It is disappointing to see misrepresentations of life in Armenia...whether intentional or not. After reading the recent article by Mr. Pope in the WSJ (posted on this log a few days ago), a few things caught my eye. For example: The quip about Armenians not being a majority 'barely anywhere' by the 19th century is not correct. More disconcerting is the absence of the reasons (ethnic cleansing, pogroms, wholesale massacres, racist policies of barbaric empires culminating in the Genocide) concerning Armenia's historical demographic challenges. Also the nasty comment about the visa queues at the 'few embassies left in Yerevan.' Which embassies existed here, and now no longer do, Mr. Pope? What are you implying? Why the blatant lies and misrepresentation? Furthermore, Mr. Pope's misquotes of at least one person referenced in the article. It is bad journalism to parade into Yerevan on a 3 day visit (leaving pre-dawn on the morning of April 24th...what a strange coincidence) with a pre-defined agenda of characterizing the country as hopeless, while not admitting any of the many examples of hope and rebirth (IT startups, job creation, recent economic growth, in short - nation building in various forms) experienced during his stay. It is one thing for a journalist to seek out and highlight positive and negative aspects of an investigative trip; it is quite another for a western correspondent (who has lived in Turkey for nearly 2 decades) to engage in prejudicial yellow-journalism.