In November 2003, Fithian was profiled by The New York Times Magazine as she prepared to take part in protests at the Free Trade Area of the Americas meeting in Miami. As she did with NRO, Fithian demurred when asked if she was a leader of the demonstrations — she claimed that the movement was "nonauthoritarian" and "nonhierarchical" and had no leaders at all — but the Times was not convinced. "To say that Fithian is not a leader is an admirable political idea, but it's not entirely honest," the paper reported.I guess that what makes New York Times Magazine a "professional" paper is the casting doubt on the truth of Fithian's claim that she wasn't a leader but, why do they consider not having a leader an "admirable political idea" in the first place?
That's a very telling paragraph.