The worst sin for a newspaper columnist is to be boring. The second worst is to be wishy-washy. Judging from some readers' recent input to me, those have not been problems with The N&O scribblers.

"These people have an amazing amount of power to wield," writes Kevin O'Brien of Apex, in an e-mail. "They appear ready, willing and able to say what they want, how they want, with little or no attention to civility. They often set aside, if not professionalism, class and courtesy."

Those were his nice comments. O'Brien wanted to know what kind of checks and balances exist for the columnists, and what ethical standards apply. See below.

What set off O'Brien, as well as other readers who have contacted me, were recent columns by Barry Saunders on the Wakefield school controversy and by Ruth Sheehan on Wake Clerk of Court Jan Pueschel. In a column everlastingly notable for the phrase "classist jerk," Saunders ran a Humvee over Wakefield parents. Then he backed up and ran over 'em again in a second column titled "Concern, or is it elitism?"

In her Pueschel column, Sheehan suggested that the clerk, who has clashed with judges and employees, get anger management therapy. Sheehan followed with a kiss-and-make-up column, after Pueschel sent flowers and agreed to an interview.

For the record, I thought Saunders was too hard on Wakefield in the second column and Sheehan too easy on Pueschel. But that's not what we're here for.

What's the internal drill for columnists? News columnists Saunders, Sheehan and Dennis Rogers are edited by a designated editor, Rob Waters, who scrubs their work for grammar, style, spelling, syntax and cetera. He also is concerned with fairness, and occasionally sends columns back for more reporting and balance. Waters knew of one column that had been "spiked," inappropriate for publication.Top managers don't regularly hand down column ideas and don't know in advance what columnists are writing about.

The news columnists are given virtually a free hand to address what interests them. They're encouraged to be close to the news, Waters says, and the paper wants them to be provocative -- to address the controversial issues of the day. By definition, that means taking positions that make a lot of people unhappy (and some happy).

"The columns are a rifle shot," Sheehan told me. "You want people to respond." But she is not, she adds, gratuitously provocative. "I'm not deliberately trying to be controversial or contrary to stir up people. The columns I write are reflective of my own views and my own opinions."

(Sheehan also told me the columnists try to avoid writing on the same subject. That was Wednesday. In her column Thursday, she weighed in with Saunders on the Wakefield issue.)

The notion of strongly opinionated columns in the local news section is relatively new to The N&O. During my previous stint with this newspaper 15 years ago, there was only one news columnist, Rogers, and his work was confined mostly to feature columns about quirky characters along the byways of Eastern North Carolina.

I think the injection of opinion columns in the news section is mostly a positive -- it engages you as a reader and, as Sheehan says, gives you a position off which to bounce your own perspective.

But there is a downside. Newspapers constantly battle accusations of bias and slanted coverage. I don't think that's true of the news reporting per se. Yes, there are loaded phrases and slip-ups occasionally, but most news stories are balanced, complete, accurate, backed by fact. (I know, some of you don't agree; I await your call.)

Next page >