[Pyramid*]

Originally Posted by MTVN

I think my reply was pretty appropiate considering the nature of your response. The "see" really was entirely irrelevant to the post yet you thought you'd try and use it to post a condascending respone while completely missing the point of what I said. Besides we did see her on tv every week and it was from seeing her that we can make a judgement on her voice

I did reas the article and it was what I expected from the Daily Mail, it was a load of biased crap wholly influenced by his unjustified hatred of Cher. And as always the readers lap it up

Like I said, quite a few of you have a sense of humour when it suits you having a pop at others, but that dies away when it's humour directed at yourselves. And I did in fact answer your question in my last reply to you.

So which newspaper would something have to appear in before you would regard it as unbiased? Which source out there would you take what was written about Cher or anyone else for that matter, as being a wholly non prejudiced viewpoint?

Disliking a person does not equate to hating. I'm never quite sure where or why some of you are able to correlate the two words - how can a person hate someone they have never met? People can, like you, form an opinion - it doesn't have to match yours - nor does the fact that it doesn't match your opinion, make them a 'hater'.