[Fairiedust]

:| Some pull 'Doonesbury' over Rove moniker






KANSAS CITY, Missouri (AP) -- It may be President Bush's nickname for key political adviser Karl Rove, but some editors don't think it belongs in their newspapers.

About a dozen papers objected to Tuesday's and Wednesday's "Doonesbury" comic strips, and some either pulled or edited them.

The strips refer to Rove, the White House deputy chief of staff, as "Turd Blossom."

Lee Salem, editor at Kansas City-based Universal Press Syndicate, which distributes the strip to 1,400 papers, said the complaints from 10 to 12 newspapers weren't unexpected. As opposed to other times when editors have objected to Doonesbury content, the syndicate did not send out replacement strips.

"Given the coverage of Karl Rove, we thought it was appropriate, especially given the history of the strip," Salem said.

Doonesbury's creator, Garry Trudeau, has infuriated some editors over the years with his language, images and political themes. An e-mail to Trudeau wasn't immediately returned Tuesday.

Salem said that since newspapers don't have to notify the syndicate when they choose to remove a strip, it's impossible to know how many papers ran Tuesday's comic.

In the strip, Bush and an aide are lamenting the problems the administration has had over allegations that Rove leaked the name of a CIA officer to reporters.

Bush says, "Karl's sure been earnin' his nickname lately."

The unnamed aide says, "Boy Genius? I'm not so sure sir ..."

Bush then says, "Hey Turd Blossom! Get in here."

The term is said to be one of several nicknames Bush uses for Rove, one of his closest allies and who is widely credited for Bush's election in 2000 and re-election in 2004. The mainstream U.S. media have rarely mentioned the nickname, but it has gained traction in the international press and on the Internet.

Among those with concerns was the Providence (Rhode Island) Journal, whose editors removed the offensive word from the strip's final panel.

"I didn't think (taking out the word) hurt it," Executive Editor Joel Rawson said. "I would prefer to run the strip and if we can edit it, that's fine."

Other papers, such as The Kansas City Star, removed the strip entirely, replacing it with an older one.

"We thought it was in bad taste and probably unclear to a lot of people why we would be using the term," said Steve Shirk, the Star's managing editor/news.

[Ntype]

Free as in Free speech :S

Your country is losing quite a few liberties if apparentely newspapers have fear to publish some "incorrect" words. (lemme define what is correct?).

[SanDog]

Free as in Free speech :S

Your country is losing quite a few liberties if apparentely newspapers have fear to publish some "incorrect" words. (lemme define what is correct?).

You can say whatever you want. That does not mean anyone has to print it or listen to it, or buy the music, or go to the concerts.

See the problem is most people don't understand that freedom of speech does not mean "freedom to say whatever I want without consequence".

[Ntype]

You can say whatever you want. That does not mean anyone has to print it or listen to it, or buy the music, or go to the concerts.

See the problem is most people don't understand that freedom of speech does not mean "freedom to say whatever I want without consequence".

indeed you can't say anything to anyone, but here we are talking about some political comic strip.
Politicians are public persons, being taunted is part of their job.

[Fairiedust]

Lawyers and the Government are out of control, i have to agree. Land of the Free....if your getting paid...

[BIRD33]

San Dog please hand over your citizenship to Ntype. What consequences could arise from Rove being called "turd blossom" since it was given to him by GW?

[SanDog]

San Dog please hand over your citizenship to Ntype. What consequences could arise from Rove being called "turd blossom" since it was given to him by GW?

Understand what I am saying. Newspapers get to decide what they print. Gary wanted "Turd Blossom" in the strip. He wrote it. The paper does not want it, that is their perogotive. This is not a first amemdment issue.

[Ntype]

Understand what I am saying. Newspapers get to decide what they print. Gary wanted "Turd Blossom" in the strip. He wrote it. The paper does not want it, that is their perogotive. This is not a first amemdment issue.

Indeed everyone got a choice in there, but the real question is "why they refused to do so".

I would understand that some little newspaper would refuse to publish it, but bigger newspapers should do so.

