It sounds to me like the argument here is that newspapers, faced with their current crisis, should be producing different (i.e. "hipper" and less "partisan" or old-fashioned) content.
I'm not sure that this is the case - I'm fairly certain that all the to-do about media implosion has to do with distribution channels. I haven't heard much doubt expressed about the quality and relevance of reporting in the Times, for obvious reasons.
Given Rush Limbaugh and the amount of partisanship on the web, I don't think choosing partisan writers is a mistake at all. Extreme positions attract readership. I think the mistake is that the guy discussed isn't partisan enough. He seems like your run-of-the-mill liberal.
I'm not sure that this is the case - I'm fairly certain that all the to-do about media implosion has to do with distribution channels. I haven't heard much doubt expressed about the quality and relevance of reporting in the Times, for obvious reasons.