Ha'aretz is indeed wonderful and indispensible, and this article is pretty good. I would like to supplement this article with a few points:
1. Go read it in English f or free!
2. This profile leaves out just how important Ha'aretz reporting and op-ed pieces are for progressive pro-real-peace American Jews, in our ongoing domestic fight with conservative American Jews, for whom the Likud-Netanyahu-Israeli government policy is never to be questioned (unless it is negotiating with Syria or the PA like Rabin did), AIPAC, Neocons and the like. It is our lifeline.
3. The flip side, is when Ha'aretz has rebuked knee-jerk anti-Israeli reporting. It often finds itself used and abused by some and has tried to push back with varying success. Anybody seriously interested in following up on Ha'aretz in particular, and how a newspaper deals with being part of a nation during a time of war should read these two articles from 2002, at the height of the intifada and when Ha'aretz was first being recognized globally due to it online English language version: A newspaper's mission, by Amos Schocken (the publisher); and an article digging beneath the surface in the Middle East conflict, by then Ha'aretz editor-in-chief Hanoch Marmari.
The story is more complicated then some might think.
4. Rosner is just awful. Completely embedded neocon/AIPAC/AEI. His spinoff work, such as the totally worthless "Israel Factor--which ranks presidential candidates in part by worthless right-wing overwhelmed Internet pseudo-polling--belongs as an AEI publication, not with Ha'aretz's name attached. Rosner is also tied in with Washington Post media via Slate.
5. The talkback section is terrible. Most of the respondents are vitriolic extremists from the fringes of either side. Rather doubtful if anybody in Knesset takes much of it seriously. It is an example of really bad blog commenting.
5. Ha'aretz is not very progressive when it comes to economic policy. Unlike its strong real-peace, get out of the settlements/occupation diplomatic policy line, it has been stuck in a "neoliberal" to outright pro-business, anti-labor, regressive taxes, pro-free market, growth at any cost line.In this sense it follows a similar line to the right wing of the Democratic party or British Labor party--the need to reform away from "socialist" past mistakes in order to achieve growth. It has underplayed growing Israeli domestic economic inequality/disparity/insecurity. Indeed, part of their argument for peace is it's economic benefit for elites. It does have a history with Schoken family as a business/financial newspaper. It is definitely not like The Nation overall.
6. Related to the above, and hinted at in the article, is its mediocre coverage of (at least in English online edition) of Sephardic/Mizrahim Jews, working-class and Labor issues.