Yasser Al-Zayyat/Getty Images

A woman flashes the V for 'victory' sign with her fingers painted in the colors of the former Syrian flag during a protest against the Syrian regime outside Damascus' embassy in Kuwait City on Feb. 5, 2012.

In the world of Twitter and social media, Andy Carvin has become a legend of sorts. I don't want to sound too much like a publicist for NPR, but the role of this NPR digital strategist as, effectively, Twitter Central throughout the Arab Spring—for the Arabs themselves in the uprisings—has won him numerous accolades. The Washington Post called him a "a one-man Twitter news bureau." The New York Times said he was "a personal news wire about Egypt."

As of today, Carvin has 62,450 Twitter followers. He told The Post last year that he tweets 7 days a week and up to 16 hours a day, sometimes more, from his laptop and phone in Washington, D.C.

His role in covering protests and unrest in the Middle East began in 2010 when he used Twitter contacts in Tunisia to crowd-source coverage of the revolution. He went on to repeat the formula in each successive country of unrest, using the same style of crowd-sourcing to debunk myths, share pertinent information, and create a written record of revolutions in real-time.

Enlarge Emmanuel Dunand/Getty Images

Republican presidential hopeful Mitt Romney in Sparks, Nevada.

Emmanuel Dunand/Getty Images

Republican presidential hopeful Mitt Romney in Sparks, Nevada.

Is Mitt Romney being treated unfairly in the coverage of the taxes he pays?

Hardly.

Some might find it rich even to raise the question, but many NPR listeners have, and it is journalistically and intellectually a valid question.

According to tax returns that Romney released last week under pressure from opponents in the Republican presidential primaries, he paid what appears to be a low rate for 2010 of 13.9 percent in federal taxes on adjusted gross income of $21.7 million. His campaign also released his estimated income for 2011 and projected that the average rate over the two years would come to a slightly higher 14.5 percent. That is an uncertain number, however, and is still extraordinarily low by the standards of the nation's progressive income tax scheme. In that scheme, the wealthy supposedly pay the highest rates.

But many listeners wrote to complain that reports on Romney's tax returns by Tamara Keith on Morning Edition and All Things Considered were, if not biased against the wealthy, at least ill-informed and lacking the context that explains how he came to have the low rates. More than half of Romney's income comes from investments, which Congress purposefully taxes at a low rate. They do so on the grounds that this will encourage more investment, as well as compensate for what arguably is double taxation on some investment income. Keith's reports noted that most of Romney's income was taxed low because it came from investments, but some listeners and conservative advocacy groups felt that she and most of the mainstream media failed to explain the justification.

Enlarge istockphoto.com

istockphoto.com

You're invited to use this space to discuss media, policy and NPR's journalism. We'll follow the conversation and share it with the newsroom.

Please stay within the community discussion rules, among them:

• If you can't be polite, don't say it: ...please try to disagree without being disagreeable. Focus your remarks on positions, not personalities.

• ...This is not a place for advertising, promotion, recruiting, campaigning, lobbying, soliciting or proselytizing. We understand that there can be a fine line between discussing and campaigning; please use your best judgment — and we will use ours.

Enlarge istockphoto.com

istockphoto.com

Most of us remember from science class that data, a plural noun, should appear with a plural verb. But in every day usage many of us, myself included, are apt to say "the data is" instead of "the data are."

In an effort to steer us back on track, Robin Taylor, a biology professor and NPR listener from Columbus, OH, offered this request:

I realize that my asking this is probably a lost cause, like asking that all men please go back to wearing hats (or that "pedophile" be pronounce "peed-o-phile" rather than "ped-o-phile," which means lover of feet), but here goes: is there any possibility of NPR treating the word "data" as a plural noun, which it is? The singular is "datum." The form, then, would be "These data are........"

Enlarge Getty Images

Bahraini protesters wave their national flag in the village of Sanabis near Manama on Feb. 14, 2011.

Getty Images

Bahraini protesters wave their national flag in the village of Sanabis near Manama on Feb. 14, 2011.

