I am not involved in the editorial board’s decisions and Allen can explain things for himself. I can assure you that you’re way off base on this one.

From the way my “rejection” went down, I sincerely don’t think there was any “message massaging” going on. I honestly didn’t like the way my column came across and I couldn’t fix it in the extended time I was granted. I promise you I would have posted it if I thought the whole thing said what I really wanted to say.

I might just post it anyway. Warts and all.

The N&R finds an excuse to kill Hoggard’s column and your cartoon. The memo issue is stale by now? Interesting that it is the premise for today’s column by the N&R editor.

I think the more reasonable explanation is that the N&R decided they wanted to more closely manage their message on this issue and didn’t want the hoi polloi interfering.

David: You got it. And thanks for the kind words. I agree that these cuts are a bad thing for increasing the local focus of the paper. Your column definitely added a lot in that respect. I get the sense that the editors would rather it didn’t have to be this way, but obviously their hands are tied by the budget they’re given to work with.

It has been a good run, Anthony, and I have enjoyed your cartoons immensely. I look forward to linking to them in the future. There are, as you know, other local print outlets that may want to feature your take on things.

As a subscriber and avid reader of the N&R, I believe that the cuts in local voices are a bad thing. Especially in a paper that was trying to become more local in its focus.