The NYT is held in high regard by people who know and understand journalism, even when they disagree with the paper's editorial slant. The NYT is respected, even when not liked, by policy makers. Some influence, you can buy, but some influence must be purchased with the currency of consistent quality. The NYT has a global reputation for quality, which it has earned. Calling that "regional politics" is just silly.

I can judge the whole Republican Party by the Nixon Administration, too. I would be entitled to my opinion, however influenced by incomplete or inaccurate information and personal prejudice that might be.

I can also judge the whole Republican Party by the words and actions of one or two of its prominent figures. Trent Lott comes to mind. I would be entitled to my opinion, however influenced by incomplete or inaccurate information and personal prejudice that might be.

And you can judge the entire NYT, all its staff and reporters, and its body of work, by the blind spot that several of its editors had toward a particular reporter. You would be entitled to your opinion, however influenced. . . that might be.

Generalizing outward from a small sample of data can work in hard science, but it doesn't work in areas that are entirely predicated on human personalities. Politics is one such area; journalism is another.

Regards--
Mary Anne