The other day Danny Finkelstein, an old Tory apparatchik who's been reinvented as a Times columnist, launched a broadside against Liberal leader Ming Campbell, saying he was useless and, more to the point, likely to let Labour in again, because a declining Liberal vote would hurt the Tories.
Well fair enough, in terms of party politics. But is this journalism? Indeed, is Mr Finkelstein a journalist?
The Libs share of the polls has dropped to 14% against the 22% they apparently enjoyed prior to the last general election.
But these things don't last for ever, as Gordon Brown well knows, which is probably why he doesn't want to call an election just yet.
And the facts probably indicate that the electorate is pretty unheeding of what the papers tell it to do (most of them seem to read Metro, if they read anything at all) so why should they be bovvered?
Because in a democracy it's quite important that people's views are heard fairly and decrying Menzies Campbell as an old fuddy duddy says more about the nature of newspaper columnists than it does about him.
Campbell got it right on Iraq (some people say he had to be dragooned into opposition to that benighted war, but there you are). He has some interesting ideas with his respected financial spokesman Vince Cable (an ex-oil industry maven, so he knows what he's talking about) about making the tax system reflect the reality of GB 2007, and is a doughty defender of what remains of our civil liberties (just because there are a few maniacs at large doesn't mean we should all suffer, forever).
But does he get a hearing? By and large, No.
So all the stories are about whether or not he'll be replaced by Chris Huhne (too much previous in the City, if you ask me) or Nick Clegg, who just isn't up to it yet.
Well a story's a story (even if you've invented it in the absence of something to report).
But as newspapers become more "viewspapers", a cliche I know but true all the same, it might occur to some of these wizards that there's about 20% of the voting population who are completely isolated from their musings.
Will this affect the fortunes of newspapers? Of course it will. Newspapers are immured in their own self-importance and politicians (sadly) mostly concentrate on their press clippings.
In the meantime the world (ie the voters) goes somewhere else.
Am I saying they should be nicer to Ming? No, but they should give him a hearing.
Am I saying they are losing their audience? Definitely. Should they try harder to be more representative? Also definitely.
Will they do it? No chance -- there'll be Danny Finkelstein and Simon Heffer rattling their port glasses in the Atheneum as the lights go out.
And it'll be the readers' fault.