I don't really see any inherent problem in writing an article concentrating almost solely on left-wing bloggers, especially if that was the stated intention from the get-go. (Though, if that was was the intention from the beginning then I don't quite understand why the reporter talked to Charles Johnson for 40 minutes only to not use any of the interview in the article.) I also think that it's unrealistic to ask for a detailed encomium to all the blogs responsible for the debunking of the fraudulent CBS memos, when that's a story which took place over the last couple of weeks and the turnaround time for a magazine piece like this is a matter of months.
The remarkable thing about this piece isn't "liberal" bias. It's really only about the 1,117th most egregious example of media bias I've seen this month. That problem could have simply been solved by making it more clear that the piece was only to be about lefty political blogs, ideally in the title. No, Sullivan's right, the salient point I got from reading this article is something I've noticed recently , the shift of political blogging from a medium for analysis to a medium for activism, mostly left-wing activism.
Hugh Hewitt may be right that this is an attempt by the NYT to introduce the nasty, angry, ferociously partisan lefty bloggers who now dominate the medium to their readership, thereby legitimizing and credentializling them (with Wonkette thrown in for a little comedy and T&A break, natch). If that was indeed reporter Matthew Klam's assignment, then he had the last laugh. As Jim Treacher points out (link via Mary) none of the subjects whom Klam profiled came off looking particularly good. Most amusing is how Klam deftly shows Markos Zuniga, the proprietor of the vile, hate-filled, anti-American website "The Daily Kos" to be exactly the creepy little dork that anyone who has read his vitriolic, fanatical little screeds for more than two seconds would assume him to be. Apparently the portrayal in the article has caused some of his cultish admirers to foam at the mouth.
As both Treacher and David Frum point out, non-lefty bloggers who didn't make the cut should actually be thankful they escaped a similarly cruel portrayal in the pages of the NYT Sunday Magazine. I even wonder if Klam interviewed Charles Johnson expecting him to be a creepy fanatic like Kos. When that turned out not to be the case, the interview ended up on the cutting room floor.
Frum has the smartest take on this piece. He thinks it's really about what Leon Wieseltier has called "the deranging influence of blogs." The liberal-Democratic establishment was told that they should pay attention to blogs because blogs would be their talk radio. So they started listening to bloggers and the bloggers convinced them that the average American had the same visceral hatred of George W. Bush that they did, which led to a series of idiotic decisions on the part of the DNC and of Democratic voters which are still ongoing. They just may have sold their party down the river at the behest of a handful of embittered losers and a chick who's obsessed with making the same joke about ass-fucking over and over again. Klam set out to expose these people, and the result is a well-written, funny piece.