An excellent criticism from a reader:

"I am so disappointed yet again with your reporting. I am so tired of you guys repeating the word F****T in print when people say it. It isn't any different for your reporter to repeat it than it is for Larry to say it in the first place. You don't see others printing the N word when it is used. Two wrongs don't make a right!"

She's referring to today's story about Chiefs running back Larry Johnson's use of a slur used to denigrate gay men.

As it happens, copy chief Amanda Wilkins and I had a conversation about whether that word would be too offensive in the story. My position is the same for all similar cases: I don't think news coverage should shy away from reprinting any language that creates controversy. And, yes, I'd even say that extends to the famously euphemistic "n-word" -- when it's central to the story. In a feature or another context outside straight news reporting, I think it would usually be gratuitous and unncessary.

At the same time, I fully understand and respect those who feel we all know what those words are, and there's no reason to reprint them, even in direct quotes. It's a very good point to ponder.