Updated 1/27/2012 6:10 p.m.(Click for the latest): Digital news editor Greg Myre weighs in on Bahrain web headline.

February marks one year since the start of a civil uprising in Bahrain, an island in the Persian Gulf. It was one of many countries to join in the so-called Arab Spring. As part of a recent series on the movement, guest host Linda Wertheimer on Morning Edition introduced a story on Bahrain by correspondent Kelly McEvers by saying: "Only one of the major uprisings has definitely failed, and that's where we'll go next."

In her report, McEvers says, "Bahrain became the one Arab country whose uprising was definitively put down."

Listener Tom Rizzo of Akron, OH, was dismayed:

That declaration is in the past tense, while the uprising in Bahrain is an ongoing event whose conclusion has not yet occurred. In many respects, the 14 February 2011 uprising has been wildly successful in raising the real situation that has prevailed in Bahrain for decades into the world's consciousness. For years and years it was possible to hear no mention of Bahrain in many "mainstream media" outlets in the United States, including NPR.

As a follow-up, Rizzo sent a Tweet noting that the State Department has just issued a travel alert because of potential unrest on the island. "Who's fooling whom?" he asked.

Enlarge istockphoto.com

istockphoto.com

Yesterday I was invited on air to comment on the state of political journalism for WMRA's Virginia Insight, a call-in show broadcast out of Harrisonburg, VA. Host Tom Graham and a few callers quizzed me on the ethics of political reporting and media bias. Below, you'll find the audio and a few excerpts from my interview.

Enlarge istockphoto.com

istockphoto.com

You're invited to use this space to discuss media, policy and NPR's journalism. We'll follow the conversation and share it with the newsroom.

Please stay within the community discussion rules, among them:

• If you can't be polite, don't say it: ...please try to disagree without being disagreeable. Focus your remarks on positions, not personalities.

• ...This is not a place for advertising, promotion, recruiting, campaigning, lobbying, soliciting or proselytizing. We understand that there can be a fine line between discussing and campaigning; please use your best judgment — and we will use ours.

Enlarge istockphoto.com

istockphoto.com

Let's jump into what is a raging debate and side with a colleague, Arthur Brisbane, the ombudsman for The New York Times, not out of collegial loyalty—it would be more fun to disagree—but because he is right.

Brisbane asked the same question that NPR listeners and critics have been asking me: To what extent should reporters, in everyday stories, act as "truth vigilantes" in correcting statements by politicians. He has been roundly attacked and lampooned. Or as he put it: "A large majority of respondents weighed in with, yes, you moron, The Times should check facts and print the truth."

Enlarge Samuel Kubani/Getty Images

International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Director-General Yukiya Amano at the agency headquarters in Vienna on Nov. 17, 2011. IAEA released the report on Iran's nuclear technology featured in Tom Gjelten's report.

Samuel Kubani/Getty Images

International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Director-General Yukiya Amano at the agency headquarters in Vienna on Nov. 17, 2011. IAEA released the report on Iran's nuclear technology featured in Tom Gjelten's report.

Last week, I disagreed with an email campaign requesting a correction to a report about Iran's nuclear program. Unlike the Huffington Post commentary that started the campaign, I found Tom Gjelten's report informative and careful. I felt the negative reaction had less to do with the journalism and more to do with the sensitivity of the subject. Most of us share an understandable fear of repeating in Iran the mistake that we made in going to war with Iraq over weapons of mass destruction that proved to be fictitious.

I knew my conclusion wouldn't go over well with some readers. NPR had received thousands of emails on the subject. I was right, and I'm thankful for the honest feedback. Below is a selection of some of the most thoughtful notes that add to the debate, as well as a criticism from a media watchdog advocacy group and a sophisticated analysis by an authoritative Washington think tank.

Wikipedia.org

NPR online readers passionate about the current debate over intellectual legislation in Congress were Wednesday slightly put off—well, for some, that would be an understatement. They were upset by what they perceived to be insufficient or slanted coverage of the online blackout protesting the two pieces of legislation, known as SOPA and PIPA.

