I for one appreciated Cecil’s article about W and his irresponsibility during his National Guard days. Thanks to Molly Ivins and Paul Begala we have access to find the truth about our president. Believe me there are a few things that should be common knowledge about George W. If we could stomach the truth about Clinton why shouldn’t we do the same about W? Please let’s be logical about this. Being in denial about what George is all about won’t help any of us. There is nothing wrong with Cecil devoting one line to express an opinion. That’s what this country is all about. Why can’t a journalist throw in an opinon among some facts? Peace is patriotic and opposing this war is not unpatriotic. I appreciate our troops but I am not so sure about the motives behind this war…
Cecil isn’t a journalist. He’s more like a Dear Abby or an Ask Marilyn.
Hi and welcome to the SDMB! It helps if you include a link to the column in question.
Did George W. Bush go AWOL during his time in the National Guard?
Did George W. Bush go AWOL during his time in the National Guard?
Hi Libertarian
Appreciate the response, but my definition (and Webster’s) for a journalist is “a writer, who aims at a mass audience.” I think Cecil qualifies whether you agree with what is written or not. Your response to Cecil is so emotionally charged. Does everyone have to agree with you for them to be legitimate? HMM. While some say buh bye Cecil…I say hello! This is a new site to me and I am enjoying the information.
Well, actually, the Webster’s primary definition, meaning the one that’s most common in actual usage is “1a : a person engaged in journalism especially : a writer or editor for a news medium”. The definition of “a writer who aims at a mass audience” is 1b.
And the definition of “journalism” lists, first, “1a : the collection and editing of news for presentation through the media b : the public press c : an academic study concerned with the collection and editing of news or the management of a news medium”. It’s not until 2c that they mention “writing designed to appeal to current popular taste or public interest”.
All of us here at the SDMB understand that Cecil isn’t a “journalist” in the primary sense of “someone who gathers news without bias”. He’s a columnist, and in addition he’s a world-class smartass, too, (read some of his old columns in the Archives), and it’s actually rather odd to hear someone call him a “journalist”.
Also, Nancy, you know, there are currently three other threads slamming Cecil for this column in this very forum, all of them vitriolic, which might explain Lib’s touchiness on behalf of our Perfect Master.
I always refer to him as a columnist. Is this term more or less right?
He writes a column, so yeah.
I speak with the power of 1000 suns (and a career in the media).
He’s a columnist.