A blogger recently posted a remark that The Gazette and I must be pro-choice.
Following on the heels of that thoughtless declaration, a friend sauntered into the newsroom and said he hoped to see a right-wing editorial from me before I retire next month.
OK, pal; here it is:
- First, the blogger couldn’t have been more wrong about my opinion.
- Not a pro-choicer. Never have been; probably never could be. The reasons are so plentiful, there’s not enough space here to explain. But I’m pro-life.
- And I’m a tightwad — it’s ecstasy finding ways to save money.
- Driving along Highway 150 in May, the sight of two KDOT workers trimming the highway’s edges appalled me. Kansas is near bankruptcy and we can afford to weed-eat highways after mowing?
- And I’m independent. Being widowed at 40 with three children at home likely contributed to that, but Mom and Dad started it. So keep government out of my life. The more our elected officials keep their laws to themselves, the better off the majority of us will be.
But here’s where I sway away to the left. It’s that “majority” thing.
The reality is that some of us are going to need help and — push the religion button here — I was taught we need to take care of each other.
Sometimes that means we hold fundraisers or simply reach into a pocket and contribute to a local cause; sometimes that means we have to funnel the money through government to take care of our needs as a nation.
Does anyone really not care whether children have health care or food or lodging when their parents cannot or will not take care of them?
Who can afford to quit work to care for an elderly family member at home, when the nest egg has been exhausted and the family can’t afford the $4,600-plus it takes to keep them in a care center?
Should children get only the educations individual communities can afford or, for the sake of equity and the good of the country, should some per-pupil aid come from the state, with supplements from the feds so there’ll be some consistency in the graduates we produce?
Sometimes there’s no alternative to accepting help from the government, and I suspect a lot of people have similar ideas that make them difficult to label as right- or left-wing, too.
Call it political schizophrenia, if you like, or call it individual preference. Life for me’s simply better with a hint of gray for shading and nuance.
Bobbi Mlynar
Reporter
sail (anonymous) says...
Enjoyed the fire in your writing.
June 29, 2010 at 5:21 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Newsie (anonymous) says...
Ms Mylnar: You should either decide to be a reporter and keep your writing as bias free as possible, or work the op-ed page, but not both. Next time you write an abortion story, the Gazette readers will be wondering how much bias has tainted your stories.
2. As a reporter, you should know that the term weed-eat is a trademark encroachment. Companies have an interest in protecting their names and employ lawyers to handle such matters.
3. Had you bothered to check with the highway department, you would have learned that trimming the weeds along the highway is an important part of highway safety. Years ago, the turnpike decided to let the grass and trees along the shoulders grow so that animals could find shelter. Turns out, thought, that those same animals also liked the warmth of the asphalt at night, and would seek shelter on the road, too. Alas the poor animal who could not clear the roadway fast enough.
June 29, 2010 at 5:31 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
oh4theluvof (anonymous) says...
Very nicely put, Bobbi. I feel as if I know you much better. I will miss your work at the Gazette after you retire next month. I hope they can find someone to be for Gwen what she's been for you. You two have made a great pair and, in my opinion, have been who's really kept the Gazette alive.
June 30, 2010 at 12:11 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
create (anonymous) says...
A great piece, rich with voice. Well done. Didn't know you were going to retire, but one thing for sure, your work has been top knotch. Good luck to you as you retire. May you find something to do afterwards that is rewarding and passionate.
Baloney on the weed eat idea. Any company whose name becomes a household word is getting free advertising everytime that word is used. A news article is the mecca of free advertising. Scotch tape, Kleenex, Band Aids, Post-it Notes -- all good examples. Those companies fully expect their trade names will be heavily used in all kinds of ways.
At any rate, I liked your example of why you questioned weed eating along the highway. Mowing along the shoulders, yes. That makes sense for highway vision. But weed eating? I agree with you. All the years I spent driving back and forth on Hwy 99, I saw lots of mowing, even in the ditches, but never once any weed eating. Yet despite the close mowing they do along that highway, I still saw dead animals every single day.
June 30, 2010 at 7:02 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
justaflushaway (anonymous) says...
Wishing you a great and fun retirement.
June 30, 2010 at 8:25 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Newsie (anonymous) says...
Don't have a clue about trademark...or advertising, do you, Create.
June 30, 2010 at 9:09 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Newsie (anonymous) says...
