Talk:Charlie Rose

message: not a MENTION?
http://gothamist.com/2009/03/22/book_mob_mistakenly_targeted_talk_s.php 66.105.218.5 (talk) 02:58, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Assassination Attempt?? 

message: "it's been substantiated that he goes too easy on guests because he agreed not to talk politics with a businessman?"
Regardless of whether or not this page has an anti-Rose bias, the notion that politics should be off-limits in an interview with Roger Ailes is simply poor journalism, no matter who is conducting the interview.  Ailes' business strategy cannot be isolated from his politics - any discussion of his business that purposefully avoids politics will be totally superficial.
:I would argue that regardless of whether it's bad journalism, it's a wikipedia article about a journalist that includes an unsubstantiated allegation from one of possibly thousands of people the journalist has interviewed; do you think we should apply that standard to all wikipedia articles? This one also doesn't include a response by the journalist, or even a quote on the topic from the journalist. It doesn't even include the response of The Charlie Rose Show's executive producer, which is in the FAIR article. And again the allegation itself is unsubstantiated, it comes from an article (which is not viewable) in the NY Times which is summarized 3rd person on a media-watchdog group's website -- in a piece that also laments the media's unwillingness to treat Henry Kissinger as a war criminal rather than treating him objectively, as public figure many critics think should be charged with war crimes. Also, let's remember who the source of the allegation is exactly; a man who was CEO of a network in direct competition with PBS at the time. Now, I'm open the possibility that the allegation is true, but the discussion of that doesn't sound to me like something that belongs in the article. Besides, the intentions of the person who included the allegation became clear as soon as they chose to exclude the Show's response. --Knuckle Bean 20:03, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The article on Charlie Rose (show) also cites J.P. Morgan Chase, and Bloomberg as funding the show which I believe should be added in the "criticism" section along with coca-cola as "Big Media" and "Big Money"  are obviously a conflict of interest in investigative media. Also i think perhaps pointing out that he has (at least in the past) been hailed by "leftist" or "liberal" organizations such as Adbusters and IndyMedia as a "good" journalist despite these connections. Also... what about a see also with perhaps Bill Moyers, and some other "similar" journalists.  ...just some thoughts... --._-zro 20:15, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Business/Politics 

message: Can "welcome to the broadcast" be one? Stan weller 08:12, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Quotes 

message: WNET-13's broadcast of Charlie Rose led with a guest host, who said that Charlie Rose was recovering from mitral valve repair surgery.
 Lent 03:50, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Heart surgery 

message: I think it was in a _World Almanac_ that I came across the fact that there was a Senator (from North Carolina, I think) named Charlie Rose.  Just now, I used Google to search for "Senator Charlie Rose", and got *one* hit!  Funny how a shopkeeper's son can become so famous, while his own namesake and senator is utterly forgotten.  Incidentally, Wikipedia really needs articles on George Crile III, who just died recently and was well memorialized on Charlie's show, and who worked with him on 60 Minutes II.  Crile's father deserves some treatment, too.  His father was the famous surgeon found under "Crile" in Wikipedia. --
D021317c 10:07, 26 May 2006 (EDT)
:You may want to reread the first sentence of the article. There you will find reference and link to the politician's article (you were thinking of a congressmember). You should by all means start articles on the surgeons as well. Jokestress 00:33, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Senator Charlie Rose 

message: I have been thinking that Rose has a unique status as journalist: that is he can easily get an audience with presidents, kings, and anyone who wants to matter. I often find Rose's excessive talking (as interviewer, arguably putting words in mouths) irritating, but perhaps it helps make him effective. I don't want to put fluff in the main article, so I ask some questions here: Is Rose unique because American journalistic interviewers  occupy a low standard? If Rose retires, can he be replaced? At a time when the powerful seem to control all popular expression, what is the best journalism that can be hoped for?Anthony717 05:47, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If you say so. Hondo77 (talk) 02:17, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Unique status as journalist

message: Charlie Rose I think is generally well respected, and I think there should be some praise and/or awards section  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.52.215.67 (talk) 19:29, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Awards and/or Praise

message: The criticism section is seven years old. Hundreds of shows have been done since then. Is there anything more recent to substantiate the allegations?
Would anyone criticize Charles Kuralt for not asking demanding questions?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.89.192.125 (talk) 01:37, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticism dated 

message: Anybody watched his show? He appeared beat up. Anybody know how this happened?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bleach 2982 (talk • contribs) 04:40, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi. See http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/charlie-rose-sacrifices-face-for-macbook-air/ and/or http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/03/17/charlie-rose-face-plants-to-save-his-macbook-air/. --KFP (talk | contribs) 11:31, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bruises 

message: I came across this term used in a an issue of the "Electrical Engineer" (Nov 11 1891). The context pertains to enumeration of the american population in the US census; 
"The work of counting all those Charlie Roses might still be going on, but...". 
Can anyone enlighten me as to what the colloquialism may mean? It's obviously unrelated to the subject of this page, but, depending on significance, may be worth a disambiguation link. --BlueNovember (talk) 23:41, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Charlie Roses" as colloquial 19th century term 

