Nicholas Kristof thinks it's bad that newspapers are dying. He views newspapers as impartial sources of information. If newspapers die, people will be deprived of the diversity of viewpoints that only newspapers can provide.
What world is Kristof living in? Has he read his own newspaper, the New York Times? Nearly every letter to the editor (I read all of them, every day) expresses a progressive point of view. There are no conservative op-ed columnists. Read that again: There are no conservative op-ed columnists. The news "reports" are biased toward progressivism, sometimes obviously so. It's as though the newspaper is being written by and for people who don't want their comfortable beliefs or values challenged. There is no attempt to express, much less to engage, a conservative viewpoint on any issue, from the war in Iraq to illegal immigration to stem-cell research to presidential politics.
The New York Times is a disgrace to journalism. The sooner it goes under, the better.
Addendum: Here are the key paragraphs of Kristof's column:
One 12-nation study found Americans the least likely to discuss politics with people of different views, and this was particularly true of the well educated. High school dropouts had the most diverse group of discussion-mates, while college graduates managed to shelter themselves from uncomfortable perspectives.
The result is polarization and intolerance. Cass Sunstein, a Harvard law professor now working for President Obama, has conducted research showing that when liberals or conservatives discuss issues such as affirmative action or climate change with like-minded people, their views quickly become more homogeneous and more extreme than before the discussion. For example, some liberals in one study initially worried that action on climate change might hurt the poor, while some conservatives were sympathetic to affirmative action. But after discussing the issue with like-minded people for only 15 minutes, liberals became more liberal and conservatives more conservative.
It's hard to read these paragraphs without thinking of academia, which, being dominated by progressives, generates increasingly extreme views. The remedy is to promote diversity. Not the superficial diversity (such as skin color) sought by progressives, but intellectual diversity. Everyone would benefit from it, even progressives, many of whom, sadly, have lost the ability to think. The brain is a muscle; if you don't exercise it, it atrophies.
Keith Burgess-Jackson, J.D., Ph.D. 