I think that this story was quality journalism in that it highlighted an issue (clear-cutting and environmental degradation) that involved an organization (the Boy Scouts) in ways that were surprising and disappointing. It was quality journalism in the reporting of the issue, stating the facts while allowing the Boy Scouts and their allies to respond. Still, I do think that the article did show a definite bias toward criticism of the Boy Scouts. While the report included information about how much Boy Scout executives were paid, it didn't provide figures for how much money is required to keep a local chapter of the Boy Scouts running for a year. How much money is put directly into services for Boy Scouts? While the clear-cutting issue is certainly central to this story, it would help to know what kind of expenses the Boy Scouts have every year. With that information, the story might have seemed more balanced and fair.