Talk:Rebel News

Although alt right has sometimes been ascribed to this News outlet,
Although alt-right has sometimes been ascribed to this News outlet, consideration must be given to the meaning of alt-right. If alt-right includes nazis or white supremacists, then this publication and news outlet does not qualify, since first, the owner and manager Ezra Levant is of Jewish origin, and has never condoned white supremacy, and second, mere support by some alt-right adherents does not make this publication an alt-right publication. Rebel News certainly leans to the right, and promotes an alternative perspective on politics, national and global, as well as on government edicts and mandates. An anti-muslim perspective does not equate to alt-right, particularly if it is in the realm of being anti-terrorism, as well as anti-Israel terrorism. Similar to not all anti-zionists being anti-semitic, not all anti-muslim-terrorism equates to being anti-muslim in general. In any case, this has little to nothing to do with alt-right or even mere-right regardless. JohnZylstr (talk) 21:27, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

Rebel News - stale
No new text since 2020 in the article. Rebel News has been doing a lot of work. I was trying to update the page but it is locked supposedly due to vandalism. I read the comments in the protection log and don't see any substance, just flame wars.

THIS PAGE IS STALE, wikipedia. Let the community fix it.

I've only made one contribution in 4 years to wikipedia, but i envisioned a community that works together and some kind of approval process. Obviously the page was written by someone who wants to be negative on Rebel News, but I see the Rebel News videos of the journalists and feel that they are credible.

I think in this day and age, at least 80% agree that mainstream media suppresses stories and spins things like the China spy balloon to redirect people from thinking about why they can't afford things (inflation out of control, etc.), or why their government struggles with underfunded pensions (United States).

I follow Rebel News, beginning with the trucker strike in Canada, and then the hearings on if Trudeau had abused the privilege to declare his emergency powers.

In particular, there was a good piece about South Texas immigration (invasion, whatever you want to call it). https://www.rebelnews.com/el_paso_texas_airport_migrant_crisis

they seem to be a struggling network. Their journalists are young, vibrant and multi-lingual.

There was a Rebel News article yesterday about protests in Dublin Ireland around immigration (cross checked and found an article about Dublin in the guardian, https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/jan/22/anti-immigration-protesters-march-dublin-ireland-refugees).

Writing this article and researching wikipedia's definition of "alt right" (far-right white nationalist movement), https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alt-right only tainted me about wikipedia author/editor community.

Rebel News is NOT mainstream media. I consume alternative news and use a filter (yes, something unique to my generation, we actually apply common sense and search out ALL opinions on a subject). I'm most interested in journalism that doesn't pander to oligarchs and governments. Chris6154 (talk) 13:18, 18 February 2023 (UTC)
 * I guess you're referring to the semi-protection notes 11 July 2020, 21 November 2020, 20 February 2022, 19 July 2022. Semi-protection is not a huge barrier, people can make the effort to be confirmed editors and can discuss on the talk page. But you can perhaps see from earlier discussions that other editors would probably not favour significant change of tone. Peter Gulutzan (talk) 15:18, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

Changing cites and first sentence
X-Editor on 19 September 2022 changed "far-right" to "right-wing to far-right" and added a cite of CTV, author Mike Blanchfield. Isi96 on 19 February 2023 edited to change the words "right wing to far-right" to "far-right", while removing a cite of CTV and adding a cite of New Media & Society, principal author Xinyi Zhang, with edit summary = "Add source for far-right descriptor and rm right-wing descriptor; MOS:CURLY". Peter Gulutzan (I) on 20 February 2023 reverted with edit summary = Undid revision 1140404667 by Isi96 (talk) Look at qualification of principal author: https://www.linkedin.com/in/xinyi-zhang-476a5016b/?originalSubdomain=au "I am a 18-year-old student who are studying commerce at Trinity College." Newimpartial on 20 February 2023 reverted the revert, with edit summary = "Undid revision 1140543508 by Peter Gulutzan (talk)Don't know what you are talking about; the first source is a published book FFS." I was wrong to quote from a linkedin page which I now see is obsolete, but apparently Xinyi Zhang was still a student when writing for New Media & Society. I believe the cite is not of a published book, and I don't know what FFS means. Any other opinions whether to keep | revert the change? Peter Gulutzan (talk) 15:24, 24 February 2023 (UTC)


 * I apologize for the FFS; I shouldn't have expressed exasperation in my edit summary
 * I am, however, quite confused. I see eight sources in the bundle for "far right", of which the first is a published book, authored by Perry & Scrivens. What am I missing, here? Newimpartial (talk) 15:29, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Isi96's edit didn't add or remove or change or mention the cite of that book. Peter Gulutzan (talk) 16:15, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
 * True, but we have seven or eight high-quality sources for far right, and one broadcast media source for right-wing, so the change seems UNDUE. I have no opinion at the moment about whether it is better to include or not include the NM&S paper, though I think the general view is that peer-reviewed academic articles are considered HQRS. Newimpartial (talk) 16:41, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
 * X-editor has retired, Newimpartial has no opinion about the paper, I oppose citing it because I don't see Xinyi Zhang as an expert. If nobody supports Isi96's insertion of that cite, I will do a partial revert i.e. remove the cite of the paper. Peter Gulutzan (talk) 15:34, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Removed the cite of the paper after seeing no support for Isi96's insertion of it. Peter Gulutzan (talk) 15:27, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Mark Davis's creds are excellent, so that cite should be used. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 17:24, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
 * The citation in question is from The Epoch Times, I copied it from there. Isi96 (talk) 00:33, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Deprecated source, IIRC, but now I'm confused. "from" or mentions? Here's what was deleted:
 * Mark Davis has good creds, so that source is fine. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 03:36, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
 * @Valjean I meant I copied the cite from its article. Isi96 (talk) 01:47, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
 * That's okay. You're not citing The Epoch Times. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 02:14, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
 * That's okay. You're not citing The Epoch Times. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 02:14, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

Rebel News Reporter Arrested Today…Then Released
Rebel News Reporter David Menzies approached Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland today and asked her a question. A police officer then stopped Menzies and placed him under arrest for "assault." If you watch the video at https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/rebel-news-personality-arrested-1.7078566, it seems that any physical contact Menzies made with the officer was unintentional, as he was walking while awaiting her response, which didn’t come. In fact, the video depicts the police officer as the one assaulting Menzies who, after his arrest, was released.

I have no dog in this fight: I’m neither a critic nor a follower of Rebel News—I simply think that this event is notable in the sense that it involves a reporter who (his methods aside) was manhandled by a police officer who then hypocritically arrested him for assault. Thoughts? Canadi-eh-n (talk) 03:08, 10 January 2024 (UTC)