Comment UPDATE: It appears I offended a fellow reviewer who interpreted my comments about personal views and objectivity as a criticism of his review. That was not my intention. In fact, I was referring to the fact that as liberals, I and some other reviewers may be more receptive (a.k.a. less objective) to left-leaning pieces like this one than our conservative counterparts . My comments were intended as an overture of reviewer comraderie (unlike, I could add, the rather snarky tone you used regarding my review of the PBS piece a few days ago; I don't know if you saw my additional comments on that one). If my overture today was clumsy, I apologize. ORIGINAL Comment: I have to salute the reviewer who attempted to evaluate the piece strictly on its journalistic merits (he must feel like a conservative lone wolf in the midst of a forest of liberal reviewers). I think his evaluation is accurate on the face of it, using the criteria set out by NewsTrust and going through the questions one by one. The thing is, when we're reviewing opinion pieces (and this is, and I will relabel it accordingly) we have to choose which questions are appropriate to answer. For an example, how do you rate "fairness" in an opinion piece? It certainly shouldn't require the same balance that straight news reporting does. Anyway, I understand that someone might anticipate the "knee-jerk one rating," and want to say that I've rarely seen much of that from NewsTrust reviewers. Now that we have a separate place for the "Notes" and "Comments" it should be easier to rate one another on the content of our reviews about the journalism as opposed to the differences in our political or philosophical viewpoints. The differences do keep things interesting!