Columbia Journalism Review
Online | Independent
 
The Columbia Journalism Review (CJR) is an American magazine for professional journalists published bimonthly by the Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism since 1961. Its contents include news and media industry trends, analysis, professional ethics and stories behind news. The chairman of the magazine is renowned intellectual Victor Navasky, former editor and publisher of the politically liberal The Nation. According to Executive Editor Michael Hoyt, Navasky's role is "99/inancial" and "he doesn't push anything editorially," adding that Navasky has "learned how to get a small magazine of ideas into the black, and he's trying to come up with some... More » (SourceWikipedia)
Tags
Audience (English)
Formats Special Report, News Analysis, Opinion, Interview, Speech
Politics Neutral (67%), Not Applicable (33%) (6 reviews)
Authors Megan Garber, Alissa Quart, Tim Townsend, Ryan Chittum, David Cohn, Zachary Roth, Trudy Lieberman, Clint Hendler...
Media Online | Publication
Quality Tags Clear, Thoughtful, Impartial, Not Balanced, Other, Responsible
Story Tags journalism, fake news, media, " hoaxing, "fake news, 2008 presidential election, al-jazeerah, antisemitism, bible, blog...
Research
Search Sites Google | Yahoo | Technorati | Wikipedia | del.icio.us
Editorial
Reviewed by Fabrice Florin, Kaizar Campwala, Dale Penn, Rory O'Connor, Kelly Garrett, Patricia Blochowiak...
Edited by Rod Amis, David Fox, Ezra Fox
Last Edit Sep. 17, 2007
Tools
(Preliminary) Ratings & Stats
Our Rating
average rating is 3.71
3.7 avg. from 169 reviews
(136 trust ratings)


Trust
average rating is 4.11

Overall
average rating is 3.65

Accuracy
average rating is 3.53

Balance
average rating is 3.19

Context
average rating is 3.44

Evidence
average rating is 3.60

Fairness
average rating is 3.40

Importance
average rating is 3.93

Information
average rating is 3.84

Sources
average rating is 3.60

Style
average rating is 3.89


Stats
Number of Sources
9

Anonymous Sources
10

Number of Viewpoints
4

Opinions as Facts
0

Number of Stakeholders
10

Stakeholders Quoted
8