01/21/republican-jerry-moran-campaign-cybercriminals-theft https://www.foxnews.com/politics/kansas-republican-sen-moran-says-cyber-criminal-stole-nearly-700k-campaign
• References supporting change (second sentence): https://www.thedailybeast.com/cybercriminals-steal-dollar150k-from-trump-ally-troy-nehls-campaign-fund https://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/article/troy-nehls-campaign-wire-theft-17767384.php https://www.politico.com/newsletters/playbook-pm/2023/02/06/the-sotu-stakes-for-biden-00081339?nname=playbook-pm&nid=0000015a-dd3e-d536-a37b-dd7fd8af0000&nrid=0d413eb3-7eb8-46a8-ab5b-39bb574340bc&nlid=964328

Thanks for your consideration! JByrne404 (talk) 20:13, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

 Done. Grorp (talk) 00:36, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

Additional campaign theft exclusive

• Specific text to be added or removed: Levinthal also revealed that a thief stole more than $10,000 from Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer's (D-NY) campaign account.
• Reason for the change: As noted by The Daily Beast, the incident is "the latest and probably highest profile incident in a growing trend of thefts targeting political organizations on both sides of the aisle." The suggested text might be added to the paragraph outlining reports of prior thefts.
• References supporting change: https://www.thedailybeast.com/check-thief-pilfers-chuck-schumers-campaign-committee-report-says, https://www.politico.com/newsletters/new-york-playbook/2023/04/04/trump-v-new-york-tbd-00090292, https://morningconsult.com/briefs/morning-consult-washington-trumps-gop-primary-lead-widens-ahead-of-arraignment/?from_subscribe=true

Thanks for your consideration! JByrne404 (talk) 16:43, 4 April 2023 (UTC)