I've been incredibly curious about the dominance of New York Times editorial contributors and their columns being listed in the Technorati Top 10. This has been the trend ever since reading editorials on NYtimes.com has become a premium service.

That's and easy one to explain. Since the NYT has put up the subscription wall, people are looking for commentary on the columns that are no longer accessible to them. No one is willing to pay for access to a very small number of people, even if one of them is Thomas Friedman. Web 2.0 type people should take note this.

Another interesting aside: "Bush Defrocked" is printed on the nytimes homepage... but the article (and headline) itself does not include the phrase "Bush Defrocked."

Leery here... not tryingn to spark some controversy involving the Times... that would just be, ahem, unheard of!

That may explain something. There is a Frank Rich column that has "Defrocked" in its title and "Bush" in its body. That would imply there is a significant number of people searching for commentary on that column. It's about the Miers nomination, so that may be plausible. Almost...

It's still very strange that this search term came up at the same time as "Impeach Bush" went away. The top search term manipulation issue is still a concern. That type of thing is very dangerous, regardless of what ideology its used to push forward.

If anything, its a wake-up call for the New York Times. People clearly want access to content they have, but are unwilling to pay for it. Let's hope they do not hit the snooze button. The loser is the marketplace of ideas. We can't have that.

New York Times subscription wall has created vaccum?