Tapper reports on a robocall, giving a link to listen to the call. He explains the context of Obama's statement and goes further by providing a transcript of the interview at the S.F. Chronicle, which was not available at the paper's site (there was an audio tape and a video and partial transcripts on the rightward blogs cherry-picked.) All of this is valuable background for readers, as the noise over Obama's interview rises on the web. Tapper does not put Obama's position in ... More »

Informative blog post that contrasts a political robo-call from the McCain campaign with the actual interview which they excerpt. However, this report doesn't go far enough to provide additional sourcing or context from other independent perspectives.

Does a good job contextualizing Obama's comment about coal plants. It loses points for depth and sourcing because there's not explanation about Obama's overall coal policy, and independent sources aren't presented.

This story compares what Barack Obama said and compares it to what was used for a Republican robocall. It looks like most robocall. They select part of a sentence and use it wrong compared to all that was said.

The objective is good, to clarify the context of Obama's remarks on global climate change and the burning of coal. The article presents a relatively full context around the Obama quote that was cherry-picked by Republicans to put into the robo-call. Scientific and technical experts are not quoted or referenced to back up the validity of the Obama remarks. The Republican ads are not explicitly categorized in the article as misleading fear mongering.

I have a feeling that, when answering this question, Obama left out a word or two. Because he actually has come out in favor of "clean coal" technologies. It would have been interesting for Tapper to compare later speeches and issues papers on the Obama site to see if this is so. It would also have been interesting to compare what McCain has said on the subject. So, though the reporting is fair, I don't think he's done his due diligence as a journalist.

The article is a snapshot of what Obama did say, the context is hard to understand as it confirms in print what the spokesman said to explain it. away. I do wish it had discussed more of the interview.

The headline implies that the Republicans are doing a dirty trick. Seems to me they are making a fair point.