Editorial board can be a foe of good writing: we have to stop reflecting our communities and start leading them.

I love getting calls from people who try to scold me by saying: "That was just a very biased editorial. That was just so very biased.... "

I listen to them, and, for the most part, hold my tongue. After all, they're customers. But I want so badly to blurt out: "THANK YOU! The problem with editorial writing in this country is that so many damn editorials are un-biased!"

I have a theory on why editorial readership in this country isn't as high as it should be. It's the editorial board.

I've worked for an editorial board before. Now I work without one. And I think I've figured out why newspapers with editorial boards have such boring editorial columns: Editorials boards are interested in consensus, not good writing.

After all, editors don't scan the newsroom for the most uninteresting writer, then think: "Yeah, he'd be good on the editorial page!" Quite the contrary.

But committees kill good writing. That may be the only real and consistent contribution of the editorial board in America: to make sure no editorial offends, or says anything passionately about any subject.

Think about it. Your publisher, a dyed-in-the-wool conservative, may sit on the board. Also, let's throw in the editor who's--in P.J. O'Rourke's words--a "dyed-in-the-hair-shirt liberal." In between, you have the editorial page editor, a newsroom rep, an ME or three, and a couple of writers, all of whom have different and varying opinions on everything from abortion to gun control. I even worked in an outfit that had three community representatives on the board. And, of course, the board had to be capital-D Diverse. Which meant I had to shuffle representatives based on their gender, their race, their age, etc.

Whew!

Now try to get everybody in that room to agree on an editorial about, say, homosexual marriage. Or the war in Iraq. Or what to have for lunch.

How in the world are you supposed to come up with an aggressive, strong opinion if you have to tiptoe around so many people with different opinions?

It's almost impossible. That's why editorials use these ungodly four words: "On the one hand.... " And they're almost always followed by more sacrilege: "But on the other hand.... "

Milksop. That's what editorials have become in the age of the editorial board.

Those who worship at the foot of capital-D Diversity would have arguments for the editorial board:

Shouldn't we reflect the community?

To which I'd say: Hell, no!

Newspapers in the South in the 1860s, and even the 1960s, reflected their communities all right. Were they right in their stands on civil rights?

If the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette reflected its community today, we'd be a lot more interested in Friday night football than in improving education in this state. If the papers in northeastern Louisiana (where I started my career in 1991) reflected their communities, they would've endorsed David Duke in his campaign for governor that year. If newspapers in this nation reflected their communities, they'd be campaigning for more fried catfish buffets (health, shmealth!), fewer safeguards for prisoners (put 'em on an island and give 'em some seeds!), and cutting gubment spending by half(close the Ed-you-cay-shun Department!).

Reflect our communities? Let's not. Let's lead our communities instead.

What have you got against diversity?

Nothing. If my time in Gannett taught me anything, it's that diversity on a newspaper's news pages is important. It's the right thing to do, and it's good for business. Have a diverse number of people and ideas on the front page. And be diverse on the business page. And be diverse on the sports page. Even have a diverse group of columnists and letter writers on the editorial page itself.

But in the editorial column, it's time to forget about diversity of ideas for a minute, and take a line. It's ironic that the very place in the newspaper that's supposed to commit opinion so rarely does, because the writer is afraid of offending one of the members of his board.

How do you work without an editorial board?

The publisher of the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, Walter Hussman, leans starboard on most issues. He's interested in improving education in Arkansas. And he wants good writing on the page.

So he hired an editorial page editor, Paul Greenberg, who leans starboard on most issues, is interested in improving education in Arkansas, and wants good writing on the page.

Paul in turn hires editorial writers who think along those lines. We hardly ever have meetings. Paul would rather us spend our time writing, and thinking about writing. And if the publisher decides against an editorial, into the trash it goes, and we start over with another idea. After all, it's his paper.

It's simple. The writers here have to please one publisher and one editor. Not a board of a dozen or so people with diverse views on the world, politics, and the A-Rod trade.

So you're afraid of opposing views?

Try being the only statewide newspaper, with a conservative editorial writing staff, in the home state of Bill Clinton. Trust me, we publish opposing views all the time in our letters section, in our guest column section, in our nationally syndicated column section. We don't mind a good argument at ten paces. But when it comes to the editorial column itself, it's time to say something, to say right is right and wrong is wrong. Think about popular columnists: Dowd, Will, Krauthammer, Goodman, Coulter, Mathis. Think they have a group of people sitting around a table telling them what opinions to have that day?

That's why people read columnists, but not editorials.

What if my publisher wants an editorial board? What if he's used to it? What if corporate requires it? What if he wants to hide behind it on tough issues? What if I can't disband the board for any number of reasons?

Then I'd suggest you ask to be reassigned to sports, where American newspapers still allow good writing.

Dante had a special place just outside hell for people who took no decisive actions in their lives, who lived without blame or praise. I say let's send the editorial board there.

David Barham is an editorial writer for the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette. E-mail [e-mail]