WCP has the (mis)fortune of captivating my precious trolling time. BTW, are you not satisfied with my answer to your question, "Why I read City Paper?"

Their poll of 121 respondants, still has the majority 39% in support of the cover. Some like Brandon could say that Fox viewers are pretty numb to this type of obscenity anyway with Family Guy, American Dad, Temptation Island, etc.

If a City Paper cover trumpeted that Eleanor Holmes-Norton put a staffer out because they wouldn't suck her dick, I don't think I'd be so much offended as stunned. Then confused. Then baffled. (Then a little bit weirdly aroused. But mostly stunned, confused, and baffled.)

The reason that you won't hear examples of kids reading it is that school is not in session. Albeit, Washington City Paper is picked up at many area libraries (it is a periodical), 2nd Graders alike may have heard this vulgar language in passing, but to read it means something entirely different. Parents can dispute spoken words or verbal commentary, admonishing a child for using that language. However, disputing the printed word, is something of a different animal. Almost like reading forbidden books. A kid may think, "If they printed it, it must be true!" Likewise, questions like "Daddy, "What is a d*ck? Why would you suck it? Why would someone be mad and put someone out because of it?" come to mind.

Honestly, even if you didn't want to take the kid route in the complaints, know that hat you put on the front page in part is actually less of a function of marketing a story and more catering to the attention deficit crowd. In that 2~5 seconds you've got someone's attention, there is a major effort to keep them there.

As for the other covers, they had their macabre and lewdness about them. The "Screw U" cover and artwork was stradling the lines of indecency, but was offensive mainly to folks in the Brentwood/Brookland area and other Catholics who may have defied the The Catholic Standard and read City Paper.

The Cop-Killings were pretty gruesome, but at least in a humanity sense, you showed photos of the victims while they were alive. Had you shown a photo of the scene, blood and all, WCP would've been rightfully accused of exploiting the victims for a story. 'In the Back of the Head' was sensational because the phrase denotes a cold-blooded execution, not that the child was running away and got shot.

I don't know Andrew. I hope your kids understand the virtues of journalism so that they don't commit their father's (and father's co-worker's) mistakes. Nobody is perfect, but as you know how subjective this business is, the importing thing is the integrity of the STORY. All else is extra.