Talk:Critical reaction to 24 (TV series)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is part of WikiProject Television, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to television programs and related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. | ||
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale. | ||
|
Assessment comments
|
|||
 |
This page is part of 24 WikiProject, an attempt to expand and create articles that relate to 24. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. |
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class. |
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Dt24.jpg
Image:Dt24.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 06:56, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Republican and Democrat parties
"...24 has featured two African-American Democratic Presidents which the show presented in a positive light and featured two negatively portrayed White Republican Presidents, one of which, Charles Logan, was revealed as masterminding terrorist attacks against Americans and the murder of a former President. On the flip side, Republican Defense Secretary James Heller and former Democrat/current Republican advisor Mike Novick have relatively been portrayed as a moral and competent figures while Democratic Vice Presidents Jim Prescott and Noah Daniels have been seen as opportunistic and reactionary. Both political parties have demonstrated good and bad characteristics."
I've watched the show from the beginning and cannot remember any administration in the show being identified as either Republican or Democrat. As far as I can remember during the show it has never been mentioned which party the various administrations actually belong to. The only reference to either of these parties I can think of is in Season 6 when Milo said Nadia was a member of the Republican Party. Count de Ville 00:54, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
It was definetely stated in Season 1 that David Palmer was a member of the Democratic Party (Sherry outright said it at one point). Since Senator Keeler was running against David Palmer, it can be assumed he was Republican. Since Logan was Keeler's VP, it can be assumed he was Republican. And while to the best of my knowledge Wayne Palmer being a Democrat was never actually referred to in Season 6, he almost certainly is one, like his brother. Nerva 01:21, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
- More to the point, that paragraph appears to be unsourced. Somebody seems to be inserting his own personal ideas into the article instead of writing about the subject in a verifiable manner. --Tony Sidaway 21:15, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Is allegations of bias necessary
Is this section necessary whatsoever? This is criticizing the show because it *might* be conservative. As if that is a justifiable criticism. I've never seen anything on wikipedia criticized for being liberal, let alone maybe liberal. You know how many shows there are that advance the policies of the Left? Almost all of them. ER is a great example. Every Christian on ER is completely whacked out and intolerant of everyone, there is one episode the doctors give a pregnant girl with "crazy" religious parents an abortion drug without letting her parents know, plenty of sex/pregnancies outside of marriage, etc. Should we maybe add an "Allegations of Bias" section to the ER page? Better yet... should we add a section about ER being anti-Christian. I'm so sorry that this 24 may show terrorists who happen to be Muslim in a bad light. ER shows EVERY Christian as bad. There hasn't been one sane Christian on that show. Case in point, there's a huge double standard and my point is maybe to just identify it so that people are just aware that we need to be more neutral on these pages. -Brad Kgj08 (talk) 20:44, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
-
- The show has has an appearance of being "conservative" but in substance it's quite left wing. How many villians are 'left' vs 'right'? In almost every season the results are either right-wing military fanatics or corporate fascists or right-wing Serbian nationalists. These are all *standard* liberal-seen enemies.DavidMIA (talk) 17:25, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
If there are people alleging bias in ER, other than yourself, then you should add that to the article. As is evidenced by the many citations in this article, re: allegations of bias, there are many notable figures who have these criticisms and there is much debate. This article is about 24, not ER, and not your personal feelings vis-a-vis Christians 59.38.32.5 (talk) 03:06, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
