I am very impressed by the fact that the author had the temerity to raise what appears to be the truth: That the Bushies went into Iraq primarily for their oil and that they are trying now to secure that oil before a more moderate administration takes power. "A"

This story sheds some heat but little light on the situation it discusses, i.e. the permissible and desirable scope of the legal doctrine of "fair use". The doctrine was developed in an effort to balance the rights of copyright holders versus the equally compelling (if not more compelling) right of the people to get full and accurate information. This article basically puts forth the copyright-holders' view without providing any reasoning to back up its conclusion that the use being complained of by AP was not "fair use". I beg to differ (I am legally-trained and have dealt with this issue) and believe that ultimately the bloggers will be vindicated. NOT RECOMMENDED

This is basically "much ado about nothing". It spends a lot of space to come to the conclusion that "media" do not shape public opinion very much, overlooking the fact that the corporatist media have been pushing the corporate point of view for a century now, with terrible effects on the public's knowledge of issues and events. It spends practically no time at all trying to draw connections between the ownership of media and their biases, and is unimpressive in its assessment of the relative biases of named media outlets; I was particularly disgusted by its naming of such as the corporatist Washington Post as being "liberal". I strongly recommend that the writer read Noam Chomsky's "Manufacturing Consent" for a meta-view of ... More »

This is a very good, well-balanced analysis of the Republican claim that raising the capital-gains tax would "hurt" the middle class. It is well-sourced and uses assumptions generous to the Republican position--and yet demolishes the claim. HIGHLY RECOMMENDED

This is not a bad story, so far as it goes. Its main fault is a lack of any analysis, in particular its lack of any effort to adjudge the relative merits of the causes being proposed as the reasons for the runaway increases in the price of oil; it mentions both speculation and tightening oil supplies, but doesn't attempt to balance the two. Worse, it doesn't at all consider the roiling of world oil markets caused by the militarism of the Bush regime (both with regard to Iraq and the threats against Iran.) USEFUL BUT LIMITED

The difference between US media and the likes of the Independent is staggering. This story was not only well-written and thorough, but it showed no obvious bias to the oil corporations such as is routinely seen in US corporatist media. On its merits it lays out a very good scenario of oil being at or near peak, and it is persuasive--and probably true. HIGHLY RECOMMENDED

This is not a bad story for a corporatist medium like the New York Times. It did refer to one of the major unreported stories in the corporatist media: that McSame is a flip-flopper, this time referring to his tax policies. RECOMMENDED

Reuters, like BBC, is corporatist, but it has the advantage of being British, which publications have a more solid recent record of being not as deceitful as American corporatist media. This is one of the better stories I have read recently. While being very short and thin on sources and facts, it nonetheless clearly lays out Obama's charges against McSame. RECOMMENDED

The Miami Herald is a corporatist rag, and it shows in this piece, which goes on at some length about what McSame SAYS--he wants to be "fiscally responsible"--without any analysis or questioning at all of the SUBSTANCE of his position, which is that he is in favor of the exact same insane borrow-and-spend-for-war policies of his buddy George Bush. In particular, his opposition to the Everglades spending is absurd in its irony, when one considers that it can be paid for with the money a few weeks in Iraq would. NOT RECOMMENDED--UNFAIR AND UNBALANCED

I am not familiar with this particular publication, but I was impressed by the sheer LACK of substance here. I did appreciate that they pointed out McSame's dismal voting record in favor of vets as compared with Obama's, but I was disgusted by the lack of objective analysis of the (admittedly awful) Vietnam Vets against McCain's substantive claims, e.g. that McSame in captivity collaborated with his captors. It would have been a much better story if they would have tried to deal with the group's claims on their merits instead of just attacking them. Pretty bad.

This is just another tired "puff piece" seemingly designed to show how "heroic" McSame is. There is no mention of a single negative thing about him: how he has a terrible temper; the questions about what really happened in his time as a POW; his involvement with the Keating 5; his flip-flopping on practically every issue he has ever taken a stand on; the concerns about his health; or anything else. Just another corporatist-media hack job.

Not too bad, but it could definitely have been improved upon by an objective analysis of whether or not McSame's accusations--that he is being mistreated by "the media"--have substance. The fact of the matter is that, with the exception of the blogosphere, McSame has gotten a largely free ride in the media; he has not been challenged on his many flip-flops or the absurdity of his "straight-talk" image, which both are very easy to rebut. Politico sometimes shows disturbingly rightist tendencies, and this article is weak, but worth reading.

TERRIBLE. A perfect example of the corporatist media attempting to boost McSame in any way they can. This "interview" was nothing but a series of softballs which even the bumbling McSame was able to hit out of the park. There was no follow-up on some of his most egregious lies, such as his claim that he had not changed his position on the illegal wiretapping scheme, when in his own words he clearly has. If you want truth, stay away from corporatist media. This is a perfect example.

NPR has, sadly, become just another corporatist propaganda organ. Scott Simon is a right-winger who consistently pushes the conservative line, albeit with subtlety. This particular piece was completely worthless, with little of substance in it, and had one notable misrepresentation: McSame's health was alluded to as being fine because he comes from the same gene pool as his 95-year-old mother, when in fact there is plenty to worry about with regard to his health, including the fact that he has Stage 2 melanoma and possible mental dysfunction. More NPR garbage.

This is an amazingly good article from a somewhat-uneven news source. UPI has not always been a reliable source for truth, but it, along with some other middle-of-the-road media, seems to be more willing recently to publish news sourced from progressive sources. I am particularly impressed by the fact that the corporatist Newsweek has been publishing truthful material recently, and this is a good example of where they actually are cited in a meaningful fashion. Recommended.

Now THIS is what a news article should be: It tells the truth--that McSame's campaign is infested with the same corporatist lobbyists who have ruined the federal government--and it is sourced to the hilt, with links to articles supporting its factual statements. Very nice. Which means it'll never be printed in any corporatist medium.

EXCELLENT! The Progressive is one of the best news and opinion sources today, and this article nails it. It shows just how deeply McSame is into the neocon worldview, and how much he consorts with the proto-fascist elements of the corporatist demimonde. HIGHLY RECOMMENDED

This is a pretty good effort, considering that AP is a corporatist medium. It reports McSame's new ad campaign as being an effort to remediate his war-lusting image created by, amongst other things, his desire to keep us in Iraq for a hundred years, and the fact that this was mentioned provides a great deal of balance. It could have mentioned other indications of McSame's love of war, such as his "bomb-bomb-bomb Iran" sentiments, but definitely not bad for AP.

This is a pretty worthless story which takes several paragraphs to communicate very little that could not have been done in a couple of sentences, i.e. that McSame is starting an ad campaign seeking to get mileage from his military past. It would have been much more useful if it would have questioned the merits of the campaign itself, but the New York Times is not a particularly aggressive publication when it comes to discomfiting the corporations, so this is par for the course.