Question: Given the wide array of options available among political cartoonists, I’m curious with the choice for Dec 7. The cartoon is recklessly misleading in its characterization of the role of the ACLU and how it operates.

The ACLU initiates legal action only if a complaint is registered having constitutional implications. It is egregiously inaccurate to imply the ACLU is violently opposed to any display of the nativity scene.

The courts have supported the claim that display of religious themes on public property violates the First Amendment principle of separation of church and state.

Whoever chose the cartoon for publication knew that. Wouldn’t a disclaimer that the views expressed in the cartoon do not necessarily reflect those of the S-R — as regularly prefaces featured editorials from other newspapers — been wisely appropriate? — Buell Hollister, Post Falls

Answer: Thanks for the question. We try to publish a variety of cartoons that reflect different points of view. As you probably know, some people believe civil libertarians have overreacted to certain public expressions of religious belief — such as crèches displayed in schools and town squares during the Christmas season.

The cartoon you cite was a depiction of that point of view.

Political cartoons should never be taken literally, because they rely heavily on exaggeration to make a satirical point.

I confess I’ve been surprised by the feedback over this cartoon. I’ve heard similar responses from several callers, including an ACLU official from Idaho. I thought it odd that the ACLU, an organization dedicated to defending freedom of expression and other civic protections guaranteed by the Bill of Rights, would be the ones to challenge the publication of a point of view it considers objectionable.

It’s not unusual for us to hear protests on behalf of organizations and causes that have been lampooned by an editorial cartoon. During the presidential campaign, for example, I heard vicious objection to cartoons that ridiculed the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth and their attack on John Kerry’s war record. None of those objections came from the ACLU, however.

I’ve long been an admirer of the ACLU because of its steadfast commitment to civil liberties, even when it requires taking an unpopular stand. That’s why I’m so surprised by this reaction. — Doug Floyd, editorial page editor

Publish readership survey results

Question: During the recent Spokesman-Review forum in Coeur d’Alene, Editor Steve Smith cited some survey data about how North Idaho readers get our news. As I recall, he said that only about 50 percent of us get our news from newspapers and television. Please consider publishing the survey results and your comments about them. — Bill McCrory, Coeur d’Alene

Answer: I was referencing results of our proprietary readership studies conducted every two years and examining readership patterns throughout the region. I told the forum that our studies show overall daily newspaper readership in North Idaho (including readership of our paper, the Coeur d’Alene Press and its sister papers) is substantially below readership in most other regions in the country. In other words, more people, by percentage, read no newspaper at all than one would find in most regions.

We’ve just completed work on our latest study (the previous study is now a bit more than two years old). I’ll report back our findings when we receive them early next year. — Steve Smith, editor