Old but interesting self-criticism of the NYT's liberal bias by its (now former) ombudsman.

But if you're examining the paper's coverage of these subjects from a perspective that is neither urban nor Northeastern nor culturally seen-it-all; if you are among the groups The Times treats as strange objects to be examined on a laboratory slide (devout Catholics, gun owners, Orthodox Jews, Texans); if your value system wouldn't wear well on a composite New York Times journalist, then a walk through this paper can make you feel you're traveling in a strange and forbidding world.

I once found myself nursing a hangover in Nowhere, Dixie.

The waiter came over, clean-faced and sun-browned. "Mornin', folks," he said in a sunny southern drawl.

"Booze?" I croaked.

"Oh, no, we don't do that," he laughed, sort of.

Fine. Eggs, I ordered, and bacon and biscuits. With "gravy," or whatever.

"That'll be it?" smiled the waiter.

"The paper. The New York Times."

A darkish look settled across his face. "Oh," he said flatly. "Oh, no, we don't do that."

He returned to the counter and whispered with the other waiters, glancing conspiratorially in my direction. Damnyank. The food was fine: heavy, savory, liberally salted. The USA Today was worse than the damn hangover.