Why the LAT has sucked

LAT:

"I want everyone to know how serious I am about purging all political bias from our coverage," Carroll wrote in the May 2003 memo, adding, "We are not going to push a liberal agenda in the news pages of The Times."

I know this is not news for LAT readers but it makes very clear they’ve lost their way, believing in that whole liberal media myth, a self-mutilating practice.

It doesn't explain my pet peeve, that many key local and state news never even made it to the pages of the LAT. Yes, Angelenos are complacent, but if we wanted to know about something, we've learned to not look for it there.

Carroll is gone, and who knows that means. I’m not sure whether Carroll’s agenda was also a directive from the parent company the Tribune.

Kinsley, who's wife is the head of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, is out as well. No loss, as long as he keeps that creepy Kaus guy off the LAT payroll (and website). And maybe we'll get more pro-public education pieces out in the LAT. How much did his wife's allegiance affect the LAT opinion page?