Anyone can edit Wikipedia. I just watchlisted the article about CNN, so if a DUer adds some valid information but messes up the formatting, I'll straighten it out.
Yes, this means you. If you know something about conservative bias on CNN, go to the article at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CNN and add the information. Remember the official Wikipedia policy: Be bold in editing pages! Also, don't feel you have to write a definitive and comprehensive treatment of the subject. You don't have to make the article perfect; you just have to make it better than it was.
If you'd feel more comfortable adding your content in a we're-all-friends-here setting, go to the Demopedia article:
http://demopedia.democraticunderground.com/index.php/CNN and put information there about CNN's bias. Those of us who are experienced Wikipedians and who read DU can format it (if necessary) and move it on over to Wikipedia.
It's worth seeing to it that our side of this story (or of any other story) is presented on Wikipedia. According to Alexa, Wikipedia's popularity keeps growing. A few months ago, we passed USA Today's website --
http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details?&range=1y&size=medium&compare_sites=usatoday.com&y=t&url=wikipedia.org#top -- and although CNN itself is still ahead of us, we're closing in on them.
http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details?&range=2y&size=medium&compare_sites=CNN.com&y=t&url=wikipedia.org#topPeople not only read Wikipedia, they rely on it. Here's a link to a story on NPR --
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4506421 (you'll need Real Player or Windows Media Player to listen to it). One of the interviewees, a school librarian, expresses concern about how often students use Wikipedia and how they tend to accept uncritically what they find in it. So, without trying to censor the right-wing point of view, we should make sure that our point of view is there, too.