This is a nicely written piece the point of which is that, contrary to conservative opinion, the stimulus package, while not perfect, is working. The author quotes a piece from the NY Times in which (presumably) objective analysts see evidence that the stimulus is achieving its major goals.

This is a book review. As such, it is less journalism than it is information and opinion. The piece reads a bit disjointedly and seems not to convey the full essence of this book. On the other hand, any author who dares to take on the burgeoning world of pseudoscience, and Andrew Weil in particular, gets my vote and is at least worth a serious look.

The main problem with this piece is the headline, which isn't the responsibility of the article's author. As soon as we read the first line of the article, and then do a simple calculation, we find that the headline is referring to (shudder) a possible 3.1% overstatement of the jobs being credited to federal stimulus money. At least that information is made apparent at the beginning of the piece. For its part, the article shows quite clearly that at least some of the overestimation ... More »

I'd call this an example of "heads-up" journalism. Someone discovered these documents and reported on them, and I think this works to the good. The piece seems to show that the House ethics group is doing their job; indeed, from what's reported here, they're doing a better job than some people give them credit for.

This is an example of superb journalism. The story presents the facts of the matter, complete with a link (online version) to the actual resignation letter, which is well worth reading, and puts those facts in context with a very compelling account of the experiences that shaped the military life and attitudes of Capt. Hoh. Hoh is presented here as a sincere, thoughtful, brave and resourceful soldier and employee of the Foreign Service. The content of his letter supports what the ... More »

This witty, well written and thorough analysis of the tiff between the White House and Fox News covers the bases on this subject. Mr. Menand makes the case AGAINST a White House attack on Fox, but provides a logical rationale for accusing the network of deliberately practicing partisan bias. I think this piece is good, informative reading.

This is an informative piece that tells of yet another dog-in-the-manger tactic being employed by -- who else -- the Senate Republicans. This at the cost to "hundreds of thousands" of American workers who haven't been able to get unemployment benefits since losing their jobs. The House passed such a bill with significant bipartisan support, but the Senate deliberations are bogged down in amendments meant mostly to stall the process.

This well written opinion piece certainly plays to those of us who agree that Fox News provides a shallow parody of responsible journalism. More to the point, the author charges that the folks at Fox News are neither journalists nor do they even have any interest in pursuing the ideals and objectives of ethical journalism. As such, the author sees Fox News as something that reputable journalists should consciously avoid.

John Nichols makes a compelling case in this opinion piece for President Obama to order his staff to stop whining about Fox News. Nichols argues that ALL media is, by definition, biased, and that, besides, if one looks at the historical record, the folks at Fox News are rank amateurs when it comes to bashing the incumbent. Indeed, in Mr. Nichols' opinion, President Obama's skills and persona are such that he needn't fear the needling he might get from Fox (or any other ... More »

This isn't journalism. It's more like a letter to the editor. It's not exactly news, either. Jon Stewart has been ridiculing CNN for it's shallowness all week. This report merely provides the coup d'grace. What price ratings?

This piece is altogether superbly written. The author skillfully dissects, explains and debunks some of the mumbo-jumbo that appears in the Price-Waterhouse report. What's particularly interesting and entertaining in this piece is the historical reference to PW's track record with the tobacco industry.

This worthwhile piece compares the fearmongering that characterizes politics today to that of the 1950s, when Joe McCarthy and Co. were oozing their way through history. Those folks are all gone now, but, as the article points out, Glen Beck, talk radio and even the GOP have taken over where McCarthy left off and are marching "us backward with banners flying and Hosannas shouted..." into another morass of hatred, bigotry and racism all rooted in fear. The piece concludes by urging ... More »

This nicely written piece describes Senator Dole's remorse at having passed on the opportunity to reform our health care system back during the Clinton administration because Bill Kristol didn't want to give the Democrats a victory. Now, it seems, the good Senator believes that the good of the country trumps party loyalties. Of course, he's had affordable health insurance the whole time...

This is an opinion piece that informs as well as opines, and it covers the subject (the disconnect between congressional naysayers on health care and simple reality) in reasonable depth and breadth. It's not exactly original, though. I first saw the same modest proposal that Mr. Kristol makes (i.e., that since members of Congress work for US, we should cancel their health insurance and let them discover first-hand what that means) in a column written by Professor Fred Niedner in the ... More »

This well written opinion piece adds to the growing mountain of criticism of the asinine and immature hissy fit that has characterized the Republicans' (in Congress and elsewhere) response to the election of President Obama and his efforts to accomplish some goals that will help all of us.

This is good -- and necessary -- journalism. The piece has been well researched and is presented with reasonable objectivity. (I can't really blame Mr. Conason for letting his feelings about these two shining lights show a bit).

This concise piece provides one more glimpse into the sordid world of drug addiction among the folks who can afford to hire their own suppliers. As it stands, the piece informs, but there's lots more to this world that should be exposed.

This piece reports the details of a story that's sordid in all respects, but it's a story that should be told. As it stands, the story's well done, in my view.

This piece is superb. It says what needs to be said about -- and to -- the "unhinged and the entitled."

