This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Journalism This article is within the scope of WikiProject Journalism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of journalism 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.JournalismWikipedia:WikiProject JournalismTemplate:WikiProject JournalismJournalism articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. Occupations (inactive) This article is within the scope of WikiProject Occupations, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.OccupationsWikipedia:WikiProject OccupationsTemplate:WikiProject OccupationsOccupations articles Politics This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics 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.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

It is requested that an image or photograph be included in this article to improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific media request template where possible. The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Upload

How is it possible that Bill O'Reilly, who anchored Inside Edition until 1995, led Bill Maher to political punditry, when Bill Maher's Politically Incorrect debuted in 1993? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.234.62.130 (talk) 14:58, 19 September 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I find it slightly offensive to those who have spent their time achieving a status as a respected figure in political commentary to be group with comedians Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert. Their shows are not shows of political commentary, rather they are shows of political satire. It's ludicrous to put them in the ranks of Bill O'Reilly, Glenn Beck, Nancy Grace and the like. The list, as said below, is extremely arbitrary. If this list stays on the page, there should be a noticeable difference between a comedian and a respected political commentator. --72.208.130.58 (talk) 04:50, 5 May 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

LOL. O'Reilly, Beck and Grace? You picked three surefire hacks to back up your complaint. 71.192.25.176 (talk) 09:42, 16 December 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The term "pundit" has taken on a derogatory connotation in America; especially over the last decade. I do not believe men such as Thomas Friedman (a three time Pulizer Prize winner, received the Overseas Press Club Award for lifetime achievement, received the Order of the British Empire by Queen Elizabeth II., written at least four major non-fiction books of such high caliber to receive honors of a literary significance, a former White House correspondent and other achievements would want to be classified in the same category as Rush Limbaugh, Glen Beck, Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity, Rachel Maddow, Chris Matthews and Anne Coulter to name just a few. The people in latter group do not have the necessary credentials or backgrounds that would qualify them to write as an "expert" in the fields they write in, speak about or etc. This latter group are by and large entertainers, none of them are journalist, news casters, news reporters. Their shows are not news broadcasts because they are not objective and unbiased. They do not offer balanced information. The News media adhere to strict code of ethics: fair, balance, objective, unbiased reporting of the news and they check their sources for validity before they report the news event or story. Rush Limbaugh, Glen Beck, Bill O'Reilly and Rachel Maddow are hosts to talk show. They discuss news events and happenings; never in an unbiased way. We must decide on one definition of the term "pundit": it is either expert or it isn't. If we want to discuss "expert pundits" as one category, that would work. We could discusss the "non expert pundits" as the "opinion-givers" . —Preceding unsigned comment added by Prof2long (talk • contribs) 03:23, 8 December 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I support this merge, I can't see any reason not to do this -- its is just a capitlization thing. --Ben Houston 17:09, 20 May 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've done the rough merge with a redirect on the previous article. --Ben Houston 17:14, 20 May 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

What's the relevance of the following: "Sports commentators and analysts are also commonly referred to as pundits." This article is about political pundits, and there's already a disamb page for "pundit." Second, this article should be merged with political commentator, as that one is a stub and covers the exact same material. - IstvanWolf 01:38, 26 May 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Actually, the article isn't (meant to be) just about policial pundits - the entry on Pundit reads "Pundit (politics), an expert or opinion-leader, particularly in the field of political analysis" (note the 'particularly'). A move to a slightly less politics-central name may be in order to reduce confusion, but sports pundits and political pundits aren't separate enough to properly warrant separate articles on the different usages of the term. --Sam Pointon 01:49, 26 May 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've moved the page to Pundit (expert). It makes more sense and reflects what is being linked here - a large proportion of links were from sport - and paticularly soccer - realted articles. --Robdurbar 11:17, 10 December 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I removed Stephen Colbert from the list of pundits. Unless, you want to include Jon Stewart in a list of journalists.

Why? Pundit is, sort of, a term of endearment (for real, or ironically), whereas journalism is a profession. I'll add Stephen Colbert (and I'm not even a Democrat, since I'm Swedish...).

--Besserwissern (talk) 02:37, 23 June 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I came here wondering if bloggers can be considered pundits. Any thoughts?

I'm all for it.

--Besserwissern (talk) 02:33, 23 June 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The first sentence of this article makes no grammatical sense.--Halloween jack 16:28, 29 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

“Political commentator” redirects here, but here it says a “pundit” often “partners with a commentator”, so a commentator is not a pundit. Is a political commentator a pundit, or is that a commentator? The redirection makes no sense.—Gniw (Wing) 16:23, 11 April 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This list of Pundits sections seems a bit arbitrary. Many of the people listed like Tim Russert are primarily journalist and Ann Coulter who is a author. IMO there should be little more conformity.- thank you Astuishin (talk) 00:31, 26 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

In my view (which might not be worth much) the "pundits" are not so much the hosts of these programs (Bill O'Reilly, Glen Beck, Tim Russert) as much as the people that frequently appear on these shows as panelists...people like David Gergen, Carl Bernstein, Susan Estrich, and so forth. "Pundits" are more the professional guests (and usually not office holders or currently serving as hosts of their own programming) that constantly appear on these programs rather than the hosts.72.191.190.68 (talk)

Why is Jon Stewart in the list? He's a comedian. Mtijn (talk) 08:58, 2 June 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

"A pundit is someone who offers mass-media opinion" Stewart does this. Just because he does it with comedy does not make him any less of a pundit. -Phil5329 (talk) 18:53, 2 June 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hm... I don't really think he offers his opinion per se, he just jokes about it and his opinion gets in there. I mean, he's got a big writing staff that writes these things for him. He may have done some real commentary every once in a while, but I think his job revolves mainly around comedy.

I get your point though, I'll leave him in the list and let's see what other people think. Mtijn (talk) 14:39, 6 June 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I think Jon Stewart fits... and I certainly agree with Bill Maher's inclusion.J'onn J'onzz (talk) 18:21, 16 June 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've heard that the word "punditry (not "pundit") is a Bushism. Is this true? SteveSims (talk) 05:39, 23 March 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Isn't "pundit" a somewhat informal term and wouldn't commentator be a better title for this article? Nurg (talk) 02:52, 14 December 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

If someone wants to learn about it, the link is there to click. I removed the phrase. If a "simple English" wiki is made, consider re-including it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gluerman (talk • contribs) 01:46, 20 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I guess that the origin of the word is Sanskrit or Hindi. --Abhijeet Safai (talk) 07:50, 27 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It would be good to describe/mention the difference between a pundit and an expert (because in other languages this specification is not existing). Thank you.--F.Blaubiget (talk) 02:06, 29 November 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Josef Joffe did a book chapter. Polentarion Talk 00:04, 2 February 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This page is a grammatical, narrative mess that constantly changes subjects between paragraphs and has little depth. For example, it takes the Sanskrit origin of the term but then no information on how the term came into contemporary usage (Sanskrit is over 2,000 years old). It uses “e.g.” wrong when talking about Karl Marx and makes no grammatical sense. It then randomly says that “talking head” is an offensive term. I have no idea where to even start with this page but I’m hoping someone with more experience can step in and help Glenohumeral13 (talk) 00:12, 16 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]