Talk:Hannity & Colmes

message: Both Hannity and Colmes get eaqual speaking time. If you actually watch the show.
:A Harvard research group did a count of words spoken by both commentators, and found that Hannity spoke almost twice as many times as Colmes.  In any event, your use of the NPOV marker is inappropriate since the article says that "critics claim," and doesn't present the information as fact. --Holdek 00:09, Mar 6, 2005 (UTC)
::It is not the words that is the issue but the amout of time used for speaking. During the show there are blocks of time ie: Hannity 3.5 minutes Colmes 3.5 minutes Commerical Hannity 2 min. Colmes 2 min. Comm. ect. Hannity usually tries to "pin" down the guests while Colmes is more a ask a question get's an answer sort of person. The time given is eaqual is my main point. --BrenDJ 16:52, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Just because somebody says more words doesn't mean their opinion is more expressed. Another misleading report.   — Ilγαηερ (Tαlκ) 23:08, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  I removed the last sentence stating the supposedly concrete facts that "Hannity creates falsifications" and "Hannity talks more than Colmes."  The former is absolutely an opinion and the latter is very debatable. --Doctorcherokee 23:45, 5 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Just because two people speak for the same amount time doesn't mean that their opinions are equally expressed. Another logical fallacy. --Swift 08:15, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Added rephrased text regarding speaking time with citation. Vassyana 10:15, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Equal speaking time 

message: I've reverted because his critics allege that he often misleads, not that he sometimes misleads.  Look at the Media Matters page. --Holdek 04:47, Mar 8, 2005 (UTC)
:Oh, and Media Matters is often misleading, according to The O'Reilly Factor (9 June 2003).  Using one source to change an article, especially one known to be biased, leads to a biased article - as this one clearly is.  There is simply no reason to have this statement at all, since Hannity & Colmes is obviously an opinion-based program.
::In my mind, being an opinion-based program does not give the hosts of a show that seeks to provide "balanced" information to the public, the right to mislead. Even if a reporter misleads by failiure to do the neccissary research, this should ring warning bells and if it occurs "often", it is a sign of incompetence.
::Now, I don't know the show very well myself, and I find the article to represent both views on the topic. If critics believe Hannity often misleads, then I think it should stand.--Swift 06:46, 24 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Often vs. sometimes 

message: Why is liberal Al Franken being mentioned as a critic of Hannity & Colmes in this article, while The Al Franken Show page contains absolutely no criticism from conservatives?  An unfortunate example of a trend in political bias in Wikipedia.  Especially in such a short article, the reference should probably be removed.  In a longer, more thorough article it would be acceptable.  --Doctorcherokee 02:22, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I did not see the article at any point mention that Fraken feels his show is more balanced and it certainly does not need to be either way.  Fraken's point was only that Colmes is promoted as a liberal (thus giving Hannity & Colmes a balanced view) when he in fact feels that Holmes is just a puppet playing a liberal to make Hannity and his conservative view point look good.  There is some fairly strong evidence to backup this view point and Fraken's opinion (being generally regarded as a "hard-hitting" liberal) is certainly one such example. - 24.23.37.62 (talk) 18:38, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Al Franken 

message: "Colmes has been doing a lot of voiceovers, when Hannity has not been on the show." This need some serious clarification--I'm not really sure what this is supposed to be saying. Toscaesque 04:50, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Weird Sentence 

message: Alan Colmes claims to be a liberal yet attacks other liberals on the show. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.102.202.99 (talk • contribs) 17:27, 20 July 2006  (UTC)
:Great. If he were to let people off easy despite them having weak arguments, simply because he shared their general philosophical views, then he'd be a lousy reporter. Your description of his behaviour isn't sufficient to lable him as a good journalist, but it alone certainly doesn't make him a bad one. --Swift 19:52, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: See talk:It is Conservative and Liberal- thank you  Astuishin (talk) 06:11, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alan Colmes 

message: It is clear that a major portion of the article is unsourced (and the external link doesn't touch many of the details mentioned in the articles).  Let's recall WP:NOR and WP:VERIFY and that might help in the improvement of the article without sacrificing NPOV. 147.70.242.40 23:56, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources, anybody? 

message: The first line calls Hannity and Colmes conservative and liberal but this is very American POV.  Link to conservatism and liberalism and you will see these philosophies do not match these news presenters very well.  A better phrase would be center-right and center-left which accurately position these two on the American political spectrum so that non-Americans can understand.
Maybe the first line using the pipe trick could be :"featuring center-right host Sean Hannity and the center-left Alan Colmes" or "featuring self-proclaimed conservative host Sean Hannity and the self-proclaimed liberal Alan Colmes"
Arlright 00:34, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: American political labeling is almost always POV. Most self-anointed "conservatives" are far from it in the historical sense; many in this group of people would define a liberal as a person who disagrees "with me." Alan Colmes is promoted as a liberal by Fox News Channel, but he disagrees with the promotion, asserting that he is closer to that of a moderate than a classical American liberal. 147.70.242.40 00:17, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I'll try the edit and see how long it lasts. - Arlright 20:49, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

text: I think much of the debate and rancor over the use of the labels "liberal" and "conservative" derives from the fact that Hannity is a neoconservative and Colmes is a neoliberal. Both positions differ considerably from what most readers would associated with "liberal" and "conservative". Perhaps we should use the "neo-" labels. Thoughts? Vassyana 06:18, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Conservative and liberal?

