# Why does Cecil Adams refuse to be photographed? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [June 29, 2008, 2:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-cecil-adams-refuse-to-be-photographed/454617 "2008-06-29T02:16:11Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 17\ **Page:** 7
**Author:** ![Princhester](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3e96dc/32.png) [@Princhester](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Princhester)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2008, 5:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-cecil-adams-refuse-to-be-photographed/454617/121 "2008-07-04T05:53:09Z")
[QUOTE=Roadfood] Honestly, you should all be ashamed of yourselves. [/quote] Yes, because this issue is _so_ important. Actually, no it’s not. It’s beyond trivial. It’s completely and utterly unimportant. It’s barely worth mentioning. If I tried to to think of one, single real world thing that depends upon knowing the exact truth about this issue I couldn’t. The seriousness with which some of you are whining about this matter is (ironically enough) like a bad joke. > [@](#): > > Well, this is also General Questions, a place for not playing around, a place for asking for and getting straight answers. Why is it that the charter of GQ gets put aside for the wonder of this “game” that everyone thinks is so great? Because it doesn’t matter. See above. > [@](#): > > Why isn’t GQ the one appropriate place in all of the SDMB for putting the silly game aside and giving straight answers? Because it would ruin the joke. How could the joke possibly go on if those that know ever admitted, straight out, in GQ the precise structure of the arrangements behind Cecil? [QUOTE=DSYoungEsq] In this thread, a flat assertion was made that Ed is not Cecil. If Ed IS the person who writes under the nom de plume of Cecil Adams, that’s a complete lie, and not in any way analogous to the “Yes, Virginia, there is a Santa Claus” editorial. [/QUOTE] And if Ed writes 95% of it and the other 5% is written by someone else, it is the complete truth that Ed is not Cecil. And you don’t know any different, so why the heat? ---
**Author:** ![Measure\_for\_Measure](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/measure_for_measure/32/557_2.png) [@Measure\_for\_Measure](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Measure_for_Measure)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2008, 7:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-cecil-adams-refuse-to-be-photographed/454617/122 "2008-07-04T07:47:33Z")
As I see it, some posters want to definitively reveal the identity of the longtime though not especially prolific poster, Cecil Adams. I’m shocked (shocked!) that they would undertake such a blatant violation of board rules: see especially paragraph 5 (after “entity” and before “minimum age”), regarding invasion of privacy. Cecil wants his RL identity to remain under wraps and I for one respect that. Animal, mineral or vegetable: it’s really none of my business. Mods may see this differently of course: I am merely expressing my dismay and horror as a fellow poster. ---
**Author:** ![mr.jp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/48db29/32.png) [@mr.jp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mr.jp)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2008, 8:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-cecil-adams-refuse-to-be-photographed/454617/123 "2008-07-04T08:16:26Z")
[QUOTE=Princhester] Yes, because this issue is _so_ important. Actually, no it’s not. It’s beyond trivial. It’s completely and utterly unimportant. It’s barely worth mentioning. If I tried to to think of one, single real world thing that depends upon knowing the exact truth about this issue I couldn’t. [/Quote] Importance Schminportance. If whether or not you should be truthful in GQ is decided by your evalutation of the importance of the topic, I think the quality will deteriorate. ---
**Author:** ![Princhester](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3e96dc/32.png) [@Princhester](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Princhester)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2008, 8:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-cecil-adams-refuse-to-be-photographed/454617/124 "2008-07-04T08:32:36Z")
[QUOTE=mr. jp] Importance Schminportance. If whether or not you should be truthful in GQ is decided by your evalutation of the importance of the topic, I think the quality will deteriorate. [/QUOTE] No, because this topic is peculiar. The subject is an in-joke about the purported figurehead of these boards. There is no reason to extrapolate from there to a general deterioration of quality about other topics. There is a completely isolated and peculiar reason why this topic is one which is gamed on these boards. ---
**Author:** ![mr.jp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/48db29/32.png) [@mr.jp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mr.jp)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2008, 8:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-cecil-adams-refuse-to-be-photographed/454617/125 "2008-07-04T08:33:03Z")
[QUOTE=Measure for Measure] As I see it, some posters want to definitively reveal the identity of the longtime though not especially prolific poster, Cecil Adams. I’m shocked (shocked!) that they would undertake such a blatant violation of board rules: see especially paragraph 5 (after “entity” and before “minimum age”), regarding invasion of privacy. [/QUOTE] He is also a public figure, and uses the same poster name as that public figure, so he is fair game. ---
