Talk:Politically Incorrect

	Television portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Comedy

	Comedy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comedy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of comedy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComedyWikipedia:WikiProject ComedyTemplate:WikiProject ComedyComedy articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Number of seasons[edit]

Where does the total of eight come from? The show was on for nine years. Though non-scripted shows of course don't follow the regular schedule of the major networks exactly, the no. of seasons is commonly determined in a similar way. IMDB, for example, has nine seasons for this show. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:FDF0:9ED0:A5CB:6739:80C0:1192 (talk) 18:49, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

CBS[edit]

The show did tape at CBS Television City (even though it was on ABC) for at least part of its lifetime. I personally attended a taping there. I don't know the dates that it taped there versus Hollywood Ceter though, so I'm not sure how to edit to reflect this.

Cancellation[edit]

Unless someone can actually cite a source that shows that Maher's post-9/11 comments were a factor in the cancellation, or even considered as such, it has no place in this article. Especially since it is just not true. The show was cancelled due to long term declining ratings and any number of financial matters. Maher deciding to blame Disney and make himself into a free speech martyr at every chance he gets doesn't make it true. Cite or delete. President David Palmer 06:22, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It should be kept regardless. It's a notable controversy. On the flip side, can you cite that it's not true and that it was canceled due to "long term declining ratings and any number of financial matters"?--SeizureDog 05:31, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Describing the controversy is different than suggesting the controversy led to the show's cancellation. David is challenging the claim, and the onus is on editors to supply a citation if the claim is to be retained. From what I can tell, there is no clear answer as to why the show was canceled; it's true that many (including Maher) tied it to his remarks, but ABC said it was strictly about ratings. I rewrote some of the section. I could not verify the quote that was attributed to Maher; accounts vary, particularly on the last sentence, and the most reliable source I found for the version in this article was the New York Post, which is not known for fact-checking. I used a different version from New York Times instead. I also removed the last paragraph in that section; it had two reference citations to imdb.com, which is a site where anyone can post anything (like Wikipedia), and is not a reliable source. -Agyle 14:05, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Seems to me that the long-term success of his similar show on HBO counts pretty strongly against the claim that it was an inability to get good ratings. Of course the censors aren't going to say that they are censoring, so ABC's statements on that topic have no value. Shanen (talk) 07:48, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The show's ratings were awful, and at least a couple of critics had very poor reviews of the show. ABC only ran it in about half of their markets. The show featured the likes of Tony Danza, Tom Arnold, and Lisa Sliwa giving their political views. 2601:8:9A80:AE9:416D:9920:DE3:B80E (talk) 06:38, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Criticism[edit]

"These criticisms are somewhat nulled by the fact that the point of the show was to showcase Bill Maher's opinions, and he should not be prosecuted because his opinions are liberal." -Is it just me, or does this sentence not make a lot of sense. If his show is called Politically Incorrect and his opinions are politically correct, that strikes me as a reason for criticism. Does the author mean "nullified?" Also who "prosecuted" Maher?--Drunkencorgimaster 23:26, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The author probably meant "mitigated," but anyway even liberal opinions can be "politically incorrect," which should be obvious from the whole dust-up over this show in the first place. Casey J. Morris (talk) 02:13, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I saw the buildings get hit that day and it was horrible but the hijackers weren't cowards Mp7774 (talk) 22:31, 19 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

German blog called Politically Incorrect[edit]

What about including some reference to the immensely popular Islam-critical German blog Politically Incorrect? It takes a pro-US and pro-Israel stance and drew harsh criticism itself for alleged Islamophobia. 217.236.238.169 (talk) 19:04, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is incorrect to associate Maher to PI NEWS. Other than sharing the same name, Maher has nothing to do with this blog. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.22.247.201 (talk) 15:24, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If there was something like a german Teaparty, that would be it's blog. If Bill Maher is the sun of the political incorrect universe, these guys are Pluto. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.76.99.96 (talk) 21:38, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Politically Incorrect. 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/20160305072356/http://www.boston-legal.org/script/BL02x2.pdf to http://www.boston-legal.org/script/BL02x2.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:29, 3 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]