And that is exactly why weed-eat is a trademark encroachment on the name Weed Eater, a brand now owned by Poulan. Farmraised, it is one thing to quote but another to understand what one is quoting.
June 30, 2010 at 9:57 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
TexasGirl (anonymous) says...
The fact that this thread turned into a discussion about trademark infringement proves that some people will grasp at the smallest straw to find something to criticize. Meanwhile, you have completely missed the point of the column. Also, I see no reason Ms. Mlynar has too chose between writing news reports and editorials, as long as it is clear which she is doing.
June 30, 2010 at 10:11 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Newsie (anonymous) says...
TexasGirl....you have just hit on the problem with today's journalism. No clear definition of the roles. That's exactly why the public does not trust journalists.
June 30, 2010 at 10:35 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
netloafer (anonymous) says...
Newsie
Ms. Mlynar's piece appeared in the "opinion" section of the on line and print versions of the Gazette.
I re-read the piece and I think it would take a very reckless lawyer to file a lawsuit here for trademark infringement. Ms. Mlynar used the term in a generic sense, in the same way people use the term "FedEx" to say they are shipping something for expedited delivery. I suspect Fred Smith and the FedEx team are quite flattered every time the word is written or spoken. The last thing they'd want to do is have their legal team descending on the public to squelch its use. What about words like "apple." We have "Apple" computers and the entertainment industry has "Apple" records. Is one infringing on the other? Does it mean that any time someone uses the word "apple" a trademark is being infringed?
also, Ms. Mlynar wasn't marketing a competitive device. I suppose she could have said something like "cut down the weeds," but I actually like her use of "weedeat."
Most of us got the point. It appears a few of us missed it badly.
June 30, 2010 at 10:45 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
methusla (anonymous) says...
First of all Bobbi, did not use the term " Weed Eater " which is or was a trademark of a certain corp., she used the term " weed eat " . And their is a big difference between the term " Weed Eater " and " weed eat". The two words " weed " which is a noun and denotes a person, place or thing and the second word "eat " is a verb, which denotes existence, action, or occurrence.
Boy, there are people in and around Emporia that are really getting, picky, picky, picky .
June 30, 2010 at 10:48 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Newsie (anonymous) says...
Netloafer, if you believe that FedEx welcomes the use of its name in a generic manner, then you need to take a look at the following site. It is a list of all the terms trademarked by FedEx. Why go to all the trouble if you want your name to represent every delivery company. By the way, this is just the US trademark terms...
http://www.fedex.com/cgi-bin/global_l...
June 30, 2010 at 10:52 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
netloafer (anonymous) says...
Newsie
I worked for FedEx. I know what I'm talking about. The general public often uses the term in the same way the public uses the term "Coke" to mean a soft drink. I'm talking about the general public using the term to move something quickly vs a competitor using the term to market its product. Fred Smith might tangle with UPS or DHL over infringement issues. He might sic the lawyers on someone who opened a shipping outlet with the word "FedEx' using a slightly different color scheme or font to try to profit from its use. He would never have the lawyers swoop down on Joe Citizen because he said something like "I need to FedEx something" instead of "I need to move something quickly." It would be a public relations disaster.
I don't think Ms. Mlynar was marketing any particular product nor do I think the Gazette is trying to diversify its business model. Ms. Mlynar simply used the word "weedeat." I liked it and so do most of those who read it.
June 30, 2010 at 11:16 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Newsie (anonymous) says...
And yet the average citizen won't know the error of his or her way when using FedEx in a generic manner. But Ms. Mlynar, as a journalist, does...or at least should.
June 30, 2010 at 11:20 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Newsie (anonymous) says...
Just curious, would you say, "I xeroxed it." when you meant you photocopied it? Would you say, "I took a picture with my kodak," when you used a Canon? Then why would you say weed eat when you meant trimmed the grass with a week trimmer.
For that matter, when did weed eat become a verb?
June 30, 2010 at 11:36 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Newsie (anonymous) says...
sorry, meant weed trimmer...
June 30, 2010 at 11:37 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
netloafer (anonymous) says...
Newsie
I'll take one last try.
I don't think the public is erring or sinning by using "FedEx," "weedeat," "apple," or anything else one can conjure up.
