When the staff at the Daily found out another adult bookstore had opened in Ames, we were surprised. We didn’t realize the community commanded such a demand for that trade, so we wanted to do a story about the stores and find out why another had come to town.

Although thousands of people drive by those stores on a daily basis, we were willing to bet that a number of our readers didn’t know exactly what is sold inside.

We felt this was one of the points of the story, and this could be better communicated with photos of some of the merchandise.

So now, three weeks later, we’ve found out that our little story made its way down to the Statehouse and has raised the eyebrows – and tempers – of a few legislators.

Wednesday I received a letter from Rep. Teresa Garman, R-Ames, stating her disapproval of the photos and her disbelief that we could have judged them appropriate to run in the Iowa State Daily.

In her letter, she states: “I respect your right to print any article about any subject matter you choose, however, I also believe you have a responsibility to your readers, your university, and to your community.”

I’m glad to know that our state representatives respect the Daily’s right to print any article about any subject matter we choose – not respecting that right would be in direct violation of the First Amendment, a part of the federal document Rep. Garman and her fellow legislators were elected to serve.

Contrary to Rep. Garman’s interpretation, I felt we were doing a service to our readers, university and community by publishing the story and photos because of the greater message they communicate – this merchandise is becoming more widely available in the Ames community. If people take issue with that reality, then don’t shoot the messenger for the message.

When I finally spoke with Rep. Garman late Wednesday afternoon, she expressed her disapproval and told me she was having State Attorney General Tom Miller look into the matter.

She also lobbied 10 other legislators to sign her letter.

I have two problems with this.

First, why didn’t Garman contact me or someone within the newspaper when she first was concerned? It is customary for readers to contact a newspaper, whether in the form of a letter to the editor or phone call, when they find something disagreeable. I would have been happy to chat with Rep. Garman before she contacted an attorney and began exploring legal action.

Second, why is this at the top of Garman’s legislative agenda, or on her agenda at all? I’m honored that our newspaper warrants so much of a legislator’s time, but it seems to me that she and her colleagues should be spending their time on the pending budget cuts and explaining to students why they’re losing university programs and departments.

Rep. Garman also told me that, because I chose to run the racy photos, I must have done so happily.

This is a misconception about news judgment that I must clarify. Just because something goes into a newspaper doesn’t mean it’s put there with joy.

Sometimes news is hard to swallow. Today, I wasn’t happy that I had to run a story about an Ames man’s death. Last week, I wasn’t happy about running a photo of an aborted late-term fetus. But both incidents were important to our audience.

The news isn’t meant to please everybody. It’s meant to make people think. And despite the threat of legal action from Rep. Garman, I’m glad to know that something in our newspaper made her think. I just wish she’d target the source, not the story.

A college newspaper is different from other community newspapers because it has a college-student audience. What is appropriate for our community certainly wouldn’t fly in a family newspaper like the Ames Tribune. That’s like comparing apples and oranges.

If our audience were upset by these photos, we would have heard about it before now. I didn’t get one phone call or letter to the editor. The only student complaint I got was anonymously made through ISU Provost Rollin Richmond.

Obscenity in the law is judged by a publication’s audience. According to Miller vs. California (1973), “`Obscene’ means that to the average person, applying contemporary standards, the predominant appeal of the matter, taken as a whole, is to prurient interest (i.e. a shameful or morbid interest in nudity, sex or excretion) which goes substantially beyond customary limits of candor in description or representation of such matters and is matter which is utterly without redeeming social importance.”

There was value to the ISU community in the story and its accompanying photos. Otherwise I wouldn’t have run them.

All technicalities aside, this situation boils down to a newspaper’s right to print information pertinent to its audience. I hope Rep. Garman realizes this before she begins walking the tightrope of censorship of the press.

Carrie Tett is a senior in journalism and mass communication from Ames. She is editor in chief of the Daily, and she’s grateful to the Tribune for its support.