His year end review of the sad, slow, steady decline of a once great newspaper is up.

If I was the CEO of the Tribune Company, I would asked editor Naquet for a list of his editors, a list of his reporters, and a list of his columnists ranked from most talented to least talented and then simply dismiss the lower half from each list and instruct Baquet to start rebuilding with young reporters who had previously written some piece that was judged fair by a center-right conservative. Readers would never notice anything except an improvement in the paper. And it will never get better until and unless they have a massive shake-out of the entrenched deadwood still telling each other that they are losing circulaytion because of the n o call list, and that the complaints about the paper's bias is just silly frothing from the far right.

It was a very good year for the blogosphere.

The blog rolls in the left margin are my suggestions as to which blogs you ought to be sampling on a regular basis. Among them are the familiar names of the center-right 'sphere. There are also some relative newcomers that you really need to bookmark and visit often, blogs that soared in '05, including Carol Platt Liebau Soxblog, The Anchoress, Austin Bay and TriGeekDreams.

Watching the Technorati "universe" expand makes me certain that '06 will see another group of new and powerful voices emerge. This week Glenn Reynolds said this about the blogosphere on my radio show:

Everything will be different in another five years. The blogosphere is still open. New people rise in traffic and influence very, very rapidly. Old people whose audiences feel they've abandoned them fall quickly. And it's a very fluid.

He's right, of course, and with long-time journalists/columnists like Michael Barone, John Leo, and Jack Kelly showing the way, 2006 may well be the year in which MSM finally figures out it has to change its habits when it comes to productivity and transparency or be eclipsed in most areas of information delivery and analysis.

Now if we could only find a way to close down Fraters, Nihilist in Golf Pants, and Infinite Monkeys. Lileks once referred to some local LA hammer head radio hosts as my own "Yancey Street Gang," but these three blogs deserve that title. They are the kudzu of the internet, and you should never read them.

Happy New Year.

Read the Los Angeles Times' story on the leak investigation. Linger on graph four:

The warrantless spying program has caused an uproar in Congress and among privacy experts, who said the Bush administration might have broken the law by intentionally bypassing the secret federal court that is supposed to oversee sensitive investigations involving suspected espionage and terrorism.

Then note that of the three named sources, two are an ACLU lawyer and Clinton-era Deputy AG Eric Holder, (who was last seen saying "neutral, leaning towards favorable" on the Marc Rich pardon.) Here's agenda journalism in full bloom:

Unlike the ongoing investigation into disclosures about Plame's CIA status, this probe is not being run by an independent special prosecutor who is immune to political pressure but by Justice Department officials who work at the discretion of a presidential appointee, Atty. Gen. Alberto R. Gonzales.

That prompted some critics Friday to call the probe an attempt to silence internal critics of the administration when they were most needed to bring controversial counter-terrorism programs and policies to light.

"President Bush broke the law and lied to the American people when he unilaterally authorized secret wiretaps of U.S. citizens," said Anthony D. Romero, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union. "But rather than focus on this constitutional crisis, Atty. Gen. Gonzales is cracking down on critics of his friend and boss."

Romero called on Gonzales to appoint a special counsel "to avoid further charges of cronyism."

This clueless and laughable account would make an otherwise uninformed reader conclude that Bush supporters are unhappy with the investigation --they are very supportive-- and that the investigation might somehow damage the president when in fact nearly everyone following the matter assumes the NSA leak came from a Bush enemy.

Most egregious of all the story's many distortions is the refusal to alert the reader that there are many legal scholars --"privacy experts"-- on the side of the president amd his authority to have ordered the surveillance, and that there is strong public support for the NSA surveillance program. You decide if Josh Meyer and his editors are simply incompetent or hard-left MSM Ahabs.

The Times' seemed to have hit bottom with its embarassing front-page story unknowingly based on an April Fool's joke, but I should never underestimate the paper's ability to fall of the floor. It is simply a running joke on anything to do with Washington, D.C.

