The New York Times is better than you.
While making the case that the NYT really is
liberal, Daniel Okrent also admits that the Times demographic target is a jaded hipster who reeks of psuedo-intellectualism and, while claiming to be open-minded, rejects anyone who is not like him.
I give Okrent credit for letting the beast out of the closet once and for all, but instead of coming off as an honest look at what the NYT is really about, it smacks of intolerance and smugness and reads like Okrent wrote it while standing on the pedastel the Times made for its writers, one which they refuse to step off of because it would require that they actually do some "self-questioning."
All the news that's fit to print? No, how about all the news that's fit to be read if you're a New Yorker (or wannabe New Yorker) who loves abstract art, trendy issues, Bush-bashing and looking down at the people are not as good as you? I mean, if you're gonna be honest, why not go the whole nine yards?
Liberalism. It's new elitism.
See, also: Allah
and Ed Driscoll
, who makes a good point about the NYT setting the tone for the rest of the media.