If you want to know what’s wrong with mainstream media, Clark Hoyt, public editor of The New York Times, explains it in his most recent column. Of course, Hoyt’s talking about the Times, but it could well apply to the media as a whole.

John Hinderaker of the Powerline blog pulled out the relevant quotes from Hoyt: “When The Times misses or is slow on a story that is boiling elsewhere — and ACORN was having real-world impact, with Congressional votes and a criminal investigation — it lets its readers down.”

True enough. Then the Times ombudsman offer examples of readers who felt “let down”:

“Here’s an example, from Leigh Allen of San Francisco, who said she relies on The Times to keep her informed,” Hoyt wrote. “‘I often don’t hear about the latest conflict until I read a Facebook rant from an old high school friend or talk on the phone with my mother (both in conservative Orange County, Calif.). It’s embarrassing not to be able to respond with facts when I hadn’t even heard about the issue.’ Michele Cusack of Novato, Calif., said that when someone asked if she had heard the latest about ACORN, ‘I had to answer “no” because I get all my news from The New York Times.’”

Comments Hinderaker: “‘I had to answer ‘no’ because I get all my news from the New York Times.’ That could be the paper’s epitaph.”

Everyone knows why the Times didn’t consider the ACORN story a story, and why the paper’s readers knew nothing of ACORN. Because ACORN, if you believe the press notices, is liberal goodness on steroids. ACORN, of course, is the pro-Obama lobbying group caught on tape advising two undercover journalists about running a prostitution business. The group is also under investigation for vote fraud and may well be a criminal conspiracy, according to former board members.

Despite all that, as well as the reporting of one its own staff writers who had nailed the group, the Times just didn’t see the story. So yeah, Michele Cusack’s note to Mr. Hoyt might well be the epitaph not only for the Times but also for the American news media in general.

Maybe the corporate chieftains who control the media’s left-wing managers should consider that. And that goes double for the Times.