message: Hannity might, in some ways, represent a certain facets of neo-concertatism, but Alan Colmes is most definitely NOT a neo-liberal.  Neo-liberals are liberals in the Adam Smithsonian sense of the word.  I would suggest that Colmes' politics, atleast economically (economics being the realm in which neo-liberal theory competes), is Keynesian.  It might be more acurate to describe him as a 'welfare liberal'.
Joe in Seattle
:See neoliberal. As noted in that article introduction it refers to "moderate" Democrats in the United States. Since this is a U.S. political talk show, I have changes the revert on the neoliberal label and added a reference to the "moderate" wing of the U.S. Democratic Party for clarity. Alan Colmes has described himself in this fashion. Vassyana 04:05, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I changed it to liberal before reading the talk page, sorry. I don't believe neo-liberal is correct here. It's purely an economic term most associated with the political right. Both George Bush and Sean Hannity themselves would be described as "neo-liberal".--Oakhouse 15:34, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neoliberal? 

message: The show is based on Hannity being the conservative and Colmes the liberal.  That will suffice for the box.  Now, they may be on some part of that spectrum, but that is too much info for the box.  azalea_pomp
::There is clear evidence that Colmes credentials as a liberal are shaky. If anything he is a moderate. IMO Hannity and Colmes political positions should simply be briefly discussed within the article, and the the one word description in the infobox should be removed.- thank you  Astuishin (talk) 14:50, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Colmes is a self-proclaimed liberal.  He holds many liberal beliefs.  Political blogs like MMFA or others should not be used to label people, especially when done in a negative light.  --75.21.166.42 06:00, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well first off the source is from USA Today not media matters, secondly self description is not necessarily infallible and should be treated as such. Colmes proclaims that he is a liberal just as media matters proclaims there're fair. Those proclamations do not validate the claims as true. I simply believe there is to much evidence disputing the claim that Colmes is liberal, for that statement to be made as fact. And IMO the political positions of Hannity and Colmes should discussed in more detail in the article. - thank you  Astuishin (talk) 00:11, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: It is Conservative and Liberal

message: If people are going to state that "Studies say this or that" then they better include a citation to an actual study.  Newshounds complaining that Holmes got less time than Hannity on one show is not a study.  Lets try to be a little more balanced and impartial.  Arzel (talk) 04:07, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citation of Studies 

message: Whether you believe so or not, Colmes claims to represent the Liberal point of view on the show.  Generally in these types of articles we don't define what others are, we let them define themselves in the lead.  Now it is perfectly ok to cite some criticism that says otherwise later in the article, but we can only report the way the show defines itself.  Arzel (talk) 01:25, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I seem to remember that the task of an encyclopedia is to report the truth. Remember that David Duke and the likes of them consider and describe themselves as reasonable, but wikipeida does not simply "report" these pronouncements without comment. Its pretty clear to anyone familiar with American liberalism that Colmes hardly subscribe to it. I think its fair to state his comments, and reaction to them as well to as his actions and views expressed on HC and incorporate that into the article. thanks  Astuishin (talk) 01:54, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Colmes = Liberal? 

message: Media matters for America is a "liberal commentator"? Last time I checked it was non-profit media criticism.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.165.28.7 (talk) 16:52, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Media Matters for America describes itself as "a web-based, not-for-profit, progressive research and information center dedicated to comprehensively monitoring, analyzing, and correcting conservative misinformation in the U.S. media." It actually defines itself as liberal (progressive) and being opposed to conservative though. -- Atamachat 21:17, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Media Matters for America 

message: Somethings up. This page says the 1st air date is Oct 6, 1996. Yet the Fox News Channel page says they launched Oct 7, 1996. What gives? Did this show start on a different channel? Or did it really air with Fox's launch on the 7th? -Anonymous 03:14, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  First Air Date Wrong? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Hannity & Colmes. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20071012214551/http://www.foxnews.com:80/story/0,2933,1242,00.html to http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,1242,00.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 02:37, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Hannity & Colmes. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.foxnews.com/story/0%2C2933%2C1242%2C00.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101211175941/http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20081124/pl_politico/26523 to https://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20081124/pl_politico/26523
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:18, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I would like to know who was the blonde chick that interviewed Kevin Nash about Chris Benoit. Sean Hannity was out that day and she interrupted by yell alright Mr. Nash this is Karen. when he said Steroids are used for therapy. and what is she up to today? thank you. 47.198.114.252 (talk) 16:09, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Blonde guest host name