Journalism.org

I chose today to monitor the news flow through Journalism.org. It's a very thorough site, reporting many different angles. If comparing reports is what you are after, this is the site to be surfing. The front pages of many news sources are even broken down so that the eye can see what is being emphasized where. BBC news tended to be less biased, and also more detailed in its report of how the media covered McCain's speech. The Boston Globe seemed to be trying to redeem Palin, and give her an underdog position. This coverage showed her as victimized; I took that as being a bit more biased than other reports I had read. On of the most straightforward and factually sound reports (to my eyes) was from The Washington Post. This article had both sides, but revealed conservative biases. The opinion column I glanced at from the Chicago Tribune seemed to have a very fair approach, and I was inclined to listen to this take on "anti-media." Phil Rosenthal satirically counterattacked Palin's attack on the media. He was very biased, but that was what an opinion article was supposed to be. His report, however, was not the most thorough account, and left one wanting at least one quote from Palin's anti-media speech. The current state of media and how the channels stack up to one another can be found, if one chooses journalism.org as their site.