nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW
13,254
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 6:
Line 6: + + +
Case not made
:::::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"-[[User:Greenmeanie|Greenmeanie]] 23:48, 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"-[[User:Greenmeanie|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 -_-[[User:Greenmeanie|Greenmeanie]] 01:41, 3 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 -_-[[User:Greenmeanie|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.
: [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 09:57, 3 June 2008 (EDT)