The Washington Post wrote this article, drawing a number of conclusions.

Yeah, I know Don posted this link. But this is what he didn't do:

Again, as is my habit, I fished out the original report. Again, it is highly educational to read the report for yourself and draw your own conclusions. What did the Post include? What did they leave out? What other headlines could have been used in this story other than the one used that would have been equally accurate?

How do your conclusions on the original material compare with what the media is feeding you?

And yes, dammit, doing this is work. The original report is 30 pages long. But you need to be able to do this to get at the real story.