This editorial exemplifies good journalism. It is concise, factual, analytical and to the point.

This piece presents an interesting international perspective on this decision. The piece strikes me as well written and well researched, with unusual details (awakening the Czech PM) and a blunt reminder of world history (Sept 17, 1939) that add to its breadth and interest. The piece, likewise, has some depth that's been missing in the domestic pieces that I've seen (the Zbigniew quote, the Patriot promise, etc). All in all, this piece is worth reading.

This well-written, informative piece describes in some detail the President's reconfigured program for missile defense in eastern Europe, addressing in particular the who, what, where, when and why of the topic. In other words, good journalism. Would that Mr. Boehner and his ilk, who predictably had either nothing good to say, or at best faint praise for this decision, would have read this piece before casting their stones.

This piece is excellent, albeit lengthy, and a reader must stay with it to find it’s main message. In the end, however, it's worth the read. Stated differently, the title of this piece could be "What Price Internet," because it shows how the demise of investigative journalism, largely at the hands of the internet (this isn't news), has opened fertile ground for folks driven by political (or whatever) ideology to comb the databases for anything, taken in our out of context, that ... More »

This is journalism as it should be. A look backward into history is always helpful and revealing, especially if the one looking back can relate the lessons of that history to the present. Mr. Brooks does that in spades with this piece in which he contrasts the humility of the victors in WWII against the look-at-me and mission-accomplished narcissism that dominates our culture today.

This is an opinion piece written by non-journalists, but it reads well, is concise, gets directly to the point, and minces no words. In this piece the authors -- retired military commanders who should know how to do this -- capture the high moral ground by repudiating the ends-justify-the-means thinking of the people at the top of the Bush administration's power pyramid whose hubris and arrogance knew, and still know, no bounds. These authors make it crystal clear that there are at ... More »

This is entertaining journalism, exploring the absurdity a a modern-day "Red Scare" in an age when communism as an ideological ideal disappeared with the Soviet Union.

This piece tells a compelling story, and assuming that the statistics are accurate and appropriately represented, points to an inescapable conclusion; i.e., that barring a change (soon) in the way wealth is distributed in this country, America as we know it will cease to exist. Indeed, David S. Mason voices exactly this concern in his recent book, "The End of the American Century."

Good journalism here. the piece points out the hypocrisy (yet again) behind the Republican challenge to the President's plan, and puts the onus on Wilson and his colleagues to reconcile their voting records with their public chatter.

I saw what this reporter saw and the reporting's good. The piece expanded what most of us saw/heard because some of what was said/shouted wasn't audible to those of us at home. This report is definitely newsworthy albeit narrow in both depth and breadth, by necessity.

This article seems to use a lot of words to convey one simple message, i.e., that the Christian right wing is angry (again -- or maybe still) and opposes President Obama's health care plan. This isn't exactly news. Missing from the piece is something that explains what drives this anger and whether these folks favor leaving health care as it is in this country or have an alternative plan to offer.

The writing here is good, although I wouldn't exactly call it journalism. It's more like news comedy, and it might be funnier if it wasn't real. On the other hand, the piece reports the knuckleheadedness of these elected officials with objectivity and a minimum of editorial aspersions, leaving readers to apply their own aspersions. All in all, this piece reads well and provides numerous opportunities to quote the immortal Bugs Bunny, "Geez, what a maroon!"

Good journalism. The reporting is thorough and objective. No bias or slants that I can see.

This is good, straight-forward reporting of Gallup's data. The story is short, which is good because it is based entirely on one data point. If the numbers go up the next time this matter is polled, the story will be worthless.

Good, informative, non-judgmental journalism here, although the meat of this nicely written piece isn't exactly news; i.e., that the Republicans still act as though they won the election and don't have to play ball with the Democrats.. Describes the ongoing difficulty the Democrats have in trying to get any Republican congressmen to negotiate a healthcare bill that can get passed.

This is a rant, and it's not much for quality. Indeed, it's not much for journalism. Rubin brings up old, mostly unfair criticisms of Obama as though they are fresh news items, and moves from there to making nasty, insulting remarks. Rush Limbaugh might find this piece stimulating, but I don't.

This is good journalism. The situation (bailing Republicans) is described in concise, readable prose. I'm left with a clear (albeit depressing) understanding of the situation that's shaping up in the Senate over health care reform.

The journalism exhibited in this piece strikes me as good. The reporting is succinct, the analysis of key quotes is relevant and focused. Mr. Scherer has been objective about and fair to all concerned parties.

This superb piece is most definitely quality journalism. Any journalist with the savvy and energy to research historical writings and then show in writing how they contradict and refute the claims of modern folk who claim to have read or studied them, but obviously haven't is practicing quality journalism, in my estimation. This piece could easily come with the sub-title, "folks who live in glass houses...".

This is opinion, not journalism; in the final analysis, it's also a bit tasteless.

This is a well-crafted, timely and suitably biting opinion piece, Although the article's lead focuses on the recent antics of the Right's lunatic fringe, Mr. Rutten heaps the bulk of his scorn and righteous anger on journalists, pseudo-journalists, and TV/radio airheads who you'd hope would know better.