The Editor's Desk

Some might find the photo on the front page of Sunday’s paper of a defaced Obama sign objectionable.
We debated whether to run a photo of something that we could so easily describe in words.
Tell someone that a campaign sign of a black candidate was defaced with a racial slur, and it’s not hard to imagine what the sign said or what it looked like.
On one hand, we thought that running the photo might be fanning the flames of racism. That we were insensitive to older readers who lived through some of the painful experiences of the civil rights movement. That we were helping to spread a message scrawled by a bigot that only a few people would have seen before the sign was taken down.
On the other hand, some felt strongly that we should shine a light on racism that still exists in our community and not hide it.
The article by Christina Woods states that the Obama campaign is furthering a dialogue on race.
The photo should also spark discussion.
By running the photo we are saying that this isn’t typical behavior. This is wrong.
We didn’t want it to be a dominant photograph on the front page, because we didn’t feel like the sentiment expressed dominates our reality today.
It is a vestige of an ugly past. But as Christina’s article points out, our future is much more hopeful.