One of the main characters in Moby Dick is "Starbuck." Do you think that Starbuck's Coffee should be entiled to sue anyone, Joe Citizen or journalist because they utter the word "Starbuck?" Should Starbuck's legal department be entitled to sue the descendants of Herman Melville for trademark infringement? Or should Melville's descendants be entitled to sue Starbuck's Coffee?
I'd like to think most corporate entities have enough smarts to know when to hold 'em when to fold em. But, maybe not. There are plenty of ambitious lawyers and ambulance chasers out there.
June 30, 2010 at 11:41 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
HenryVIII (anonymous) says...
Newsie,
The word "eat" became a verb when it was created sometime in the 12th century.
'enry
June 30, 2010 at 11:49 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Denise_Dorcey (anonymous) says...
And, isn't this focus on "weed eat" diluting the focus of Bobbi's article?
June 30, 2010 at 12:10 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
I'm currently serving 3 consecutive life sentences in prison for repeatedly using the term "Crescent wrench" in my everyday language instead of using adjustable end wrench. Apparently "trademark encroachment" is a big deal. It's a good thing I'm in here instead of out on the streets cuz I'd clobber the rat that narced me out to the fuzz. Watch your back Sparky Flanterton!!! I got friends on the outside! See?
June 30, 2010 at 12:14 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
create (anonymous) says...
If he used a Weed Eater this morning, does that mean he weed ate?
June 30, 2010 at 12:25 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
giggles (anonymous) says...
I agree with netloafer, somebody got hung up on the little things, and missed the big picture!
BTW, weed-eat, is not a trademark, Weed-Eater is. Look it up. Also to be infringing on the use, they would have to be doing so for commercial sale or use. Basically, if Bobbi had used the term as a competitor or was trying to sell a product or service, then she would be infringing.
Go check it out.
There are bigger issues in the world to get upset about.
Furthermore, her issue wasn't about cutting the grass along the highway in general, but instead doing detail work such as weed-eating. Using the tractor to cut the grass would more than suffice to increase safety, weed-eating is for aesthetics.
Lastly, stating one's personal feelings and ideals, posing questions, and listing personal preferences, does not a news article make.
June 30, 2010 at 12:32 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Newsie (anonymous) says...
We could argue this all day. The point of the original post, directed at Bobbi, is that she should know better.
But, regarding your last sentence, giggles...thank you for affirming my first point.
June 30, 2010 at 1:26 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
giggles (anonymous) says...
I most certainly did not affirm your first point. Opinion pages, with opinion pieces with opinions in them, are not news articles.
Anyone reading the opinion section and taking it for cold hard facts, probably should go back to first grade and carefully listen to the teacher when she teaches about facts and opinions.
Also, I still don't see where she infringed or that "she should know better". Once again, that pertains to commercial use of a term, and not even this term. My point is, your arguement is moot.
June 30, 2010 at 2:12 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
jackslap (anonymous) says...
It is common for gazette reporters to write opinion pieces. Is this the first time you've read the paper? Argue with Newsie? Why bother... maybe you should send your initial post into Mrs. Mlynar to proofread? Maybe then it would not have so many errors. And four commas in one sentence, come on? As for writing a bias-free news article, I believe she has probably written thousands, and was also nominated for a Pulitzer Prize. She should know better than what? Offend you with her weed-eat comment, or expressing that she is pro-life? Maybe someone's mother should've had a coat hanger.
June 30, 2010 at 2:15 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
oh4theluvof (anonymous) says...
She's retiring in less than 31 days.
This was in the opinion section.
They could have been using Weed Eaters.
She's retiring during the month that begins tomorrow.
"Weed-eat" is not trademarked.
She made a great point about that secondary step being a waste of money.
She's retiring within the next four weeks.
Let's see, have I left anything out? Oh, Yes!!!
SHE'S RETIRING IN LESS THAN A MONTH!!!!
How about you, Newsie? How new to the scene are you? How long till you retire from journalism or will you be fired from it first? Do you even work in it? Get over yourself.
Congrats and best wishes, Bobbi!
June 30, 2010 at 3:23 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
REWBA (anonymous) says...
I really like my String Trimmer. That's what I call them. My string trimmer is manufactured by homelite. Homelite is just a brand name owned by TTI.
TTI is a world-class leader in quality consumer and professional products marketed to the home improvement and construction industries. An unrelenting strategic focus on powerful brands, innovative products and exceptional people drives our success.
