Second, I agree that some parts of the UI are overkill. Keep in mind that it has been designed for tablets and phones though: "(...) built primarily for the devices closest at hand: tablets and mobile phones."
The title of this post is taken from the text the link points to. From the text itself: "Developers and journalists, sometimes one-and-the-same, sit next to each other in the Quartz newsroom as we continually iterate and experiment."
I'm simply happy to see someone trying something new.
This actually highlights one of my pet peeves: that web pages need special "mobile enhanced" versions. 90% of the time, a "mobile web page" is just worse than the original. I have to ask: do the guys designing these "mobile" web pages actually use tablets or smartphones? Because what part of "mobile" means "ruin the usability and make sure a lot of awkward javascript-emulated touch gestures are involved"?
Another news site that's gone full tilt tablet UI is pandodaily, but at least their site renders correctly and is mostly usable (both not optimally so) for a desktop/laptop user.
Are the costs just too high to support two presentation layers such that shops will bet on mobile/tablet users over all others?
The main news timeline is promising though, but greatly needs visual codes for differentiating and qualifying content.
It's great to focus on the content while not putting technology asides, but your publishing tool is also of strategical importance. It's great to have rethought the general way of showing information, but this is, to me, clearly half baked.
Comparing that with your submission title (for whatever it means, it evokes technology), makes me think you have a problem here.