Thanks for writing all this!
I hadn’t heard anyone else point out the vast difference between National Review’s print and online versions. I’ve described their online presence as a sort of honest lawyer for the right. They present all evidence that’s in their favor and cast the other side in as negative a light as possible, but their factual assertions (while cherry-picked) are generally accurate. I’d say your description of NR’s print side as, “a well-researched slightly conservative publication concerned primarily with pre-Gingrich Republican conservatism and is critical of many in-power Republicans,” would apply just as well to Foreign Policy. Even better, both FP’s online and print publications contain the same well reasoned in-depth analysis.
Excellent point about focusing on print journalism too. I hadn’t thought about how the sources that tend to be most rigorous were print publications, but it makes perfect sense and seems to hold up.
That’s also a good point about newswire services being a different thing without a hint of opinion. Often their primary audience is the financial industry or other news organizations, and both expect impeccable accuracy without any layer of commentary or spin. While that lack of editorializing is wonderful, it also often means a lack of prioritizing and promoting especially important stories on their homepages, so reading them is like drinking from the firehose.
Thanks again for the article, and check out Foreign Policy some time if you don’t already.