I apologize that this is so late, I missed a few days last week and the day that it was assigned.

This debate was filled with logical and intriguing ideas from both sides, but after reading this article and thinking clearly I have to agree with Keller. Impartial journalism has been the most used and the most highly regarded form of journalism in our country to date. Impartial journalism gives the author freedom to use his own evidence, analysis, details, etc. Impartial journalism makes the reader use their mind to come up with their own opinion after the author brings up his evidence. Greenwald claimed that papers like the New York Times support higher classes and are looking to protect the government. Overall I thought most of Greenwalds criticisms of journalism were true and ver well put. However in my opinion the journalism that Greenwald supported was not as strong as Impartial journalism.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/31/sports/baseball/boston-red-sox-rout-st-louis-cardinals-to-win-world-series.html?_r=0
Did this World Series victory move Boston past the marathon bombings that occurred in April? Did this victory help them move past it at all? Will Boston ever truly get past this horrific event?

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/31/sports/baseball/boston-leaves-worries-behind-and-learns-to-be-happy.html
Is this victory going to be a final push to help the city get past the bombings? Will the city ever fully get past the bombings?