And yes, the coverage so far of the longest running “revolution” in modern history - half a century! - has been ... mixed.
As our friends over at Penultimos Dias pointed out some days ago, the BBC was first off the blocks, with an extensive section on its Spanish-language site under the headline, "Fifty years of struggle".
Incorporating photographs, videos and the inevitable video interviews, the site is quite an effort , as you would expect from the venerable British broadcaster.
But it seems that in their aim to be seen as fair and balanced, the BBC editors have in fact, compromised big time.
And so, while they are happy to use the Spanish term “triunfos” in headlines describing the “achievements” of the regime, they pointedly refrain from using the equally valid Spanish term “fracasos” to describe the all-too-obvious “failures”. Instead, they opt for the term “deudas”.
On the other hand, there are no compromises in this excellent article by Leonard Doyle in The Independent, detailing how those lovable Castro brothers deal with anyone who has the temerity to question the official “triunfos”.
But up to now, the most accurate summary of the past 50 years has come from Andres Oppenheimer, the high profile Miami Herald columnist (H/T to our pals at Babalu).
Mr Oppenheimer concludes that 50 years after Castro took power, the big question is not so much whether the upheaval of 1959 was justified, but whether it was worth it.
“A dispassionate look into Cuba today shows that, while the country has reduced the pockets of extreme misery that existed during the Fulgencio Batista dictatorship, a majority of Cubans are poorer and have fewer opportunities to improve their lives than they did five decades ago,” the columnist concludes.
Sadly, he is right.