Proponents of the House bill, the Stop Online Piracy Act, and its counterpart in the Senate, the Protect Intellectual Property Act, introduced the legislation with the aim of curbing online copyright infringement. Opponents argue the two bills are too far-reaching in their regulation of the Internet and threaten free speech.

One NPR post, in particular, from NPR's Two-Way blog caused some uproar. Featured in the post was insight on how to sidestep Wikipedia's day of protest January 18 against the bills.

Several readers were outraged, claiming NPR was "trivializing" the widespread online blackout and effectively "undercutting" Wikipedia's efforts by publishing a way to access the free encyclopedia's site during the day of protest. One characterized NPR as acting "like a scab in a labor dispute."

Enlarge Scott Olson/Getty Images

Rick Santorum speaks at the Daily Grind coffee shop on Jan. 1, 2012 in Sioux City, Iowa.

Scott Olson/Getty Images

Rick Santorum speaks at the Daily Grind coffee shop on Jan. 1, 2012 in Sioux City, Iowa.

You're an NPR reporter covering a presidential candidate. Serious stuff, even if it's still early in the election season. As he speaks, you think you hear the candidate say something that negatively singles out African-Americans. You try to get an explanation from the candidate after he finishes, but can't get to him. So, you go back to your hotel and listen to the tape. You're convinced he said it. But it's a little garbled.

What do you do?

In the balance, as you prepare your story, could be the fate of one man's presidential candidacy, or an increase in racial friction during an election year—or just simple accuracy.

This is the situation that Ted Robbins faced covering Rick Santorum in a meeting with voters in Sioux City, Iowa, two days before the Iowa caucuses earlier this month. Unable to get an explanation from Santorum, Robbins went with what he heard, which was a slur against black Americans. Since then, however, many listeners—and the candidate himself—say that in the garbled comment, the candidate did not mention blacks. At the most, others say, the candidate might have started to say "black" but stopped himself.

Enlarge Samuel Kubani/Getty Images

International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Director-General Yukio Amano gives a press conference on Nov. 17, 2011. A report by the IAEA has been at the center of discussions about Iran's nuclear technology.

Samuel Kubani/Getty Images

International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Director-General Yukio Amano gives a press conference on Nov. 17, 2011. A report by the IAEA has been at the center of discussions about Iran's nuclear technology.

Listeners are right to be vigilant about NPR and the news media coverage of Iran's nuclear program. A decade ago, much of the news media was intimidated and manipulated over a supposed nuclear weapons program in Iraq. The news media was hardly the only sector of society to be gullible, but the cost that we have had to pay in lives and money for such a catastrophic mistake has left us all on edge not to repeat it.

But the thousands of letters and phone calls that have poured into NPR in recent days about a story on Weekend Edition Sunday are finding phantoms in the other direction: the protesters are claiming things that NPR didn't say.

Most of the letters were a form one drafted by Robert Naiman, the policy director for Just Foreign Policy, a small advocacy group based in Washington. The campaign was started in an opinion post by Naiman on The Huffington Post, in which he gave a link to the letter to send to NPR, asking for a correction.

There is nothing to correct.

The NPR story by national security reporter Tom Gjelten was about the escalating economic war of sorts between the United States and Iran. The focus was on how the current economic threats and sanctions have rebounds and consequences that are often unintended or counter-productive. It was a smart piece that stepped back to suggest that we all open our eyes to look at just what we are getting into as a result of what we are doing now.

Enlarge istockphoto.com

istockphoto.com

"Roadside slim" from Roseburg, OR, wants to take a break. And he's not the only one.

Many of you have written—pleaded, really—for NPR to cut back on 2012 presidential campaign coverage. As Frank Range, from Athens, GA, put it, "The election is still 10 months off and we will have to endure a lot of hot air from the candidates. Please don't add to the wind."

Trust me, I hear you. You're not alone.

A survey by the Pew Research Center published yesterday found that 37 percent of Americans feel there is too much campaign coverage in the news. One problem for us is that about the same amount—39 percent—felt that they were receiving the "right amount" of coverage so far this year.

