While I understand the comments about the format, I personally find most “blogs” to be infuriatingly cluttered and user unfriendly, but I am an old guy struggling to keep up in a new age. As an old-line newspaper guy (I was a daily reporter from 1985-1996), I hope the comment that the leads are such that readers “aren’t sure what the rest of the content of the article will be” is wrong. Indeed, they are written and edited so that readers get the gist of the story (the news hook, to use journalistic parlance) and, hopefully, will want to know more.

As for profanity, we use it sparingly, and only when appropriate. The number of people I’ve met in my 58 years on Earth who don’t use this type of language is almost zero, so I do not accept that writing the way people talk is “less professional.” If cursing was a hallmark of our publication, I would agree that it was unprofessional. When used to make legitimate points, even in headlines, I submit it is honest journalism.

I will say that we are irreverent and impudent by design and intent. Most if not all of our writers believe that those who have corrupted our government and are destroying our culture, economy and environment for personal profit are not worthy of respect. And we don’t give it to them. If you want sanitized, he-said/she-said BS, the Alternative is not for you.

Finally, I know that some people think “left” when they read opinions like ours, but I don’t buy it. I’ve been in this business since the early 1980s, espousing effectively the same message in multiple formats and media, and I never cease to be amazed at the positive feedback I get from across the political spectrum. If you must label The Bloomington Alternative, call us radicals. I’ll wear that label with pride.

One more thing, the only people on our Web site who write under pseudonyms are those who criticize us.