'Chicago Tribune' Readers Not Satisfied With Rationale for Running Parker Column

By: E&P Staff A week ago, Chicago Tribune Public Editor Timothy J. McNulty wrote a piece criticizing Kathleen Parker's "full-blooded Americans" column while explaining that the Tribune's aim is to run a "wide range" of commentary.

In a new piece today, McNulty ran letters from a number of readers who said Parker's column "went too far" to be in that commentary range.

Parker's conservative-leaning feature is syndicated to more than 400 newspapers by the Washington Post Writers Group.

Among the comments from Tribune readers writing McNulty:

-- "I find your explanation for running the Parker piece completely unsatisfactory. It was so overtly racist that it shocked.... (T)he Tribune should have taken the opportunity to disavow the column's obvious bigotry in some parallel item on the Op-Ed page if you felt obligated to run it."

-- "While I absolutely agree with your right and even duty to publish a wide range of political views, the Parker article went too far and came very close to hate speech. You would not publish an article by the KKK, or Osama bin Laden, or for that matter any extremist group, so you should draw the line somewhere."

-- "The Tribune's action is more reprehensible than the columnist. Your Op-Ed acknowledged that the Tribune knew that they were code words, and yet paid for a right to spread her bigotry to hundreds of thousands of readers."

-- "I am very disappointed that you chose to be an apologist for this bigotry. Of course, a newspaper should not suppress reporting about racism. That does not mean it should promote racism as a legitimate political argument...."

-- "There are some views which simply should not be given paid exposure in responsible publications. The freedom-of-speech argument you use does not work with me, as other venues for her exist. You guys published her idiocy and paid her. You do have freedom of selection."

Parker did get defended by a reader who said she was "very surprised that so many people found her article to be racist. Am I missing something here? I just thought by 'full-blooded American' that she was talking about people who feel deeply about our country, its core values, and its heritage...."

E&P's story about last week's McNulty column can be seen here. It includes excerpts from -- and a link to -- Parker's column.