You can't get much more fact-based than a poll. I am assuming CNN knows how to take polls and does so accurately. This is an important story, because polls are a way to understand the attitudes of the population, and there is not enough reporting on polls.

Provides an example of consequences of environmental problems.

This is an interesting story, but in the end I think readers are left not knowing what to think. Are we really in danger? If so, are the dangers being addressed?

Because it actually provides useful information so that readers can better understand the world around them.

Basically just a summary of what politicians said. Nothing that some blogger probably couldn't patch together by Googling and watching cable television.

It's a round-up of recent popular uprisings around the world and gives these uprisings some historical context and offers an explanation of why they are occurring.

This is a quality journalism that reviews the past year of civil liberty abuses committed by the Bush administration and the failure of Congress to do anything about it.

This opinion piece deliberately ignores that the Fairness Doctrine was an issue of public interest. Primarily, it made up for the fact that airwaves are limited to the people who can afford to purchase them. It is in our democracy's best interest to inform the public rather than having a public only receiving one-sided and either ill-informed or deliberately incomplete information such as this op-ed piece delivers.

My major problem with this story is that it completely dismisses Congresses complete disregard for democracy. When 73% of the country wanted to pull out of Vietnam, how did the Congress not enact the legislation to do so? The article mentions that currently 56% of the American population wants the US military out of Iraq. This is a clear majority, but the article dismisses this as not enough support for Congress to enact legislation that will pull the military out of Iraq. In the ... More »

Straight ahead reporting on the fact that jobs will be cut at the LA Times. No political context given for these cuts, only a business perspective. A connection could have been made, for example to the recent Frontline documentary News War, had a segment specifically focused on the LA Times and their shrinking newsroom.

The critical information we need is what politicians stand for. How much money they raise is irrelevant to knowing what they stand for. It would be relevant to know who they received their money from as provided by opensecrets.org.