Sound Off for Dec. 24, 2006

Batch Data Processor | Saturday, Dec 23 2006 10:05 PM

Last Updated: Saturday, Dec 23 2006 10:09 PM

Reader: Why does your newspaper insist on trying to eliminate the word "Christmas" from the vocabulary of the vast majority of people who live in the United States and annually celebrate the Christian day of recognition of the birth of Jesus Christ?

The Dec. 17 Eye Street section featured an article about "A Different Christmas Poem." The editor's note even advised readers that this Christmas poem was allegedly written by Michael Marks at the onset of the Christmas season, 2000.

Nonetheless, in your tradition of liberal "political correctness," The Californian could not permit itself to use the word "Christmas" in any portion of an article that it penned. Thus, The Californian was compelled to headline this fine article on "A Different Christmas Poem" with a red in color (a parody on the traditional red and green Christmas colors?) headline entitled "Holiday Poem."

You, dear Californian, are well aware that this poem is a Christmas poem, not a "holiday" poem. Shame on you! You owe Michael Marks, and your readers who celebrate Christmas, an apology.

-- Joseph R. De Silva

Jenner: In case readers missed it, the poem was was a "thank you" to the military for keeping us safe. I highly recommend going back and giving it a read.

It sounds like you enjoyed the poem. We hope so, that's why we put it in the paper.

Now, to your issue. It's hard for me to react to the "Christmas conspiracy" you describe other than to say, "Good grief!"

It's just flat silly to accuse us of trying to alter the English language by having a label (a very small headline in red) that said "Holiday poem." I'm sure you noticed the headline just below the label (more than twice the size, by the way) contained the word Christmas. The editor's note accompanying the poem mentioned Christmas not once but twice, and the title of the poem (Christmas included) was prominently displayed. That's what? Four to one?

I'm pretty sure the word Christmas is safe from our insidious attempts to cleanse the vocabulary.

Reader: Your reply to a reader justifying the use of "the holidays" versus Christmas is definitely the PC rhetoric that I have become accustomed to from The Californian. The reader was absolutely correct when he pointed out that, "'The holidays' is, in actuality, one holiday, and that's Christmas." Now, if the truth (which Mr. Whitby wrote) is "arrogant," then I believe you would find that a large part of your reading audience is arrogant, including myself.

The real "arrogant" person is one who thinks he has the right to explain away a period that by custom and law is the holiday -- Christmas, designated as such by the California legislature as well as the federal government. When California legislates some other holiday, I will gladly acknowledge it. Whether I actually celebrate that particular day or not, or just simply go fishing, is another question, but I will not be offended by the mention of it by name.

I like to see all people celebrate their religion, heritage and customs if they differ from mine, but not to do it at the expense of American customs and holidays -- after all this is still America, is it not? By always deferring to political correctness we are slowly losing our own national customs and culture.

-- James Leist

Jenner: Here we go again.

Yup, Christmas is the legally designated, official holiday.

My point was, and continues to be, that there are other holidays celebrated at this time of year. "Happy holidays" isn't a slap in the face to Christmas. It's a friendly seasonal greeting that is inclusive. I don't think Christmas and what it represents to millions will be somehow destroyed if someone says "happy holidays" or if the words "holiday sale" appear in an ad.

Maybe I just have too much faith in the enduring power of Christmas.

Reader: Could you PLEASE make your headlines more specific? When the general public reads a headline that says "3 deputies arrested," they don't know the difference between deputies and detention deputies. Your paper is giving the impression they are the same.

Deputies and detention deputies have completely different jobs and level of training. They are even represented by different unions. The vast majority of the residents will never come in contact with detention deputies, who are assigned to the jail. When someone calls 911 for aid, it's a deputy who arrives in a patrol car, not a detention deputy.

I realize your headlines are attention grabbers and the body of the article states detention deputies, but readers are going to remember the headline.

-- Shelly Fairbanks

Kern County sheriff's deputy

Jenner: Good point.

The copy editor who wrote that headline obviously didn't have the room to say "detention deputy," and because the vast majority of readers would assume that referred to deputies involved in law enforcement, the headline was misleading.

It would have been better to use the term "guards," even though many of those who staff our county jails and prisons adamantly oppose our use of that term, insisting that we instead call these workers "correctional officers." Like "detention deputies," that doesn't fit very well in a headline, either.

Reader: Along with readers Susan Thompson and Pat Cowles, I too am disappointed by the manner in which Page One of The Californian panders to the casual news readers' prurient interests. The issue of a local high school teacher's disciplinary methods is merely one of a number of news items that do not merit front-page splash, but nevertheless find their lurid place there in our community paper. Your justification that "it was the talk of the town" is lame in the extreme and very revealing. Has Californian news coverage now descended to the abysmal levels of talk radio? Disappointed.

-- Jerome S. Kleinsasser

Jenner: Perhaps the phrase I used was too flippant. But I don't think there was a story in the paper that day that was of greater reader interest.

Shouldn't that be a legitimate factor in considering what should make it to the front of the paper?

Reader: There is nothing illegal with Sen. Dean Florez spending funds contributed to the "Keep Kern Clean" committee to print and mail his Christmas card. Your article seems to be an attempt to imply something is out of order.

Further, I suspect that Florez provided what he thought was "seed money" of $15,000 to get the process moving to get enough signatures for Measure E to be placed on the ballot. There was not much time to get such a labor-intensive activity done and it needed to be on the June ballot. It is highly unusual for a politician to contribute their own campaign funds toward what is a citizen-driven public policy initiative such as Measure E. In fact, why don't you research any similar experiences and prove my statement wrong?

My last comment is really directed to The Californian management as to why they even commit a reporter's time to foolishness like this when they did nothing to report on the Bakersfield City Hall giveaway of almost $10 million to George Martin and his Borton Petrini retirement fund. Maybe because Borton Petrini is a big advertiser with your newspaper? Hmmmmm?

I bet The Californian would never do an article like the Los Angeles Times story on Bill Thomas and Cathy Abernathy! The Bakersfield Californian is full of hypocrites!

-- Frank Pecarich

Jenner: Our story on how Florez paid for his Christmas cards with money collected by his Keep Kern Clean Committee, which was created to fight sludge, was a legitimate story.

We didn't say he did anything illegal, and we gave him the space and opportunity to explain what he did. Our readers, many of whom contributed money to keep sludge out of Kern County, were surprised that this money went to buy Christmas cards. We know because quite a few called us. Whether the action was right or wrong, they had a right to know where their money went.

It's our job to act as a watchdog keeping an eye on the political activities of our elected representatives.

As for the Times' investigation, we published it in two installments. And over the years we have not shied away from publishing stories critical of Thomas. We've reported plenty of them ourselves.

Finally, Borton Petrini is not a big advertiser, and if it was, that wouldn't affect our coverage. We did report on the sale of the Borton Petrini building to the city.

The cost per square foot was below the going rate for commercial real estate.

Whether the money funded someone's retirement or simply paid the law firm's mortgage isn't an issue for taxpayers or us as long as the public's getting a good deal.