About average for journalism today. It has a lot of facts but buys into the storyline of those who would cut Social Security benefits. It uses loaded statements, e.g. the social security surplus"has been borrowed over the years by the federal government and spent on other programs." Another of the articles listed as opposing Sen. Durbin's statement indicated Social Security was "forced" to loan the surplus to the federal government. A less value laden way of explaining this is to say that the Social Security surplus was invested in the safest available investments, U.S. government notes. It is true that past presidents going back to Johnson have masked the size of the federal debt by balancing it against the social security surplus, but that would have required better reporting in the past, and should not be an excuse for bad journalism today.