Many, many of you have sent me e-mails over the past few weeks praising me for the addition of MKH to this blog. MKH is indeed that good, that smart, and that much fun. She's a superstar in the making, and she is one of the reasons I am an optimist about American politics generally, though a pessimist about 2006. Because new media has destroyed all the barriers to entry, a young talent like MKH can quickly earn and keep an audience purely on market appeal. Quick: Name a lefty blogger introduced to you in '05 with half as much insight and work ethic as MKH.

I have to thank DailyKos for the idea of using established blogs to gain attention for new bloggers with ability and diligence. I hope Instapundit, Powerline, CQ and others all use their platforms to help younger talent get traction.

This is another feature of new media that distinguishes it from old media. There is a genuine desire among the folks of new media, of left and right, to, as novelist Alex Haley put it on his tombstone, "Find the good, and praise it." MKH is good. Very good. One of my resolutions for the new year is to find more like her.

(Speaking of CaptainsQuaterss, say a prayer for the quick and complete recovery of Mrs. CQ. She's a wonderful lady, and as tough as they come. Post a note of encouragement for her and Ed.)

Another resolution is to thank the folks who have helped the blogosphere grow and prosper. Perhaps the greatest unsung hero of the 'spere is N.Z.Bear, the man who conceived, built and operates the ecosphere. (Full disclosure: He's a new friend of mine, with whom I hope to work in the furture.) N.Z. should be the man most Madison Avenue firms are trying to recruit because he understands what is happening. Completely. I hope they stay blind.)

A thank you has to go out to Jeff Jarvis and Jay Rosen: I don't often --if ever-- agree with these men, but they are always thoughtful, and always pushing the entire blogosphere to think about what is unfolding before our eyes.

Tomorrow: The must-reads, and why.

And I hope they catch him or her quickly. Unlike the ludicrous charge that the exposure that Valerie Plame worked for the CIA injured the national security, this leaker may have done just that.

Hillary's office denies she's behind the obstruction of D.C. Circuit nominee (and former Ken Starr deputy) Bett Kavanaugh. (HT: Powerline.)

I will believe that when Senator Clinton publicly authorizes Majority Leader Frist to disclose any hold she has placed on, or other objection she has made against Mr. Kavanaugh.

Spotted this at Breitbart on the way out the door.

The site is here.

Off for the rest of the day and tomorrow. Check Radioblogger for the transcript of my upcoming interview (3 PM Pacific if you want to listen) with Fred Barnes, Michael Barone and Mark Steyn on the election outlook in '06. (BTW: You may be shocked to learn that this trio's take on the political landscape is not all that different from that of Kos, interviewed here by Newsweek.)

And here's the link to the interview with Robert Kaplan. If you haven't already ordered Imperial Grunts, Kaplan's new and immensely impressive account of his travels around the globe in the company of the American military, you should.

New Sisyphus wrote me earlier today about Kaplan's account of his time in Columbia, the book's most shocking chapter. Check his blog to see what he has to say if he takes my suggestion and posts there. He's a former foreign service office, and has plenty of info on Columbia, and given Hugo Chavez's designs on his neighbor, the FARC's brutality, and the ties to al Qaeda, folks should be playing attention.

But why not put links into the online version?

Joe's Dartblog collects some of the collections so you don't have to.

The first hour of today's show is a look ahead to the elections of 2006 with Fred Barnes, Michael Barone, and Mark Steyn as my guests.

Hours two and three are a look back at the events of 2005 with my Salem Radio colleauges Michael Medved, Dr. Al Mohler, and Dennis Prager.

To listen at 3 PM Pacific, click the "listen online" button.

From LA Weekly. (HT: Powerline.)

With Michael Yon, Michael Totten, Bill Roggio, Iraq the Model, and Robert Kaplan writing, why bother with MSM's coverage of the Middle East at all?

Yesterday I noted the front-page pratfall from Monday's Los Angeles Times:

But now, as the Fish and Wildlife Service ponders a delisting plan that would turn over management of the wolves to the states, federal officials are balking at plans they fear would allow hunters to exterminate whole packs.

