The great comics controversy

'Mallard' and 'Doonesbury'

You're probably tired of reading about comics in The N&O -- I am -- but one cartoon burr lingers under some readers' waistbands.

The introduction of the conservative strip "Mallard Fillmore" to the comics pages has some readers complaining about a double standard. Why does The News & Observer run one political strip, the liberal "Doonesbury," on the op-ed page while placing "Mallard" with "Blondie," "Peanuts" and all the other nonpolitical cartoons on the comics pages?

"Why is 'Doonesbury' still hiding out on the editorial page while you allow the egregious 'Mallard Fillmore' to mingle with the other cartoons?" asked Steve Forsythe of Holly Springs. "The content of 'Mallard Fillmore' is far more focused on a narrow political agenda with none of the narrative complexities of Doonesbury."

In case you're not familiar with "Mallard," its title character is a right-leaning waterfowl who takes delight in poking jabs at Democrats, the media and liberal orthodoxy. "I can't believe our daughter is dating outside the faith," says a bow-tied liberal in a recent strip, upon learning that the daughter's boyfriend doesn't believe in global warming.

One reason for the inconsistent treatment of the politically flavored comics is the newspaper's internal setup. The opinion pages, including "Doonesbury," are the province of the editorial page editor. The comics pages, including "Mallard," are under the executive editor. To keep editorial opinion and news coverage separate, those two editors don't tell each other what to do.

Steve Ford, the editorial page editor, wants to keep "Doonesbury" on the op-ed page. It's a decades-long staple there at The N&O, he says, and it fits well with the comment and opinion mission of the page "in terms of content, in terms of tone and in terms of its visual appeal."

" 'Doonesbury' treats the same sort of issues that the op-ed writers tend to address," Ford said. "He simply is dealing with them in a visual and humorous way."

Garry Trudeau, Doonesbury's creator, recently has been focusing on wounded Iraq war veterans.

Ford also acknowledged he doesn't want to let "Doonesbury" go because it's a good readership magnet for his pages. But he and op-ed editor Allen Torrey don't want to add "Mallard" to the page because a second comic strip would consume valuable real estate that's needed for opinion articles. And, they said, "Mallard," at least at this point, is not the same quality as "Doonesbury" in terms of writing, wit and art.

Thad Ogburn, features editor, would be happy to accommodate "Doonesbury" on the comics pages -- it would help his readership, too -- but he said he respects Ford's reasons for wanting to keep it.

How are the two strips handled at other papers? Spokesmen at the distribution syndicates said most papers run the cartoons on the comics pages, although they don't keep numbers. "Doonesbury" is carried by 1,400 papers, "Mallard" by 400. The N&O's sister paper, The Charlotte Observer, runs "Doonesbury" in the comics section.

I ran by some readers the question of where to put the two comics. The general reaction was: Is this the biggest issue you guys have to deal with?

But when pressed, they were split. Of 133 readers who responded to my query, 63 said keep "Doonesbury" on op-ed and "Mallard" in comics, 43 said move "Doonesbury" to comics and 27 said move "Mallard" to op-ed.

Myself, I used to come down on the side of "Doonesbury" in comics. But I've changed my mind. Here's why.

"Doonesbury" is a manifestly better strip with a recognized political identity that has been accepted by readers. Trudeau's strip deals not only with politics but also with controversial topics -- homosexuality, drug use, out-of-wedlock sex -- that, you could argue, don't belong on the comics pages. Trudeau was the first comic strip artist awarded the Pulitzer Prize for political cartooning. He has managed to maintain the high-level mix of humor and commentary over three decades: "It's like the guy who walks the tightrope over Niagara Falls," Ford said. "Can he keep it up?"

"Doonesbury" would have to be reduced in size to fit on the comics page, and it would be less prominent among the other 41 cartoons there. Moving it would bring howls of protest from longtime followers and, arguably, reduce readership of the editorial pages -- the paper's public square of ideas that needs more, not fewer, participants.

The main argument for putting the two strips under the same roof is that treating two political strips separately is inconsistent. This is the place to trot out the old Emerson aphorism: "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds." There are in comics several other strips with political commentary -- "Candorville," for just one example.

Finally, some might argue that The N&O is showing liberal bias by giving "Doonesbury" marquee treatment in the opinion pages.

Surprise. The N&O is liberal on the editorial page, and seeking to offset a liberal strip with (an inferior) cartoon from the right would be producing a false balance.