Norwegian Liberals: Can they be trusted? Or are they commu-nazis? Mostly opinion, in fact, I don't think this is quite the title of news-worthy as it is op-ed, but certainly comparable to the evening news. Obvious biases. But Obama is a Marxist... Right?

Mostly EU cited sources, I'd say their experts, but I don't know them personally. Where's the rest of what Nabucco said about having up until May 17 to sign up...? The article sticks to the blanket facts, but doesn't give much of the raw materials from which these facts are derived. For the most part, though, I'd say a decent publication.

This isn't quality journalism, because I'm still left with questions after reading the entire thing, for one, what spurred the coup de'tat? Were there any Americans injured? To what degree was there rioting/looting? And who killed the 68 people? Other than that, the article stuck to putting forth what the author thought were the important facts. Likewise, the article itself seems toneless, neither supporting nor refuting the actual rise of the opposition government.

This article made statements that were not backed up by actual concrete evidence or data. It's easy to say that this is the "worst recession in decades." but that could very well just be fear mongering if they don't actually back it up, which they don't. Also, they do state a statistic "The average EU dropout rate stands at 15 percent." but what does that mean? And from which news source does it originate? The journalism that's going on here is sketchy.

The sources/organizations are cited very clearly. The information presented isn't one-sided/is a direct representation of the facts. The goal of the news is to present the information, and the article does a good job of that.

They cited themselves. And two other sources, one specific, the other not so specific. It presents the facts, but doesn't really paint the whole picture. Maybe a reason why this conflict is continuing, or maybe what the terrorists hope to gain, that is actually based in truth, and not in the bias of the people writing the story.

This doesn't really portray the aspects of quality journalism, in that there are limited sources, the news provider is somewhat credible, and it gives little to limited view of the overall situation.

This isn't even an article, it's basically just someone who posted a bunch of headlines under the Economics section of the website, and expects people to think that's news, unless I'm missing something here and these are secretly interactive links that you have to be Iranian/Muslim to access. In either case, it looks like the economy is A-O.K.

This article takes a look into the recent discovery made in Iran that can save truck drivers money by reducing the amount of drag that is exerted on trucks by air resistance. It is entirely factual, and is actually straight-forward with why this is such a good idea: profit.

A short and unbiased article that targets the political spheres that are centered on the construction of the Hat Gyi Dam. In an effort to prevent China to seize control of the dam, Thailand is putting added emphasis to complete this dam. The journalist refrains from taking sides, and offers little to no opinion on the matter, presenting facts rather than his/her own ideals.

This news article explains the new-found power that Vietnam has attained by being granted a seat onto the United Nations Security Council, it's very compact and direct, and does not offer the author's own opinion of the matter into the story. It remains factual in that it leaves very little out of what actually happened.

The author definitely remains objective, and considers most viewpoints in the matter, and allows the reader to see into each viewpoint.

This is a first-hand account of an incident in the Capital of Kachin State, Myitkyina.