Talk:Laura Ingraham

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

White supremacist controversy[edit]

Another Ingraham controversy has flared up and may be worthy of inclusion if it continues to receive news coverage. Ingraham has apparently defended some white supremacists and other far-right personalities who have been expelled from social media. She lost at least one sponsor.[1][2][3][4]

References

  1. ^ Brice-Saddle, Michael (May 31, 2019). "Laura Ingraham promoted a white supremacist on her show. At least one advertiser is pulling out". The Washington Post. Retrieved June 1, 2019.
  2. ^ Darcy, Oliver (May 31, 2019). "Fox News stands by Laura Ingraham after she defends white supremacist, other extremists on her prime time show". CNN. Retrieved June 1, 2019.
  3. ^ Steinberg, Brian (May 31, 2019). "Laura Ingraham Pushes Back on White Supremacist Controversy". Variety. Retrieved June 1, 2019.
  4. ^ Le Miere, Jason (June 1, 2019). "Fox News Host Laura Ingraham Hits Out At Cnn After She Defended White Supremacist Paul Nehlen". Newsweek. Retrieved June 1, 2019.

Education[edit]

What did she major in? That might be significant to readers, given that she offers opinions on various topics, e.g. COVID-19

Yes because everyone offering opinions has a degree in that topic. CNN, MSNBC, and the other left news only offer fact. Never opinion or even political bias. Thanks Mr. Doomas. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1004:B170:2C02:C83:2749:56C8:79AE (talk) 03:18, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

grammar edit in Coronavirus section[edit]

"disproe effectiveness" instead of "disprove"

Worst Wikipedia Entry I've Ever Read[edit]

I think this needs a COMPLETE rewrite. Totally biased information that only cites items that a liberal would point out. I have donated a lot of money to Wikipedia but might have to rethink that after reading this. Absolutely shameful claptrap. 152.208.58.247 (talk) 03:55, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Reality has a liberal bias. Still no mention of the Dartmouth controversy her brother discusses in several interviews. You’re giving me some needed inspiration to add it. Viriditas (talk) 02:41, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
LMAO! You mean this? 'She's a monster': Laura Ingraham's gay brother lashes out in interview. Curtis Ingraham, the Fox News star’s brother, has been speaking out against his famous sibling and her conservative views since the beginning of the year. “Our father was a Nazi sympathizer, racist, anti-Semite and homophobe,” Curtis Ingraham, who is gay, wrote alongside a video of his sister. “Like father like daughter?” -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 03:45, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No idea what the OP is on about, but the controversy over what happened in the aftermath of Ingraham's deliberate outing of gay students still isn’t in the article. Her brother alleges one of the students committed suicide after his sister outed them. Viriditas (talk) 03:57, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
if what people say is ok to put in wiki as fact, I always hear it must be from a reputable source. There has to be a lot uncensoring going on at wiki because this is about what her brother said in an interview, where he obviously is disgruntled. Any way to prove all her brother said was true about, her, her dad, and things she allegedly said? Typical bias entry. All left views. Where is fact, you know the middle where most of us are??? 2600:1004:B170:2C02:C83:2749:56C8:79AE (talk) 03:10, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That's Wokeapedia. 2601:281:D685:4360:6CAA:5132:8AE5:503 (talk) 00:38, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There's no earthly way you donated a dime here, let alone a lot. The fact that you think saying so makes it true or that anyone would believe you is a reverse insult you visit upon yourself. 71.47.252.144 (talk) 05:25, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This reads more like a hit piece than a Wiki bio.[edit]

Responsible community members need to swallow their biases and vacuum this "article". 2600:1700:1B29:4880:9F3:82A:7F35:CA5F (talk) 19:44, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations, this is the 1,000,000th post by someone who doesn't like a bio without providing a single example of bias. O3000, Ret. (talk) 20:30, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 7 June 2023[edit]

4th paragraph under the "Immigration and Race" subsection, the word "instances" is misspelled in this sentence: [When her statement was criticized, Ingraham said there was "no racial intent in my remarks" and cited her 2003 book Shut Up & Sing and other intstances when she had said performers should "shut up" about politics.]

Change "intstances" to "instances" MickRyan1 (talk) 05:52, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Thanks. Llll5032 (talk) 05:58, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 22 June 2023[edit]

Dangerous (and off-topic) misinformation O3000, Ret. (talk)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. 
203.220.64.191 (talk) 13:26, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your article about the response to Covid 19 are sadly out of date given it is now accepted that wearing masks was a complete waste of time and lockdowns caused more damage to the people than they were supposed to protect.

Vaccinations neither prevented transmission or contracting the virus which your organisation continues to promote.

Hardly I reliable information source.

 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 and provide a reliable source if appropriate. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 13:37, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Not a proper sentence"[edit]

@Amaury:

A sentence is defined as a set of words that contains a subject ("Ingraham") and a predicate ("speaks at [...]").

Please tell me why you think this is not a sentence. Maxeto0910 (talk) 20:28, 25 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

MOS:CAPFRAGS --FMSky (talk) 16:59, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for supporting me by citing the guideline. The case stated in the guideline page which applies here is clearly the second example, "Period or full stop ends complete sentence", as it also fulfills the definition of a sentence and thus ends with a period. P.S.: I just saw that you changed the caption to a sentence fragment so that it shouldn't end with a period anymore. That's fine as well, but Amaury was definitely wrong. This thread can be archived now. Maxeto0910 (talk) 20:45, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 4 December 2023[edit]

There are a number of instances (the "Books" and "Homosexuality" subsections, for example) where periods are placed outside of quotation marks at the end of a sentence but should be placed inside the quotation marks. Does not matter that a footnote/endnote number follows. The period should be inside. https://contemporaryarts.mit.edu/guidelines Amlans (talk) 07:23, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Not done: Thank you, but they appear to follow MOS:LQUOTE, our style guide. Can you point to any instances where they don't? O3000, Ret. (talk) 12:42, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments on Nipsey Hussle[edit]

I remember when Ingraham got backlash over this, I'll list some sources below so anyone who reads this understands what I'm referring to, and if this can be added.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2019/04/16/disrespecting-deceased-is-not-news-rappers-call-fox-news-fire-ingraham-over-nipsey-hussle-segment/

https://www.latimes.com/entertainment/music/la-et-ms-laura-ingraham-nipsey-hussle-rappers-20190416-story.html Cahlin29 (talk) 04:25, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Laura_Ingraham&oldid=1211869416"