I share everyone’s skepticism about the ability of school-board coverage to save America’s newspapers. But I’m not sure Kathleen Parker was blaming the Right (or the all-powerful el Rushbo) for newspapers closing. I think she was sardonically airing caution.

In addition to what has been quoted, she wrote in that column Sunday:

There is surely room for media criticism, and a few bad actors in recent years have badly frayed public trust. And, yes, some newspapers are more liberal than their readership and do a lousy job of concealing it.

Some credit where it’s due, in other words, on all sides. Kathleen is coming at it, too, as someone who has put in a good bit of her career time doing what she describes as “boots-on-the-ground grub work.” And there are worse things than a few hundred words in defense of those who “produce[] the news stories and performs the government watchdog role so crucial to a democratic republic.”

Do they do it like they should? Perhaps newspapers wouldn’t be dying if they did. But I also know that newspapers we’ve heard of and love to legitimately kick around have done some important work, even in latter days. (I have an odd personal gratitude for the Boston Globe, for instance.)

Kathleen didn’t say it like this, but we are a nation of wanna-be pundits. Year after year we have kids apply here and submit here who want us to hear their opinions. We don’t have people knocking down our doors to let them do “fact-based, serious reporting.” I don’t think that’s a condition unique to us. Perhaps Kathleen’s lament will contribute to a “younger generation” that wants to revive journalism.