one tiny relevant fact; the poll bump. a nice bit of recent historical context. but not worth the time to link to it.

obama gives the troops the fuel and ammunition they need to get to work. the speech worked.

interesting reporting of the penumbra, the shadows and responses in the Chinese blogosphere, around a relatively simple event but set in a multicultural and political context

14,000 words, but a pretty good history of the internet by the people who built it.

This story is notable for the concise, conversational way it packages a relatively complex and nuanced story. And it seems accurate and insightful. but making the complex simple is something modern journalists have to wrestle with in new ways for a new audience.

racism is unacknowledged and persistent. thomas sowell is acknowledged not as an expert on racism but as a relatively doctrinaire hoover center thinker, concerned about liberal media bias activist judges, etc. who is also black. all that said, the story is what it professes to be, an account of a talk by a researcher.

I love this story. most people don't realize the depth of their own prejudice. as a mississippian i know that better than most. we are the problem. it's not them. the difference between a mississippi racist and a california racist is that mississippi racists don't lie. i love the scientific verification of this kind of thing as it arises.

This is a point that is worth reading: "The world has shifted from anti-Americanism to post-Americanism."

i am thinking more about system risk than I have in a long time. this story points to why that issue, one that you don't really want to face head on, because it has no head, for one reason, is a subtext in lots of financial stories these days.. .

an op ed with a viewpoint that points out structural barriers industrial agriculture has built into our farm bill and ag laws and regulations.

glad to see newstrust getting some attention by some of the more established players in the citizen media space.

there is a lot of merit in the reporting as well as unexamined bias in the way the numbers are interpreted. this is not a neutral topic and all voices have their own agenda.

it makes you wonder if the books were cooked

the realization of the need for a new approach by such a respected figure is pretty amazing.

Edwards was the only candidate to use the word "poverty" in his stump speech. I hope Krugman is correct in his prediction that his ideas will continue to live on in the debate.

Jon Stewart montage of coverage highlights with the copycat, inflamatory context by TV journalists around presidential candidate's remarks. Really well done for reversing the context; the candidates were not blowing up, but the stories are promoted like a wrestling match.

amazing denial and CYA by the man who dismantled the Iraq army. the army units were not functional, but there were professionals and relationships that should have been used.

"Privileged people never see the connection between their power and the powerlessness of others. " If you agree with this statement from the story, then this commentary will make some sense to you. if not, it will not.

typical caution from the economist, who were warning about deflation a couple of years ago; they flag macro risks well. and the article is worth reading. but their big picture forecasts are not as good as their reporting. they've successfully predicted 9 out of the last 5 major threats with their approach.

an important story about an indigenous people not being heard or seen for who they are. the kind of story that makes you want to take action.

top rating on content. low rating on accessability, which is not actually a category i seein the newtrust rating system.

nice historical counterpoint. time to take stock of the right in light of older trends, says george will.

a good editorial, but not news. still important as a viewpoint. but just a viewpoint. tweaks the newstrust model a bit

An insider take on china's asian political moves vs. the u.s. commentary mixed with reportage, it raises large issues beyond mere partisanship but american short term attention and myopia.

Interesting take on a general's purposeful injection of military goals into the political realm. Now everyone will have to react to this mention of a timetable by the man in charge of boots on the ground.

very interesting, links to other research

Pelosi's newness at internaional diplomacy is made clear in this story; saying Israel is ready to negotiate, when Israel quickly denied actual readiness, as is the fact that the whole trip had more to do with domestic than international diplomacy. but the larger point of a new approach to foreign policy was not made as clear as it could be. congress is stepping into the bush adminstration's potholes with a new boldness. that part was not really included in this story.

Tracks a refinement and maturation of a technology and business trend well, in a quick, Business Week kind of way. Long on tactics, useability, short on deeper analysis, but a good marker of progress in a field.

I like the fact that it is a new source; clearly advocacy journalism, but the quotes are well referenced. It brings in a new viewpoint and shines a different light on an issue.

Administration policy restricts officials from talking about embarassing subjects, like impact of global warming on ice, polar bears and other species

Wired has been excoriated throughout the blogosphere for the inherent conflict of interest; their parent company owns a lower profile competitor of digg. they should not have done this story without seeing if they could use the same manipulative techniques on reddit, their own competitor. bad bad bad.

Interesting way of using new technology and online communty to level the playing field with an existing entrenched political competitor.

Startling scientific fact about a key indicator; why are millions of bees missing? A mystery with several alarming scenarios.

Extensivel sourced, this story points to a troubling new regulatory policy favoring big pharma over health concerns

This story misses the key point; yes you can buy votes on Digg, but over time, the wisdom of crowds asserted itself and the stupid story for which he bought votes was buried. The writer completely misses the deeper point, I think. Bought votes on Digg lose value as the community applies its own value.

cory doctorow knows this issue inside and out. his criticism of the technical and legal issues is pretty much flawless.

The vice president's doubt that humans cause of global warming has not wavered despite overwhelming scientific evidence to the contrary.

this is the result of surveys; valid as far as it goes.