It was the dude who gave out the name of a CIA agent. names and pics, you know divulging the identity of an operative endangers that person and all the contacts she had, he may merit being called turd.

[TomFoolery]

You can say whatever you want. That does not mean anyone has to print it or listen to it, or buy the music, or go to the concerts.

See the problem is most people don't understand that freedom of speech does not mean "freedom to say whatever I want without consequence".

You'd make an excellent mod at UJ.








(I'll stop now)

[SanDog]

Indeed everyone got a choice in there, but the real question is "why they refused to do so".

I would understand that some little newspaper would refuse to publish it, but bigger newspapers should do so.

It was the dude who gave out the name of a CIA agent. names and pics, you know divulging the identity of an operative endangers that person and all the contacts she had, he may merit being called turd.

The newpaper is in business to make money. If the they believe their core market would not like it if they ran the strip, and they would lose revenue, then they make the decision. The size of the paper does not matter at all.

The Dixie Chicks learned this lesson as well.

You are changing the arguement by saying he deserved to be called a turd. I don't give a rats ass what he is called by the president or anyone else. If you want to discuss his outing of a CIA employee (non covert) then start another thread. This one is about the paper having the right to publish or not publish what they want.

[BIRD33]

I understand what your saying but I think your missing the larger problem in regards to free speech, its journalists\editors choosing sides and manipulating news to fit their agenda.It happens on both sides I know but given the whole WMD fiasco that we all were sold a bill of goods on by the goverment we need as much free speech and unedited speech as possible.

"We thought it was in bad taste and probably unclear to a lot of people why we would be using the term," said Steve Shirk, the Star's managing editor/news.

Uh thanks for looking out for me Steve Shirk but let me decide whats in bad taste especially when the cartoon is about current events and uses a name for Rove that the president came up with.This was pulled purely because it put bush and his advisors in an unfavorable light.

[SanDog]

You'd make an excellent mod at UJ.








(I'll stop now)

Hey, if I owned UJ or any other site, and conduct deterimental to my pocket book was occuring, I would stop it. The difference is that the mods who were booting people were not doing it because Hoover was being negatively financially impacted, they did it because their feelings got hurt.

[BIRD33]

The newpaper is in business to make money. If the they believe their core market would not like it if they ran the strip, and they would lose revenue, then they make the decision. The size of the paper does not matter at all.

The Dixie Chicks learned this lesson as well.

You are changing the arguement by saying he deserved to be called a turd. I don't give a rats ass what he is called by the president or anyone else. If you want to discuss his outing of a CIA employee (non covert) then start another thread. This one is about the paper having the right to publish or not publish what they want.

All journalists serve the public good, thats what they teach you the first day.Thats what Journalism is at its core.I know its a business but its no excuse.See Judith Miller.

Edit: its like a doctor refusing to save a life because there is no money in it.Thats not what medicine is about.

[SanDog]

All journalists serve the public good, thats what they teach you the first day.Thats what Journalism is at its core.I know its a business but its no excuse.See Judith Miller.

All businessmen are self serving. Since when did Gary Trudeau become a journalist? He is a psuedo politcal satarist, with his own agenda. If the Editor who runs the paper decides not to run it, it is his choice.

Look we are not ever going to agree on this, you see this as a political discussion, I see it as a business discussion.

[Ntype]

The newpaper is in business to make money. If the they believe their core market would not like it if they ran the strip, and they would lose revenue, then they make the decision. The size of the paper does not matter at all.

The Dixie Chicks learned this lesson as well.

You are changing the arguement by saying he deserved to be called a turd. I don't give a rats ass what he is called by the president or anyone else. If you want to discuss his outing of a CIA employee (non covert) then start another thread. This one is about the paper having the right to publish or not publish what they want.

Basically we live in a capitalist world, unless you are a charity or government your aim is to make money. Now newspapers do more than "doing money", they report "how the world is going", whatever your world goes to the next hill or a few continents.

