news
It’s gratifying to know the extent of readers’ engagement with the newspaper and their strong feelings about what’s in it.
Everybody has opinions, so it’s not surprising that the page you’re reading now is the subject of many of those interactions with readers. The Opinions & Editorials page is a forum for a variety of viewpoints on local, state and national topics, and it’s safe to say that if you read it regularly, you will find things that both confirm and challenge your opinions.
It’s also fair to assume that most people, at one time or another, will be angered by something they see or read on our editorial page.
We’re not aiming for that. The primary purpose of our editorial page is to stimulate thinking about important issues, as well as to provide reflections on life in general. A newspaper has an obligation to offer a diverse sampling of opinion, and we work at getting different perspectives on the page.
I’m often asked why the Journal would run a particular column or political cartoon, and the implication is that the editors must agree with it if it was published. That’s not the case; there are many opinions expressed on our pages that our editorial page editor, Joe Rutherford, and I don’t agree with, not to mention other members of the staff. And the ones we disagree with are often different, because everyone here at the paper hardly thinks alike about everything.
Newspaper folks sometimes assume everyone understands these things, but I’m not surprised to learn many don’t since we rarely communicate directly to readers about them. So here’s a quick primer on the contents of the Opinions & Editorials page:
The only thing that represents the Daily Journal’s institutional viewpoint is the unsigned editorial at the top left corner. In fact, it’s the only item on the page we call an editorial.
What you’re reading right now is a column, a personal opinion that represents only the views of the person writing it. It carries no endorsement from the editors or management of the Journal; it is offered by the writer, and published by our newspaper, under the assumption that it contributes to a lively give-and-take on the issues of the day. We do want the columns we publish to be responsibly written, factually accurate and in good taste. We run a mix of national and Mississippi syndicated columnists and columns by our own staff.
Political cartoons are like columns in that they represent the view of the individual cartoonist. We get ours from a variety of nationally syndicated sources by cartoonists who are conservative, liberal and in between. Some are equal opportunity eviscerators of politicians of all stripes.
Political cartoons are often the source of reader consternation since by their very definition they are not fair; they oversimplify issues in a way that provides little room for nuance or complexity. But they often cut to the heart of the matter.
Some stretch the limits and may go over the line. One we ran last week that seemed to equate all conservatives with racism and homophobia was in that category, even though it was aimed at individuals in the news in recent days. Subtlety is not in most cartoonists’ vocabulary. We were happy to provide a forum for two leading local Tea Party activists, Ed Holliday and Grant Sowell, on Saturday’s page to respond.
As for the editorials themselves – the unsigned Daily Journal opinions – they’re mostly on local and state subjects, which we feel are our primary responsibility and sphere of influence. In those editorials, we are not trying to tell people what to think, but rather to stimulate discussion and increase understanding of the challenges facing us. Sometimes we simply want to commend good works or celebrate individual or community achievement.
We don’t expect anyone to agree with us all the time, or even necessarily most of the time. But we do hope through our editorials, columns and cartoons to provide food for thought.
Finally, don’t forget the best read part of the page: the letters from our readers. We print most of the letters we receive that meet our guidelines for length and that aren’t libelous.
So write us – and keep those calls and e-mails coming. We relish the conversation.
Lloyd Gray is executive editor of the Daily Journal. Contact him at (662) 678-1579 or lloyd.gray@djournal.com.
Polite showed his true colors when he referred to those involved in the TeaParty as "teabaggers."
That is a sexual term used in a derogatory fashion by liberals when referring to people affiliated in either thought or deed with the Tea Party.
It's one thing to disagree with a person or group, but another thing altogether to refer to them with such derogatory terms.
Very classless.
The TupeloTeaParty response was wrong. Two points that I will make clear are simply: (1) in the camera footage - there were no black facing in the tea party crowd (2) TeaParty activists are celebrating April 19 as the day to build their cause around (if you are not aware, Tim McVeigh bombed the OKC building on April 19th - up until this point it was the worst case of domestic terrorism).
Point one makes clear that Sowell and Grant were not honest in having a black friend on-hand and within hearing. Point two makes perfectly clear that Sowell and Grant have no sense of history - that their insane ideology is shared by terrorists.
I was a member of the NRA (like president George HW Bush) on April 19th. After the OKC bombing the NRA praised the attack. Like president George HW Bush, I quit the NRA.
The TeaParty movement is one lie stacked upon another - everything they advocate is insane.
While teabaggers are being worst (everything their ignorance entails) than republicans, and to most this makes the republican seem reasonable - they are all the same. The KKK and the CCC were the same.
"A rose by any other name still smells as sweet" or "if it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck - its a duck"
A staff writer should use their own name if they want to defend their comments or answer a question.
The more folks realize that staff is posting comments the less the public will be involved.
It is great that you are showing the name of the writer in the headline because some of the writers are so out of touch with reality that I will not open their articles because I do not want you to think I like the writer"s comments.