The article was lengthy, and introduced points of view that I hadn't read before. But overall, it didn't leave me with any greater understanding of the situation in the Sudan than I had before. This is surprising for AlJazeera. Unless I have bias (which I sometimes do toward some topics), I otherwise find AlJazeera news reports to be high quality. Features like this are usually well-written, straightforward and logically supported.

I agree with the message of this opinion piece. Unfortunately, the writing is rather over wraught, though I understand why. The situation has become dire, and the tone of the article matches the gravity of the situation. This is an opinion piece, yet makes more factual references than many like it. But it is very brief, and needs more content to be effective.

This article offers a variety of viewpoints, historical context, various experts. It covers on-going concerns over the past few months as well as introducing some new ones from U.S. regulatory authorities.

This was more of a story describing Ms. Bair's departure from the F.D.I.C. than an article about Dodd-Frank and executive compensation clawbacks (recovery of compensation) to the government.

This is not a particularly detailed news story, but it is very recent information.

Article was brief, minimal detail or context.

Good explanation of events, with background of individuals and context.

There was little new information here. However, the article was good because it was balanced, discussing pro's and con's from a variety of viewpoints. There were multiple expert sources directly quoted. Also, this was the first article where I finally found multiple links to published sources of information about the use of "crowd-sourcing" and social network information for epidemiology and tracking of infectious disease.