Last week, the Iowa State Daily published a partial transcript of former basketball player Kenny Pratt’s exchange with Ames police while he was in a holding cell after an arrest for drunken driving and assault charges.

The verbatim exchange was chock full of nasty language, including lots of swear words and gender-demeaning terms. It was, by all accounts, not very nice, yet the Daily elected to publish the exchange anyway. It’s a decision that has prompted lots of letters and phone calls — mostly complaints.

“I was shocked. I can’t believe you would print that,” goes the typical complainant.

The concerns are valid, and I’m glad readers are taking the time to take a stand. Feedback, even negative feedback, is healthy.

In this case, however, I disagree. Given a number of factors, I stand by the Daily’s decision to publish Pratt’s remarks, as detailed in a video tape released by the Iowa Department of Transportation.

Here’s why:

* Audience is likely the most important news-determining factor for any paper. The Daily’s primary audience is Iowa State students. Iowa State students swear. Iowa State students swear, under some circumstances, a lot. In publishing Pratt’s remarks, I didn’t think we were subjecting students to any language that most haven’t heard before. Yes, the language was foul, demeaning and in some respects disgusting, but it is nevertheless language with which students are familiar.

The decision may have been different if the Daily’s audience was similar, for example, to The Daily Tribune’s, The Des Moines Register’s or another professional media publication. But a targeted audience of students is wholly different than a targeted family or business audience.

* I have never been one to think that hiding information from people does much good. The fact is that Pratt said these nasty things. Was he justified in doing so? I don’t know, and it doesn’t much matter. The words were undeniably his. Skewing, or even toning down, Pratt’s words doesn’t do anyone justice.

* One letter was critical of the Daily “invading Pratt’s privacy.” This, I think, is an easy one. Pratt should not have had an expectation of privacy in a police department holding cell. The police station, by its very nature, is a public place and police officers are public officials. What’s more, the tape was presented at an open DOT hearing. Anything presented in an “open court” format is fair game.

* Other callers were critical of the timing of the article. Here’s where I’m sympathetic. The tape would have been more newsworthy had we run it closer to its release on April 11. As a simple matter of logistics and reporting, we obviously didn’t do that. I do, however, still think the tape was newsworthy on Wednesday.

Throughout the ordeal, Pratt and his lawyer claimed that Pratt was mistreated by Ames police. Because of the ongoing investigation, there was little by way of police response to those allegations. The tape is a response. I have no idea whether it completely disproves the mistreatment claims, but it does clearly show an out-of-control Pratt, something police have stressed.

* The next question goes something like this: “OK Mr. Daily Editor, even if all that’s true, why didn’t you use those little dashes — you know, the sh— things — instead of the actual words.”

That’s a good question. It’s a policy of a lot of newspapers to indeed do just that. It is not, however, the Daily’s policy because I don’t think it does any good.

The intent, whether you use the dashes or print the whole word, is the same. You’re trying to let readers know that the word was uttered. Why is a word somehow less offensive because a couple of dashes represent a couple of letters? I contend it isn’t.

That being said, I thank those avid and occasional readers who offered feedback. Certainly a newspaper cannot reasonably expect all of its decisions to be popular ones. Accordingly, this decision wasn’t among the most popular, but I think the healthy debate that’s stemmed from it is good for the Daily and good for its larger public.

Chris Miller is a senior in journalism and mass communication from Marshalltown. He is editor in chief of the Daily.