What We Wish The NY Times Would Write

Hey, he used to work for the Times, check his bio! The title is "The News That's Fit to Print."
Here's an excerpt:

[...]
Our editors also feel severely chafed by the accusation that many of our front-page articles are not really news at all but rather illustrations of our editorial-page arguments. Yes, we have run many articles showing that Americans are poorer, stouter, more psychotic, less well dressed, and more prone to hangnails and paper cuts since Bush took office. But these reports are legitimate news. For example, our report last week, “Sure, Country is Divided, but Bush Country, Too?” conveyed our wonderment that even in Crawford, Texas, Bush’s hometown, some folks intend to vote for Kerry. This was news. If we discover that several people in Boston intend to vote for Bush, I’m sure we will run that story on our front page, too.
To the casual reader, many of our front-page articles may look a bit like editorials. Last week, one article took a stern look at President Bush’s foreign policy, and another more or less said that Republicans feared that Mr. Bush looked like a loser in the debates. We call this interpretive journalism, and if our reporters interpret things the way the owner and editors of this paper do, well, that’s just a coincidence. For instance, in his front-page analysis after the third presidential debate, the Cocoon reporter said the debates were “a rough passage for Mr. Bush,” who “occasionally seemed agitated,” whereas, Mr. Kerry “delivered a consistent set of assertive, collected performances.” Some readers believe the headline should have said “Reporter is Voting For Kerry” instead of “A Crucial Test, But Not Final.”

[...]