**Author:** ![mr.jp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/48db29/32.png) [@mr.jp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mr.jp)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2008, 8:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-cecil-adams-refuse-to-be-photographed/454617/126 "2008-07-04T08:43:19Z")
[QUOTE=Princhester] No, because this topic is peculiar. The subject is an in-joke about the purported figurehead of these boards. There is no reason to extrapolate from there to a general deterioration of quality about other topics. There is a completely isolated and peculiar reason why this topic is one which is gamed on these boards. [/QUOTE] The argument you made before, that I quoted, states that this subject is very unimportant, and thus it is okay to lie about it. Is that a correct interpretation? In any case, I don’t think that’s a good reason. I don’t like that it’s allowed to be untruthful just because some guy called **Princhester** thinks it’s an unimportant topic. As implied, I don’t think it’s an unimportant topic. I trust this source of knowledge called Cecil Adams more than any other single source, so it would be nice to know who is actually behind it. To me, this answer is more important than at least 90% of the other GQ threads. ---
**Author:** ![Princhester](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3e96dc/32.png) [@Princhester](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Princhester)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2008, 9:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-cecil-adams-refuse-to-be-photographed/454617/127 "2008-07-04T09:38:55Z")
[QUOTE=mr. jp] The argument you made before, that I quoted, states that this subject is very unimportant, and thus it is okay to lie about it. Is that a correct interpretation? [/quote] Absolutely not. I never said that it was OK to lie. This is what I was responding to: > [@Roadfood](#): > > I think, frankly, that it’s very sad that the self-proclaimed bastion of fighting ignorance is peopled by those who apparently think it’s just great fun to keep others in the dark. Honestly, you should all be ashamed of yourselves. I think it’s OK not to reveal this particular completely trivial and unimportant fact . There is no way you can honestly transmogrify that into a general statement that it is OK to lie about unimportant subjects in general. > [@](#): > > In any case, I don’t think that’s a good reason. I don’t like that it’s allowed to be untruthful just because some guy called **Princhester** thinks it’s an unimportant topic. Who’s being untruthful? Your assumptions aside? > [@](#): > > As implied, I don’t think it’s an unimportant topic. I trust this source of knowledge called Cecil Adams more than any other single source, so it would be nice to know who is actually behind it. To me, this answer is more important than at least 90% of the other GQ threads. Firstly, you seem to be confusing whether this source is or should be trustworthy on this particular topic with whether the topic is important. Secondly, if you think this topic is actually important, I think your sense of priorities is in need of serious re-adjustment. I challenge you to come up with one single way in which this topic has any real life importance whatsoever. ---
**Author:** ![Princhester](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3e96dc/32.png) [@Princhester](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Princhester)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2008, 10:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-cecil-adams-refuse-to-be-photographed/454617/128 "2008-07-04T10:18:49Z")
Actually, scratch that last sentence, I misread you. Consequently, my response makes no sense, sorry. Ahem. If you trust this source called Cecil Adams more than any other single source, then you’ve clearly formed that trust absent any knowledge of who or what he is exactly. How is any clear answer going to alter that? ---
**Author:** ![jimmmy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/73ab20/32.png) [@jimmmy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jimmmy)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2008, 12:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-cecil-adams-refuse-to-be-photographed/454617/129 "2008-07-04T12:07:16Z")
Cecil Adams is a brand name like Dear Abby or Ann Landers or Heloise and has a nationally syndicated column. He is edited, probably by more than one person. He is presumably fact checked. Certainly he is reaching out to experts and attributing where he gets his information. He is in effect more or less a reporter. Reporters don’t make up news. Reporters ask questions, get answers, write nicely and properly for their audience to understand it. They may have assistants who may conduct interviews or send research that are then incorporated by the Reporter. There is nothing wrong with any of that appearing under the reporters byline unattributed as long as (& you will see this from time to time but not in the SD) something doesn’t blow up & then the Columnist/reporter blames his researcher. semi-Rhetorical assh^le question: If Ed = Cecil on this Message Board doesn’t that make one or the other of them a sock? Isn’t THAT a good reason to get rid of the “No Sock” rule? ---
**Author:** ![Laughing\_Lagomorph](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/6bbea6/32.png) [@Laughing\_Lagomorph](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Laughing_Lagomorph)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2008, 12:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-cecil-adams-refuse-to-be-photographed/454617/130 "2008-07-04T12:31:46Z")
[QUOTE=freekalette] … If I came into GQ asking serious questions about belief in Santa Claus or the Tooth Fairy, I’d be laughed at, mocked, possibly Pitted, and driven right off the boards. So why doesn’t that happen with Unca Cecil? … [/QUOTE] So you guys who can’t seem to accept the current situation would feel better if we laughed at, mocked, or Pitted you? At this point one or more of those could probably be arranged. Ed isn’t Cecil in the same way Jim Henson wasn’t Kermit the Frog, or Edgar Bergen wasn’t Charlie McCarthy, or Eppie Lederer wasn’t Ann Landers (thanks **jimmmy** ). Why is that so hard to understand? ---
