This is NOT journalism, much less good journalism. Nor does it qualify as "news analysis." While this piece is interesting, this is a political "Action Alert" and does not qualify as jounalism any more than a campaign flyer for Hillary Clinton would. Although I understand the point and empathize with Senator Edwards, this does not really come under journalism and, in my opinion, should not be listed on a site that rates the media. This could be a fine discussion piece for a site that rates political blogs, but not for a media rating site. I also wonder if the reader isn't asked to make a major leap of faith as to the REASON the Edwards information did not appear. The stated connection to corporate shenanigans is tenuous at ... More »

Calls attention to some of the problems in corporate media reporting on the Democratic primary elections. This is an extremely important issue that has received little attention while potentially having an enormous impact on the elections.

While confessing a bias as an Edwards supporter, this story is good journalism for two reasons. It brings forward Edwards' strong position against all the GOP nominees, which has been true all year, but rarely shows up in "horserace stories." And perhaps more important, it shows one media source criticizing another, which is sorely absent in our national debate. I would like to see more of this criticism in the mainstream media.

Quite a logically put together story. Somewhat editorializing, but that's expected from this source. Good target picked, valid points made, reasonable sourcing.