For those of you who never took Latin, Sine Die means “without day,” and it is the traditional closing words at many legislative bodies, implying that this session is closed. And so it is with this blog. It will go dark at 5 tomorrow. And I’ve turned off the comments on this; for once in my life, I get the last word.

So let me get serious for a second, and please indulge me if I wander.

I’ve known for most of my career that it is a privilege to be a journalist. The pay is lousy. The hours can be brutal. You’re hated. Or, worse, ignored. The privilege comes in the freedom. The freedom to write the truth. To speak the truth. It is incredible. The joy I experience in writing is secondary. It’s the fact that we can do it that is so amazing.

Journalism is in crisis. It’s silly to argue about whether it’s the rise of the internet, the Wall Street obsession of Big Media, the arrogance of editors (including this one), the fragmenting of America, or any number of other factors that caused the problems. The docs in the ER don’t argue about whether the heart attack was caused by smoking or eating. They worry about saving the patient. Which is what we should be worried about. It’s fair to say that a democracy needs journalism as much as journalism needs democracy. And I worry about what a post-journalism democracy would look like or if that’s even sustainable.

I don’t have answers, although I intend to keep looking for them. But I would offer up this small piece of wisdom/advice. Subscribe to your local paper. It will make you a better citizen. And it gives you a stake in its quality. I listen to everybody who calls and try to respond to their concerns. That said, I listen harder to the people who tell me they take the paper. They are paying customers.

I had the privilege this morning of being a judge at the spelling bee at Cook Elementary School, where I have tutored for many years. The principal there, Ted Burcaw, is very inspiring, and he spoke about the power of words. And while I know his primary audience was the children, I felt at times that he was talking directly to me. Words matter. And they have the ability to move mountains. It’s easy to forget the strength and precision found in 26 letters.

Before I sign off, a few thank yous

Joe Goodman. For hiring me at the Journal. Twice.
Jim Laughrun. For setting the example for effort, integrity and organization.
Carl Crothers. For making the newsroom believe in itself. Every great team needs a great coach.
Bill Turner. Fishing buddy and former columnist. The best thinker I know.
Phoebe Zerwick. For having talent equal to her heart.

The Journal newsroom. For a work ethic and professionalism that is second-to-none.
Our other departments—circulation, production and advertising. We are only as good as the papers we print, deliver and pay for.
Our readers—both paying and non-paying. I’ve enjoyed the conversation.

And for my family and friends. For being there. Always.
And for JoAnne, for giving me the courage to take the next step.

That’s all. See you in the real world.

This online conversation, digital as it must be, critical as it often has been, has been one of the highlights of my tenure here. Even the scolding.

I’ll have more on this during the next few weeks, and my plan is not to get all weepy about my time here, etc. The Journal is a strong paper, certainly stronger than any one person, and it will survive. That’s my hope. It’s been a great ride here. I love Winston-Salem and plan to stay here, if possible. But after 21+ years here, it’s time to move on.

Pun headlines are easier said than done. The word play has to work on all levels, in other words, you can’t just put two words together, and then not care if the pun lines up with the story. And people have to get it. Puns that require readers to think too much, reach for their thesaurus, and finally say, “Oh, I get it.” don’t cut it either. All of which is to say, there are many bad pun headlines out there, a decent amount that are so-so, and a small amount that are stars.

One of our best pun headline writers is a woman named Cassandra Sherrill, who is a graphic artist by training, but also does presentation, design and a host of other things. Very clever person. And she is the author of the pun-tastic headline in the paper today about the problems with our city tree after the wind knocked it down. Her headline was nothing short of brilliant: Oh, Tannen-boom Says it all…

There was an important ruling yesterday by a Superior Court judge ordering the release of documents related to the Silk Plant Forest case. Many of these documents are quasi-personnel documents, and the officers arguing against their release maintained that they were protected from release by state law. The Journal was not a legal party to this case, although we supported the city’s push to release.

North Carolina’s public-personnel laws are very restrictive from an open-records standpoint. But lawmakers put in an elastic clause that allows the release of personnel documents in certain instances. Here’s what it says:

The city manager, with concurrence of the council, or, in cities not having a manager, the council may inform any person of the employment or nonemployment, promotion, demotion, suspension or other disciplinary action, reinstatement, transfer, or termination of a city employee and the reasons for that personnel action. Before releasing the information, the manager or council shall determine in writing that the release is essential to maintaining public confidence in the administration of city services or to maintaining the level and quality of city services. This written determination shall be retained in the office of the manager or the city clerk, and is a record available for public inspection and shall become part of the employee’s personnel file.

This is vital language. There are cases where public interests supercede total privacy, and this is one of them.

On a lighter silk plant note, I received the following comment on this blog, which shows the crazy way people (or actually computers) link up divergent sites:

Hello Webmaster,

If we are happy with your price, then we will send you the Link details that you can place on your website and we will make the payments to the PayPal id provided by you.

Closer to home, it is a crazy day out there, one that matches the rawness outside. Murder-suicide. Teacher charged with having sex with student. Potential layoffs at RJR.

One of the hardest things for newspapers to do is cover themselves. But we are part of the news. Sometimes we are in the news. Take this morning’s story about the search for a new branch for the public library. One of the sites the county is considering is the Journal property at Fifth/Marshall/Spruce. We’ve reported before that we were doing a study on this building and how it fits into our long-term needs now that a)our printing facility is a few miles east, and b) we have fewer employees. But I hadn’t heard about the library deal. It’s uncomfortable when we become part of the story, but sometimes it is unavoidable. All you can do is put the facts out there and then let events take their course.

