Comments from feedback form - "So this article is not neutral..."
So this article is not neutral and I applaud that! Love that a company this big is take a stance. This article is not meant to be neutral, go Wikipedia!!!
Wikinews is neutral in reporting: but we do have interviews where interviewees are allowed to say what they wish and express their opinions. We don't do Fox News style fake balance though.
Fox News often sets up a back and forth with two guests. The "information" presented on Wikipedia's website during the protest made no allowance for any rebuttal with respect to the claims of fact that were made. How about for your next interview calling up The Information Technology & Innovation Foundation and asking them about where their funding is coming from and what their view of the protest is.
The ITIF?
Not, based on this page (http://www.itif.org/content/board), someone I'd trust to be "unbiased" about SOPA or PIPA.
Orrin Hatch is well-known to be so deep in the pockets of big media companies that he's covered in lint.
And Darrell Issa, who's also on the board, isn't the biggest anti-SOPA Congressman on the Hill? Even if they ARE biased, why so scared of hearing an opposing view? The ITIF people happen to know a lot about what's actually in these bills. Instead of interviewing Sue how about arranging a debate between her and someone who disagrees with her?
It's evident you suffer from a malady all too common in our modern world: you can't recognize neutrality even if you see it. Presumably this malady stems in part from rarely having the opportunity to see it; I prescribe hanging around Wikinews. A Wikinewsie learns to find and present a neutral view of the news, without bias from their own opinions. We all have opinions; the trick is to know where neutrality is, so one knows where one is relative to it.