Talk:CBS

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

CBS on coins[edit]

Vlogger Go Viral has the CBS logo on the coin. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.58.152.81 (talk) 00:29, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Batiste[edit]

The Batiste material was removed here today. I restored it at John Batiste with better sourcing and some tweaks for accuracy. Anythingyouwant (talk) 17:12, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Good move. --Nat Gertler (talk) 21:12, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"War of the Worlds" Broadcast[edit]

Isn't the War of the Worlds broadcast panic a myth? That section of the article might need to be double checked and corrected with different, reliable, and verifiable sources.

Thanks! Your Pal, MooperVeltresleex 17:33, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

"A resurgent 'Jake and the Fatman'" during the early 90s?[edit]

"Under network president Jeff Sagansky, the network was able to earn strong ratings from new shows Diagnosis: Murder; Touched by an Angel; Dr. Quinn, Medicine Woman; Walker, Texas Ranger, Picket Fences and a resurgent Jake and the Fatman during this period, and CBS was able to reclaim the first place crown briefly, in the 1992–93 season..."

I think this sentence may need to be revised. Didn't Jake and the Fatman get cancelled after the 1991-92 season (before all the other shows mentioned in this sentence even debuted)? Jim856796 (talk) 18:05, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Charlie Chaplin[edit]

Today I edited away the claim in a photo caption that Charlie Chaplin "chose CBS" to introduce the public to his voice after having done silent film for 20 years, because there was no source, and because the notes on the photograph provided no basis for the idea that this was his first use of radio.

Doing further research, I find that Chaplin was on the radio as early as 1923, before CBS was even on the air. As such, not only should my edits not be undone, we may want to consider removing the image altogether; it's hard to see that CBS did anything particularly notable for Chaplin, nor vice versa. --Nat Gertler (talk) 23:13, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Lucille Ball responsible for the CBS eyemark?[edit]

I've heard a story that goes that Lucille Ball didn't like CBS' "spotlight" logo, and requested that it be changed to the familiar eyemark used today. Is this true or another television urban legend? MightyArms (talk) 19:45, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Online, I could only find this text about the CBS logo on a Tumblr page: "It was created by William Golden based on a Pennsylvania Dutch hex sign as well as a Shaker drawing. Early versions of the logo had the lens telescope to reveal the acronym. It was often depicted against a field of clouds. The new logo made its broadcast debut on October 20, 1951, five days after the premiere of their mega-hit “I Love Lucy.”" [[1]] In retrospect, I would guess not, but I hope this helps. Isthmus55 (talk) 20:38, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Tiffany Network[edit]

I think this part in the lead needs more clarification:

It has also been called the Tiffany Network, alluding to the perceived high quality of its programming during the tenure of William S. Paley.

Where does the name Tiffany factor into this explanation? Is the "perceived high quality" of CBS under Paley being likened to the quality of Tiffany lamps? 199.120.30.205 (talk) 23:34, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Split Proposal[edit]

The history section is too long and may be better off separated to a different article. kpgamingz (rant me) 18:20, 3 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

CBS Entertainment Group[edit]

Should we add a section for CBS Entertainment Group? After all, it is only one of five divisions of Paramount Global that either needs its own article or a section in the CBS article. RamsesTimeGame (talk) 04:40, 21 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No, such a section does not belong here. The only thing that belongs here is that the network (the sole topic of this article) is under that division of the parent company, Paramount Global. It's just a division of the parent company, bears no independent notability, and doesn't need a separate article. The current redirect is proper and there's a reason every time you try to turn it into something else you get reverted. oknazevad (talk) 19:41, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]