TTI’s powerful brand portfolio includes Milwaukee®, AEG® and Ryobi® power tools and accessories, Ryobi® and Homelite® outdoor products, and Hoover®, Dirt Devil® and Vax® floor care appliances. Our products are distributed through major home centers and retailers, full-line tool distributors and other channels worldwide.
Our culture of innovation, firm commitment to R&D and extensive customer insight ensure our leading brands and high-quality products meet the specific needs of the customers, consumers and professionals that we serve and deliver long-term value to our shareholders.
TTI is listed on The Stock Exchange of Hong Kong (HKEx: 669) and maintains a Level 1 American Depositary Receipt (ADR) program (ADR: TTNDY).
Hope that clears things up for you all.
June 30, 2010 at 5:05 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
blulitespecial (anonymous) says...
Why can't we all just get along and work on our weed trimmers together with adjustable end wrenches?
June 30, 2010 at 5:57 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
create (anonymous) says...
That's quite a cartoon, blulitespecial. All these posters working on their weed trimmers together. Uh huh. How long before the wrenches go flying? How long before someone says, "Don't have a clue about weed trimmers do you, create?" LOL Can Bobbi come to report the scene?
June 30, 2010 at 6:30 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
blulitespecial (anonymous) says...
lol, create,I just couldn't help it!
June 30, 2010 at 7:11 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
educ8253 (anonymous) says...
What do you think, Bobbi and Gwen, is "weed eat" a trademarked phrase? A trademark encroachment? Please tell us.
June 30, 2010 at 9:09 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
educ8253 (anonymous) says...
By the way, Bobbi, congratulations on the Putlizer nomination. When did this happen? I was unaware.
June 30, 2010 at 9:11 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
I use to work on weed-eaters with my crescent wrench all the live long day before they sent me up the river. There I said it! What are they going to do, give me a 4th life sentence? Oh I',m soooo scared. You can take a man's freedom but you can't stop him from saying crescent wrench, as the old saying goes.
June 30, 2010 at 11:19 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
REWBA (anonymous) says...
Emporia Kansas has an Army Reserve Unit who is currently mobilized and serving in Afghanistan. They departed on a bus back in February and no one was there to bid them farewell. Not even the local paper. Want to win a Pulitzer? Do a story on that. People say they "support the troops" and "thank them for their service" but, do they really? Yes...No...What do you think? I think that people do and say things that they really don't mean just because it is politically correct and when it comes to actually caring about the troops or their families they try not to think about it. Is it fatigue? After all, the war is an old story and not local. So what if fifty or so of our citizens had to deploy? That's not news. We want to hear about smoking bans and sofas sitting in the yard. Back in the days of the Pulitzer Prize winning Emporia Gazette Mr. White would have dispatched a reporter to Afghanistan to interview the Emporia Unit and report from the Forward Operating Base. Today they don''t even dispatch a reporter to the east side of town to wave goodbye to the troops or take a picture of them loading a bus. There is a prize winning story there. It just needs a writer with talent.
June 30, 2010 at 11:39 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
noel_stanton (anonymous) says...
Mrs. Mlynar,
Your comments are a true delight: a wonderfully compact definition of positive political convictions grounded in personal religion and awareness of the social responsibilities of individuals for their fellows. If I may say so, your standpoint reflects a moral generosity that is sorely missing in American life.
It is saddening to learn that your voice will soon be absent from the Gazette. Thank you for the good journalism and may retirement be enriching and rewarding for you!
Noel Stanton,
Moerlenbach, Germany
July 1, 2010 at 12:48 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...
Bobbi,
You are not old enough to retire!
July 1, 2010 at 5:33 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Pingeon (anonymous) says...
Did everyone miss that Seriously is in jail and yet he's surfing the Internet? My tax dollars are paying for him to have an Internet connection? That's nuts! I bet they are also piping Logjam tunes through the new stereo too!
July 1, 2010 at 11:17 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
Yeah, we got it good here in the hoosegow because of you "tax payers". In here we call you suckas. We are surfing the web and watching Oprah while you are weed eating with your weed eaters. Ha ha ha. Suckas!
July 1, 2010 at 12:16 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
TexasGirl (anonymous) says...
I wish the Gazette would add a "Like" button on these blogs kinda like Facebook! Some of you posters crack me up!
July 1, 2010 at 12:48 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )