I am a former print journalist, local/regional, recently moved to Washington, D.C., in search of new opportunities. I am fascinated by Washington and the people who run our government.
This is quality journalism in that it points out deficiencies of supposedly quality journalism. This is a blog post; it is not a news story. Furthermore, it's a liberal blog post. Since I am a liberal, that's ok with me.
This is quality journalism because it sheds light on the current Guatanamo torture story by putting it in historical context and perspective. This information is important for Americans to know.
I am becoming more and more disillusioned by Obama, or as Chomsky calls it - "the abuse of reality." I especially like the way this story connects the torture issue to the war in Afghanistan. Also, it appears that Chomsky knows a lot about former Pres. Reagan's "abuse of reality," and has suffered due this knowledge.
This is quality journalism because it questions a generally-held notion - that the Boy Scouts organization is conservationist and acts as a responsible steward of the land. I have some reservations because the main source for the story is the newspaper-financed survey. I think more independent corroboration would have enhanced the journalism and the credibility of the story. The story raises in my mind questions about the local governmental bodies involvement in approving various development projects - e.g., building permit for a new roof that overlooked stripping the nearby forest.
Another question that comes to my mind is that although the survey is called "national," quotes and reports from actual people sources are overwhelmingly from the U.S. Northwest. There is scant mention of other areas of the country. I have personal knowledge of a Boy Scouts Council on the Eastern Shore of Maryland that fought hard to stop a proposed strip mining development that bordered their land and allegedly encroached upon protected habitats.
This is quality journalism because it portrays both sides of an issue: It reports the income and taxes paid by the the wealthiest of Americans and contrasts these figures against the rest of us taxpayers.
I've seen the issue of need for tax reform reported in a couple of other stories in non-mainstream media publications. It heartens me to see the issue broached in the widely read NYT.
This is a quality journalism. It's engaging, well written, interesting, informative and topical. It'a a feature story and enterprise because it plays off current news. It presents practical information, especially useful for those who espouse a spiritual or, in this case, religious perspective on life.
I don't walk around being spiritual or religious. But, as they say, there are no athiests in a foxhole.
AP is usually quality and fast.This story is particularly good because it stays on point throughout. It stays with information on consumers. It does not stray into a corporate view.
This is not quality journalism. The reporter should have identified the angle of health care spending as part of the stimulus package in the lede graph. Instead, he casts the story as an opinion piece, generalizing the stimulus bill as Democrats "rewriting the social contract."
I am an Obama supporter and a liberal. I support rewriting the social contract, an opinion I am entitled to hold and express. The reporter is supposed report information, which he does with the story, but the information is buried.
No, not really. It's a start on the subject. Perhaps a companion piece could have included comments from actual students. I also would have like to see comments from someone who prefers the classics to practical education.
This is a 'blame the victim' mentality on the country's credit crisis. While I agree there is practical value in a high school course on personal finances, at this particular moment I'd like to see more investigative pieces about the credit/banking industry.
This is quality journalism because it checked out and found wanting the reliability of a story in the New York Times, one of the world's most used news sources. The NYT reports that Obama's U.S. policy in Afghanistan has been decided. This story investigates that claim and found that the policy is still emerging.
The NYT is suspect. We can never forget NYT reporter Judith MIller and her reporting of the Weapons of Mass Destruction story. What's the deal here? Are we talking conspiracy theory?
This is quality journalism because it forces us to consider the news in terms of the bigger picture.
Holder's nomination as Obama's attorney general has been controversial based on his agreement with former Pres. Bill Clinton's pardon of financier Marc Rich. This is a minor criticism of Holder in light of his more recent 2000-20008 corporate defense work in a private Washington law firm.
I believe the decline of mainstream media newspapers has as much to do with their failure to report the news accurately and free of bias as it does with the rise of Internet news. We should never forget the NYT misled the American public on the weapons of mass destruction. We have to look to alternative sources and independent media if we want to know what's going on.