Sure indeed I am changing the arguement because we don't talk about the same thing; you speak about the hability to do choices in a general manner and you are right; however in this case, as stated by brid33, even if newspapers follows their own agendas they have to report current affairs.

What I was talking about was the moral obligation of the press to report exactly what's around, living in a country where the press "fears" to take controversials positions or "fears to fear readers" is a sign that

1. you don't have confidence in the separation of the executive and legislative branches of the state
2. you think that you sell your newspaper to a bunch of brainless monkeys who should be educated because they "don't know what's good for them".

[BIRD33]

Journalism isnt a business.Its reporting the truth no matter how it effects your pocketbook.If Knight Ridder was owned by Haliburton would you have a problem with all their papers pushing for total conquest of the Mid-east??Its unetical and goes against the definition of journalism.You should be outraged at being told half truths.

[SanDog]

Basically we live in a capitalist world, unless you are a charity or government your aim is to make money. Now newspapers do more than "doing money", they report "how the world is going", whatever your world goes to the next hill or a few continents.

Sure indeed I am changing the arguement because we don't talk about the same thing; you speak about the hability to do choices in a general manner and you are right; however in this case, as stated by brid33, even if newspapers follows their own agendas they have to report current affairs.

What I was talking about was the moral obligation of the press to report exactly what's around, living in a country where the press "fears" to take controversials positions or "fears to fear readers" is a sign that

1. you don't have confidence in the separation of the executive and legislative branches of the state
2. you think that you sell your newspaper to a bunch of brainless monkeys who should be educated because they "don't know what's good for them".

Newspapers should absolutely report current affairs. And if a journalist had written an article about this subject, with verifiable facts, I would take issue with them not running it. But they did not. A biased cartoonist who does not like either man, and makes no claims to be a journalist, made a cartoon about something he thinks might be true. The paper chose not to run it. These are really different scenarios.

[SanDog]

Journalism isnt a business.Its reporting the truth no matter how it effects your pocketbook.If Knight Ridder was owned by Haliburton would you have a problem with all their papers pushing for total conquest of the Mid-east??Its unetical and goes against the definition of journalism.You should be outraged at being told half truths.

I am outraged by half truths every day. I like the idea of your perfect journalism world. But here, in the real world, it does not really work that way. If that was the case then there should never be a time when a paper takes sides or endorses a candidate for an election.

I understand what you are saying. I am telling you that it does not work the way you want it to.

By the way, hospitals turn away people that cannot afford treatment all the time.

[Ntype]

Newspapers should absolutely report current affairs. And if a journalist had written an article about this subject, with verifiable facts, I would take issue with them not running it. But they did not. A biased cartoonist who does not like either man, and makes no claims to be a journalist, made a cartoon about something he thinks might be true. The paper chose not to run it. These are really different scenarios.

Everyone got a "biased" opinion, it's true because we all perceive our world differentely and don't see the same things.

I won't say that I am not sharing the same point of view than you, but in a whole larger aspect, what is journalism than reporting things outside.

Journalists isn't a special class of people, they just happen to do a few years of study to learn good writting and be given some intellectual background. Now I won't dissect the merits of that cartooonist but what he done "a political satire" using words that the president may have said (or not) is some kind of journalism too.

<edit>

I should add, that W. is quite know to give out nicknames (that even created a few problems at the beginning of his 1st mandate as people weren't sure who he was calling). But we are talking of some satire comic strip, if you want the "real data" go to the inside article, a satire has the right to take some liberties with the reality (it's a cartoon) and it's short so it has to point quickly to "the goal"

</edit>

[BIRD33]

Newspapers should absolutely report current affairs. And if a journalist had written an article about this subject, with verifiable facts, I would take issue with them not running it. But they did not. A biased cartoonist who does not like either man, and makes no claims to be a journalist, made a cartoon about something he thinks might be true. The paper chose not to run it. These are really different scenarios.

Political cartoons serve a valuable purpose and are never edited.It is on the record that bush came up with the "turd blossom" nickname. Its all true and wouldnt have been a problem if people didnt feel the need to defend bush.