**Author:** ![Rilchiam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/2bfe46/32.png) [@Rilchiam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rilchiam)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2008, 1:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-cecil-adams-refuse-to-be-photographed/454617/131 "2008-07-04T13:06:22Z")
What’s hard for me to understand is why the CR and SD staff are still laboring so hard to maintain a mystique that, to me, seems outdated. Way back in the '70s and early '80s, it actually did seem plausible that there was a Cecil Adams who chose not to reveal himself. At least to me: I thought he must be severely physically or socially stunted, or agoraphobic or something, and therefore couldn’t bear making public appearances. Of course, that was in the days when failure to fit the mold bore a terrible price. But then time moved on into the '90s. And Ed began making public appearances. And, those appearances were, IIRC, always heralded as The Real Cecil Adams Meeting The Public For The Very First Time. And then it was always, “Oh, Cecil couldn’t be here; I’m Ed Zotti on his behalf.” We are now ten years or more past the point where it would have destroyed anyone’s world view if Ed had said, “I write the column; there was never any Cecil.” And again I say, I don’t understand why the myth has to be defended so ferociously. Is it because people take TSD seriously? People took Ann Landers and Dear Abby seriously too, but there was never any denial about those women’s real names or other identifying info. So why is the Cecil myth so crucial? Aren’t we all big boys and girls here? ---
**Author:** ![Laughing\_Lagomorph](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/6bbea6/32.png) [@Laughing\_Lagomorph](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Laughing_Lagomorph)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2008, 1:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-cecil-adams-refuse-to-be-photographed/454617/132 "2008-07-04T13:23:34Z")
[QUOTE=Rilchiam] … So why is the Cecil myth so crucial? Aren’t we all big boys and girls here? [/QUOTE] That’s what I’m wondering. Presumably big boys and girls wouldn’t need everything spelled out for them. And I disagree about Ann Landers and Dear Abbie. I don’t know if there was any denial about their real names or other info but pre-Internet I don’t think the knowledge was widely known either. I suspect their were many, many people at the who at the height of their fame thought that women actually named Ann and Abbie wrote those columns. ---
**Author:** ![Rilchiam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/2bfe46/32.png) [@Rilchiam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rilchiam)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2008, 1:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-cecil-adams-refuse-to-be-photographed/454617/133 "2008-07-04T13:40:54Z")
I knew their real names in the '70s. In fact, I found out about Ann from Reader’s Digest. I’m also not clear on what you’re disagreeing about. A lot of things weren’t widely known before the internet. ---
**Author:** ![Eutychus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/a3d4f5/32.png) [@Eutychus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Eutychus)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2008, 3:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-cecil-adams-refuse-to-be-photographed/454617/134 "2008-07-04T15:29:37Z")
[QUOTE=Rilchiam] Of course, that was in the days when failure to fit the mold bore a terrible price. But then time moved on into the '90s. And Ed began making public appearances. And, those appearances were, IIRC, always heralded as The Real Cecil Adams Meeting The Public For The Very First Time. And then it was always, “Oh, Cecil couldn’t be here; I’m Ed Zotti on his behalf.” [/QUOTE] Even Daniel Handler gave up on that schtick. But it didn’t seem to hurt the Lemony Snickett mystique any. ---
**Author:** ![Gadarene](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e47c2d/32.png) [@Gadarene](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gadarene)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2008, 4:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-cecil-adams-refuse-to-be-photographed/454617/135 "2008-07-04T16:08:37Z")
Like **DSYoung** , the only thing I really care about in this business is why **Dex** would see fit to flat out lie the way he apparently did. ---
**Author:** ![Beware\_of\_Doug](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/278dde/32.png) [@Beware\_of\_Doug](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Beware_of_Doug)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2008, 4:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-cecil-adams-refuse-to-be-photographed/454617/136 "2008-07-04T16:22:06Z")
[QUOTE=mr. jp] He is also a public figure, and uses the same poster name as that public figure, so he is fair game. [/QUOTE] He is also the only known harlequin baby (_ **PLEASE, FOR THE LOVE OF OG DO NOT GOOGLE IMAGE SEARCH THIS TERM** _) to survive past infancy. No paparazzo who has gained access to Cecil has remained sane long enough to release the pix. Rumor has it that his innumerable, painful skin fissures were finally cured by a mixture of Botox and Gorilla Glue. ---
**Author:** ![Colibri](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/colibri/32/1841_2.png) [@Colibri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colibri)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2008, 5:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-cecil-adams-refuse-to-be-photographed/454617/137 "2008-07-04T17:50:11Z")
Given that this topic has been beaten to death many other times on the board, and that the discussion here for some time has been generating far more heat than light, I don’t think that this is still appropriate for GQ. Those who wish to take other posters to task for their responses in this thread may do so in the Pit. I’m going to close this one. Colibri General Questions Moderator [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-does-cecil-adams-refuse-to-be-photographed/454617.md?page=6)