In Wyoming, for example, Gov. Dave Freudenthal last April decreed that the Endangered Species Act is no longer in force and that the state "now considers the wolf as a federal dog," unworthy of protection. The governor's declaration reflects the views of hunters and ranchers that the wolves are decimating elk herds and devouring cattle and sheep. Some rural residents say they fear that wolves may prey on children.Idaho, home to the largest population of wolves in the West, has been the least welcoming. Officials say hundreds of wolves have been shot, in violation of federal law. A recent spate of poisonings has not only killed wolves, but dozens of ranch dogs and family pets that ingested pesticide-laced meatballs left along wildlife trails, state wildlife managers say.

I did not reproduce the paper's "correction" from Tuesday, which read:

FOR THE RECORD
Gray wolves — An article in Tuesday's Section A about tensions over the federal effort to reintroduce wolves into parts of the West wrongly attributed to Wyoming Gov. Dave Freudenthal a statement that Wyoming considered the Endangered Species Act no longer in force and "now considers the wolf as a federal dog." The statement, which was circulated on the Internet, was purportedly from Freudenthal but was in fact a hoax

You be the judge. Did the Los Angeles Times correct its embarassing and deeply misleading story, or repair the reputation of the Wyoming governor, and did it take any steps to protect the paper, its readers, or future targets of its reporters? Of course not.

On October 10, 1999, the Times devoted its Sunday magazine to the opening of the Staples Center, and did so because it had agreed with the center to split the revenues from the advertising in that magazine with the Center. Oh the agony within the newsroom! How the tubas of journalism sounded deep notes. The exercise in self-flagellation amused outsiders as it so clearly framed the cluelessness of the newspaper's insiders as to what mattered to outsiders. Outsiders --especially readers-- just want to be able to trust the stuff they read. The content of the magazine wasn't flawed, but the self-perception of the delusional reporters was.

I doubt that even one of those insiders shocked and horrified by the Staples Center flap even raised an eyebrow at the fact that a front page story could casually absorb and pivot off of an internet hoax, and that the "correction" would be the small and buried aside published above.

Which is why the New Year's Resolution you ought to make and keep is to cancel a MSM subscription today. The papers won't change until they are made to.

Still nothing, btw, in the Washington Post about its slagging of Bill Roggio. But in searching for updates on the story, I found James Joyner at OutsideThe Beltway's comment on the practices of MSM:

For reasons I have yet to fathom, a substantial number of professional journalists seem unable to mine the Internet for easily accessible information.

Combine Joyner's wonder with the Los Angeles Times' quick embrace of an internet fraud/joke, and you begin to get the picture: The MSM uses the internet to find what it wants to find, and ignores what it wants to ignore.

Here's a test: The MSM wants to flay the president over the NSA's surveillance of al Qaeda aboriad communicating with its agents inside the United States.

But the best arguments are that the president has the authority and indeed the duty to do just that.

So does the MSM reference liberal law professor and scholar Cass Sunstein agreeing with those arguments, note the vigorous discussion about Sunstein's views on blogs both right and hard left, or the Rasmussen polling solidly behind the president's executive order?

Of course not. Those are data bursts that don't fit with where the MSM wants the story to go. Instead, the anti-Bush Ahabs of the MSM bend every bit of data to their purpose. And the result is not that public opinion changes, but that the public grows even more distrustful of the MSM, and circulation and credibility drops again.

"Fake but accurate" quotes in the Los Angeles Times, drive-by slagging of accurate correspondents in the Washington Post, the selective use of scholarship and the Ahab-like obsession with Valerie Plame and complete disinterest with anti-Bush leakers of seriously-damaging-to-the national-security intelligence gathering secrets in the New York Times and elsewhere --the MSM is ending 2005 in a state of utter panic over its future and cluelessness as to why the public hates it so.

There are truly none so blind as those who will not see.

The Professor of the Vines speaks. His home is here.

It has been more than 30 hours since the blogosphere detailed the slagging of Bill Roggio by the Washington Post. The Post has not published a paragraph on the topic, preferring to imitate Nixon's "modified, limited hang-out," just as it did with Woodward's dissemblings on Plamegate.

RN, at least, thought he was defending much more than circulation numbers. The Post is disgraced. Twice.