Difference between revisions of "Talk:Time magazine"

Revision as of 02:33, June 5, 2008

dont say that it has a liberal bias, just because a conservative website said that they did (lots of websites that would be called liberal say fox news is biased, while its wiki says that it is "unbiased")-Greenmeanie 19:29, 29 May 2008 (EDT)

im sorry apparently, saying that constituded a 3 day block -_-, because apperantly i didn't have the authorization to issue a command (although i could just be told instead of being blocked) and i suppose i should have said: i don't think that its right to say that it has a liberal bias, just because a conservative website said that they did (lots of websites that would be called liberal say fox news is biased, while its wiki says that it is "unbiased") (and if this is bad just post a response, instead of blocking me again)-Greenmeanie 21:00, 1 June 2008 (EDT)

Greenmeanie, this magazine does have a liberal bias, and if needs be we will add in more references to that effect. If you disagree, talk to any of the sysops or ASchlafly. Karajou 02:03, 2 June 2008 (EDT)

it shouldn't be necessary to talk to the sysops, they should talk here about it being biased. and if time has a liberal bias, why doesn't the fox news article say that fox news article has a conservative bias, and a reference from a openly conservative source saying that it is anti-liberal, just means that its not biased toward conservativeness-Greenmeanie 09:39, 2 June 2008 (EDT)

That implies that all magazines that aren't conservative are automatically considered to be liberal, and that is a obvious misnomer. Learn together 10:43, 2 June 2008 (EDT)

im sorry if i implied that, (and is there a 3 revert rule or some conservapedia equivalent? cause all this reverting is annoying) but i don't think that i did imply that. and i agree that non conservative magazines aren't necessarily liberal, although i would like to see something that shows why this is biased, while fox news is "fair and balanced"-Greenmeanie 23:48, 2 June 2008 (EDT)

so sad, this page was just protected, and DanH didn't even say anything on the talk page about it, (which he should have) but i think that about wraps up the attempt to make this article less biased -_-Greenmeanie 01:41, 3 June 2008 (EDT)

Greenmeanie, I rarely read Time and being an Aussie I don't see Fox, but it's not logical to argue that just because someone claims that Fox has a conservative bias therefore it is biased.

Also, I seem to recall someone saying that Fox has both liberals and conservatives on it, which means that it tends to tell both sides of the story, which suggests that it's not biased.

Philip J. Rayment 09:57, 3 June 2008 (EDT)

can you name one news organization that DOESN'T have both liberals and conservatives on it? so that means that no magazines/newspapers/news channels have bias (time magazine included)?-Greenmeanie 22:06, 3 June 2008 (EDT)

Again, I'm not that familiar with America, but yes, I could name at least a couple of Australian ones that essentially don't have a conservative journalist/columnist/whatever on them. But perhaps I should modify what I said before a bit, because a single token conservative (for example) among a sea of liberals on staff would hardly make a news organisation unbiased. You'd have to have about 50/50 for there to be no bias. Philip J. Rayment 00:31, 4 June 2008 (EDT)

i don't think that time magazine has a higher democrat to republican ratio then fox has a republican to democrat ratio, and just wondering, does conservapedia have any liberal/democratic sysops? (can you tell me how many their are of each (liberal/conservative?)-Greenmeanie 22:33, 4 June 2008 (EDT)