Mr. Greenwald presents an insightful review and analysis of Bill Moyers documentary. But more valuable are his musings on the show's ultimate impact as well as his UPDATES, a collection of reactions by principals in the show or the industry.

Mike Wallace is not the proper person to conduct an independant interview with Iran's president. He is more of a celebrity journalist (a retired one, at that) who interjects himself into a story. It becomes more of an "accomplishment by Mike" than an informative and objective report.

Mr. Arkin makes a poorly disguised attempt to sound neutral in his article but is clearly an apologist for the aggression by Israeli forces in Lebanon. The article is constructed of aguments posed and answered by the author. For the most part, these arguments - attributed to "them" and "they" and "the world" are neither true nor accurate.

Based on the information in the story, the headline could have just as accurately been written, "Clinton Scores Highest 'Yes' Vote of All Candidates - Jeb Bush Scores Lowest" The basis of this story is a biased manipulation of numbers derived from an unidentified phone population.

This is simply a "story." It reports on the activities and the promotional speeches of Bush. There is no real value to a reader who wants to know the nuances and pros/cons of the border fence construction issue.

It is difficult to creat prose from so much statistical content and this article is an example of that challenge. The writer relies heavily on numbers with some important analysis interspersed. On a wider level, though, this article - and most stories in this topic - are based on the health industry focus of "cost shifting" and say nothing about the underlying increases in delivering health care. It seems as long as the insurance companies find ways to shift the costs of health care, the health industry will continue to raise their prices of goods and services. I guess I'm moving into the "editorial" area but I believe it is an important discussion that is not being heard.