Much of the news media coverage is, of course, "horse race speculation." Most of us, including journalists, bemoan that, but we all want to know who is in first, too. The crowded Republican field does look a bit like the Kentucky Derby. I trust that NPR will continue to give us more substantive coverage as well, which many of you have written to say that you want. Let me know if you are dissatisfied, though it will be easier to judge once we get down to a more manageable number of candidates. In the meantime, here is a tongue-in-cheek solution from "Roadside slim," or at least I hope he doesn't really mean it:

Dear NPR:

We need to talk a little. Our 35+ year relationship of sharing the news of the day both in the morning and at night has been pretty stable, but recently you have seemed rather distant and preoccupied. Our great conversations about life, the universe, and everything now seem strained and only with perfunctory effort. I understand the bright lights, glitz and short term heart stopping lust of election analysis, but it is so fleeting like cigarette smoke, and becomes like warm stale wine and last night's muddy confetti.

I know there are things I can't understand but why would you throw your splendor and talent of delightful, provocative stories of home, culture, science, and far away cultures to the wind and then wallow with the hard, coarse and vulgar election street walkers of the other media, especially when street walking is not one of your best talents?

NPR, I bask in the air waves of both AM and FM stations located in the central part of western Oregon. But recently I have had to turn you off multiple times, both going to and coming home from work because we are just not talking on the same wave link.

NPR, I think you and I need space while you go find yourself. Perhaps you need time to explore the vulgarities enough to decide that is not for you. Understand that I will be fine. Now with the head spinning aroma of audio books and blogs misting from my silver IPOD and savory voices reading from my Kindle, Perhaps I could.... Maybe even... YES NPR, I do think we need space at least till next January after the inauguration. Maybe then we can hook back up. Play well NPR, just don't let the smoke and warm stale wine harden your voice, laughter, and desire for richness in the important things of life.

- "Roadside slim," Roseburg, OR

As always, we'll share your laments, odes and thoughts with the newsroom.

Enlarge istockphoto.com

istockphoto.com

You're invited to use this space to discuss media, policy and NPR's journalism. We'll follow the conversation and share it with the newsroom.

Please stay within the community discussion rules, among them:

• If you can't be polite, don't say it: ...please try to disagree without being disagreeable. Focus your remarks on positions, not personalities.

• ...This is not a place for advertising, promotion, recruiting, campaigning, lobbying, soliciting or proselytizing. We understand that there can be a fine line between discussing and campaigning; please use your best judgment — and we will use ours.

Enlarge T.J. Kirkpatrick/Getty Images

Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum during the nation's first primary on Jan. 10, 2012 in Manchester, N.H.

T.J. Kirkpatrick/Getty Images

Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum during the nation's first primary on Jan. 10, 2012 in Manchester, N.H.

Rick Santorum has a problem. The Republican presidential candidate has been dogged by gay rights activist Dan Savage since 2003, when as a senator he supported anti-gay laws, including against sodomy. Savage, an internationally syndicated sex advice columnist, took offense and called on his readers to wage an Internet war. He invited them to name, or re-name, a sex act after Santorum. Then he took a vote and created an anti-Santorum website with the new "definition." It's not delicate.

Since then, Santorum's problem has been a Google one. Even after he came in a close second in the Iowa caucus, a Google search on his name leads to Savage's column popping up first or near the top. Santorum can't seem to escape the, well, savage plays on his name.

NPR, like much of the news media, did a story on the phenomenon. This raised uncomfortable issues of what to say on air. The resulting piece attracted a complaint from listener Brendan Wolff, of Fairbanks, AK, who quite sensibly asked if such stories were appropriate, given that young people are often listening. She also asked if NPR wasn't contributing to the popularity of the site.

This is an age-old question when it comes to reporting on smut, sex scandals and the like, and can only be decided on a case-by-case basis. We asked NPR reporter Laura Sydell why she chose to go ahead in this case. Here is Wolff's letter and Sydell's response. See what you think.