way back in the day, or so my favorite american history professor would say, the Monitor used to report the news like this:

So and so on the following date at the following place and time said this: "whatever speach etc it was in its orriginal entirety" , no editorial comments no explanations that was it, the speakers words, no sumations , no "spin" etc,,,,,,,

that is why it originally achieved its stunning reputation as an unbiased news source

today the Monitor has a single page ussually dedicated to airing its own views on an issue, with a light religious overtone, if yu dont want to read it yu just skip to the next article,, i havent seen them use the "quote alone style" in thier reporting recently but that doesnt mean they have completely abandoned it eaither

i have seen them allow more reporters to editorialize pieces though, and they dont allways try to balance the piece with an opposing view point,

as far as political leanings i havent noticed the Monitor take a stance one way or the other (alltough the individual contributors sometimes do) and in that respect i think its one of the best newspapers out there and as non-partisan as it can be without resorting to thier old format (which my professor said was frankly a little lengthy and boreing as they didnt edit the reports)

i love the bbc and npr as well as colours television , pbs and link, all of which i get on satilite i also have several news blogs on my email page and i am an avid reader of a variety of books and information sources (though i will argue wikipedia is hardly a credible source as any tom dick and harry can amend whats in it) though wiki is trying to change that,,

of course an individuals perspective is dependent on a wide variety of things from the way they were raised to peer pressure ,to thier intelectual capacity etc etc, all parts of the whole,, i really dont believe any one person should be catagorized simply based on a single belief in a single topic or generalization,,, which is why it may sound like i snub ya if yu call me a radical, and i call ya one back (thats to anyone not any one)

the only way a news source could be completely "free" is if it was completely economically, culturally, politically and socially independent,

it would also have to be held to the highest ethical standards

these are things many claim (because who would claim not too) yet few approach

i have seen blatent bias in every majior news channel on tv even from cnn to fox, from msn to (my beloved) dailey show even cctv and yes on occasion bbc and npr (yes i find news on the dailey show sometimes more accurate than the regular channels)

the ultimate judge on your news is you,, take it or leave it, with or without the grain of salt