> I'm not familiar with this, but are you saying the Washington Post doesn't post about Washington anymore?

You should probably read about the cuts we're talking about, then. From the OP:

> The metro staff, already cut to about forty staffers during the past five years, has been shrunk to about twelve

It's not a 0 or a 1. They had more staff doing it, now they have less. That means they now do 0.2, which is not 0 as you're implying, but it's still significantly worse than back when it was 1.