1) Cell phone cameras. The ability to take and send images quickly and surreptitiously has changed journalism forever. For proof, see the current issue of National Geographic and the story about unrest in western China.
2) The other amendments beyond number one in the Bill of Rights. Still an extraordinary document. And having the other nine around gives support to press freedoms in difficult times.
3) The number 3 Sudoku puzzle. Hard enough to be very challenging. But still doable most days. The accomplishment high is very underrated.
4) Journalists—like my colleagues here and elsewhere—who still argue and care about words and pictures and how to use them.
5) Gov. Sanford and former Gov. Easley. The heart of both these scandals reveals reporters who did their jobs.
6) Election Night pizza.

Here’s the question: I have a question about how and why the newspaper endorses candidates.
Before voting, I normally find my information from the candidates themselves and decide how to vote accordingly. This was my first election where my primary source of information was the local newspaper.

I noticed that in every race with an incumbent, the Journal endorsed the incumbent. Personally I feel that the current council has abdicated responsibility for oversight of the ballpark finances by creating a review board to look out for the city’s interests, when that is the primary job of the council itself.

The election is over and the winners have been determined, but I’d really be interested in how the endorsement process works. Is it the opinion of one editor, or a committee that votes?
Also, When you endorse a candidate, what is the goal of that endorsement? Is it to convince readers to vote for the endorsed candidate?

I’m just curious about the process. I’ve never given it much thought until recently. Thanks.

Now, here’s the response from John Railey, one of our editorial writers:
> > Thanks for your thoughtful questions.
> > We generally endorse incumbents, if they have been productive, because
> we feel that their experience is necessary for stability in
> government. But that is not policy. Several times over the last
> several years, in races involving the city council, the school board
> and the county commissioners, we have endorsed challengers that could
> bring fresh viewpoints to the table.
> > In regard to the ballpark finances, we understand your concerns, but
> we feel a review board is best to bring a fresh perspective and, it’s
> hoped, independent set of eyes. In editorials, we’ve pushed for more
> oversight of the ballpark. It’s our view, based on interviews with all
> of the incumbents and having watched them in action, that they learned
> the need for more caution from their dealings with the ballpark.
> Ballpark construction has now resumed, with greater oversight. And in
> the long run, the stadium will be a crucial part of area economic
> development.
> > About how the process works: Endorsements are the opinion of our
> editorial board, which consists of Mike Miller, our publisher; Carl
> Crothers, our vice president and executive editor; and me, the local
> editorial writer. Mr. Crothers and I interview all the candidates who
> respond to our requests for interviews, hash out our thoughts and take
> our recommendations to Mr. Miller. He has the final say.
> > Our goal is not to tell readers who to vote for. Rather, it’s to give
> those who want it our opinion based on interviews with the candidates
> and those who know them, and our own knowledge of the issues. Most
> citizens don’t have the time to do that. We feel it’s our
> responsiblity to share whatever insights we have.
> > I hope this helps, and please feel free to ask any other quesions you
> have.
> > 

One email we received spoke for others and took issue with our decision to put this story on the front page. The writer wrote: today’s “front page news” about rabbits and the repair of their little malfunctioning penises really sets the bar even lower.  In a world this large and complex that is the best thing you could come up with for the front page?  Think again.  A significant advance in the treatment of cancer or AIDS - okay - this article - I don’t think so.

We struggled a bit in our discussions about how to present this story. It’s clearly a front-page story. It’s research from here that is groundbreaking and has the potential to impact thousands of lives. If it were about the ability to grow heart valve tissue, there would be no discussion. It only comes into play because the research is related to ... sex.

From my perspective, to bury the story because we don’t want something sexually related on the front page is a disservice to the research. The better tactic is to not be ashamed of it, but to be discreet in the use of graphics, to watch the bad headlines and be upfront that this is research and it’s related to that most intimate of ailments.

This has been a difficult campaign for us to cover, because of the lack of mayoral challenger to Allen Joines. There are certainly spirited and important campaigns in several wards, but there’s a lack of a larger city-wide narrative, despite big issues swirling around like the leaves. And there’s not a lot we in the press can or should do about it. Despite what people think, our goal isn’t to create controversy where none exists. That said, one of the jobs of newspapers (and other media) is to help people make sense of what’s happened. The Why of the Five Ws. And so, it will be interesting after tonight to try and figure out what’s happened throughout this electoral season, where change was evident in the primaries and whether that push continued into the general election.

Now many people say if you don’t vote, you have no right to complain. If that were so, our lives would be a lot easier. Me, I tend to think that complaining (or its more refined cousin “dissent”) is part of our national fabric. So, the I voted sticker isn’t required to gripe. But that said, people are fighting all over the world for the right to vote in free elections and then to read about the results in a free press. So take advantage of both!

A few months ago, we went to a largely paperless budget system (used to keep up with stories), taking a few hundred sheets out of use each week. But still, there are thousands of emails and releases and faxes we get every day. Not all get printed, but a lot do. It’s unavoidable.

Lots of emails we get now carry some version of this enviro-friendly reminder: Please consider the environment before printing. Often there is a little green tree.
But here’s the print reminder I got yesterday in an emailed press release from the N.C. Forestry Association:

Notice:  It’s OK to print this e-mail. Paper is a biodegradable, renewable, recyclable, sustainable product made from trees.  Producing paper and other forest products utilizes a renewable natural resource and provides jobs and income for millions of Americans.  Thanks to improved forest management, we have more trees today than we had 100 years ago.

Very clever.