message: I rev'd the edit where a 3-edit contrib'r inserted ", originally slated as a vaudeville show," which is farfetched, has the ring of stealth vandalism, & should await verification if true.  --Jerzy•t 22:34, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:   ", originally slated as a vaudeville show," 

message: ...is?
I have a hunch he's an agnostic.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.212.2.86 (talk) 15:10, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: My hunch? I'll take an each way bet on Quaker or Rastafarian or Mahayana Buddhist. Tsinfandel (talk) 19:34, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  His religion 

message: One or more portions of this article duplicated other source(s).  It was introduced in this series of edits. Infringing material has been removed by the restoration of an earlier version of the article. It must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you.  Moonriddengirl (talk) 12:18, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright problem removed 

message: Charlie Rose is shown on Bloomberg, and the trailers make it clear that the interviews take place in Bloomberg offices.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 219.77.148.133 (talk) 11:24, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why nothing about Bloomberg? 

message: I have an opportunity to listen to Charlie Rose speak this afternoon, so I came here looking to see if I might be interested. This article does little more than say "Charlie Rose" is a television journalist. That's terrible! Is he involved in philanthropy? Is he politically active? What does he stand for? All I get instead is brief resume and a list of residences he owns. As uninformative as this article is, you'd think this article was written by the main stream media. Rklawton (talk) 16:20, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Terrible article

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Charlie Rose. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091120230228/http://statelibrary.ncdcr.gov/ncawards/nca2.asp?bn=crose to http://statelibrary.ncdcr.gov/ncawards/nca2.asp?bn=crose
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150114083158/http://www.bilderbergmeetings.org/participants_2010.html to http://www.bilderbergmeetings.org/participants_2010.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110828210925/http://www.bilderbergmeetings.org/participants_2011.html to http://www.bilderbergmeetings.org/participants_2011.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:09, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Charlie Rose. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080627001124/http://warofillusions.wordpress.com/2008/06/23/my-analysis-of-bilderberg-2008/ to http://warofillusions.wordpress.com/2008/06/23/my-analysis-of-bilderberg-2008
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) 16:59, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The "Early Life" section contains no mention of church attendance or influence, or his parents' religious affiliation (or lack of it), which is highly unusual for that area of the farming south during those years.  Aren't both of his wives Jewish?Starhistory22 (talk) 05:04, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Evidently people who weren't around at the time don't remember that there was a draft lottery, by birth date. If you got a high number, you had little chance of being drafted. And unless we're delving into the draft history of every notable person who graduated from college around that time, this seems WP:UNDUE. --Tenebrae (talk) 15:28, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Early Life -- how bizarre 

message: Should we be putting end dates on the shows he hosts on CBS and PBS? He has not officially been terminated by either network as of yet.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikeb0728 (talk • contribs) 23:17, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Too soon, as suspension is not termination; & active investigations are underway by CBS, the Washington Post, & others. — Lentower (talk) 13:00, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: CBS and PBS have fired him http://www.latimes.com/business/hollywood/la-fi-ct-rose-cbs-fired-20171121-story.html.  --В²C ☎ 19:01, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sexual Harassment Claims 

message: I have seen Rose credited with winning several Emmy's & other awards not in this article.  Emmy's are notable & should be included.  — Lentower (talk) 16:06, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: He won one News and Documentary Emmy Award, which is included and cited here. --Tenebrae (talk) 15:29, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Emmy's & other awards. 

message: he *was* a tv host 2604:2000:B0C1:1D00:68B8:1EBA:C624:C559 (talk) 22:36, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: 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. —KuyaBriBriTalk 15:05, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 21 November 2017 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Charlie Rose. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100505081032/http://www.newsobserver.com/2010/04/15/438633/charlie-rose-to-speak-at-ncsus.html to http://www.newsobserver.com/2010/04/15/438633/charlie-rose-to-speak-at-ncsus.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141019063105/http://www.oswego.edu/news/index.php/site/news_story/charlie_rose_honor to http://www.oswego.edu/news/index.php/site/news_story/charlie_rose_honor
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) 14:33, 11 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Much of the text of the lead and honors section read as a newspaper rundown of the day's scandal.  I have toned down the lead, the details are in the article.  The Honors section should have been prose.  I have converted it from a bulleted list of what honors he has lost and hasn't yet lost to a neutral prose section that does not speculate on whether he might lose honors which officials have not yet said were in jeopardy. See WP:Ten year test. μηδείς (talk) 06:07, 17 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neutrality and Encyclopedic Style 

message: These Epstein allegations which I added to the article (which have been reverted multiple times) seem very much WP:DUE for this article. There is a decent amount of coverage in a number of different (non-tabloid) sources, and covers similar ground to the sexual abuse allegations already included in this article. --Bangalamania (talk) 02:16, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: EDIT: I have stricken all the info which in retrospect seems WP:UNDUE and possible WP:SYNTH. I still maintain that the amended text is relevant to the article. --Bangalamania (talk) 19:27, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Epstein allegations 

message: The section is pretty small considering 1) his stature before the scandal broke 2) the number of women who have made allegations and 3) the time period (about 20 years). It should be bigger. Unfortunately I don't know enough about it or have enough free time to research and write an expansion. Hopefully some reading this has both or at least one or the other. Lenbrazil (talk) 01:09, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:   The Sexual misconduct allegations section should be expanded.