That's okay. I didn't expect it and, in fact, it clearly illustrates the very point that I was trying to make. Below is the full text of the message that I would have brought to the Millinocket Town Council if I hadn't been cut off by Councilor Nelson, who never seems to mind when his cronies go over the allotted time:

My name is Ken Anderson. I am a citizen of the town of Millinocket, but I am addressing you tonight as the publisher of the Magic City Morning Star, an online news and opinion site that has been a frequent topic of discussion from this bench over the past several months.

I'll try to restrict my comments to responding to those that have been made by member of this council in reference to the Magic City Morning Star, and without getting into any specific or peripheral discussions.

You need to understand that the Morning Star is not like the other newspapers that we have in this area. When I say this, I don't mean to disparage any of the print papers, but simply to point out that there are differences.

First of all, we're online only. Not one tree has given its life in the publication of the Magic City Morning Star. I would think that some members of the council would be happy about that.

Secondly, we're not trying to be just an online version of anything that you can read in print on Mondays or Tuesdays.

When I began publishing the Morning Star, we already had a local print weekly. Now we have two, and there's no need for three media outlets that do essentially the same thing.

Thirdly, we don't have a paid reporting staff. For that reason, our news section is limited. This an area I'd like to build up in the months and years to come but, for now, we do what we can.

Fourth, we don't ask our writers to pretend to have no opinions of their own. I don't believe that any newspaper is truly objective, and we like to think that we're simply being honest about it.

Lastly - but that doesn't mean I'm going to stop here - our policies may differ from that of the other local media outlets, just as they may differ in some ways one from the other.

Getting to what I wanted to talk about tonight, we have most recently been criticized here over our policy of publishing anonymous letters to the editor, and I have to ask, "Just what business is this of the town council?"

Do you realize that throughout most of the history of this nation, up until the late 1970s or 80s, it was commonplace for mainstream newspapers to publish both letters and opinion columns anonymously, or under pseudonyms?

Newspaper reporters still routinely use anonymous sources in news stories.

As it is, this trend away from publishing unattributed letters may well be shortlived.

In 1991, the Columbia Journalism Review published an article that spoke of a small but growing number of dailies and weeklies that have decided to open up their editorial pages to readers who have opinions to offer, but would rather not have their name or addresses attached to them.

In that article, the editor of a daily newspaper with a circulation of 17,000 is quoted as saying that policies requiring letter writers to identify themselves "frightens people away."

A study conducted by the Newspaper Research Journal in the fall of 2004 found that newspaper policies requiring attribution have a "chilling effect on letters submissions."

Policies that do not allow for anonymity had a particularly chilling effect on those who believed themselves to be vulnerable, including women and those who had reason to believe that attribution might adversely effect their jobs or business.

The 2004 study concluded that its findings cast doubt upon the reasons editors sometimes give to justify their "must sign" policies - that somehow people who don't want to sign their names are crackpots or are unworthy of having their opinions published, or that opinions in such letters are of inherently lower value than opinions in signed letters.

To make such claims in light of the evidence, the authors say, is both unwise and unfair, and newspapers might do well to rethink their policies.

It disturbs me that I am in a position to have to make this argument here, in front of the council, because this is not an argument that should have to be made here. It is a policy decision, based on the tradition of newspapers in America, and there is evidence that it is a sound policy.

Regardless, it is mine to make, not yours.

Certainly, I'm not arguing that other newspapers should feel obligated to do the same thing. I am sure that they can come up with equally compelling reasons for setting another policy, and that is certainly their right.

Once again, there is little reason for three local media outlets to be doing the same thing.

If, as the 2004 study suggests, policies prohibiting anonymity in the press have a chilling effect on a certain segment of the population, then the Magic City Morning Star will be here for them.

We will not knowingly publish anything that we know to be false; but, to use an example that came up here during the last meeting of the council, I don't know whether or not any particular councilor drinks on the job. And to be honest, I don't really care.

Statements made by the authors of letters to the editor, whether attributed or not, are their own, and not mine.

As readers, you shouldn't believe everything you read. This is true whether it has been published in the Magic City Morning Star, the Bangor Daily, or any of the local print weeklies.

I encourage you to use your powers of discernment.

And if you don't believe that something published under a pseudonym is credible, then feel free to give it less weight than you would something that is attributed. But when you berate the Magic City Morning Star from the council bench, and when you make threats from your council seat, you are trying to intimidate the press, and this is an abuse of power.

There is something called the 1st Amendment that might come into play here, however badly it has been eroded.

Over the years that I have sat here at council meetings, or watched them on tape, the council has taken - not only the Morning Star - but another of our print weeklies to task for things that have been published which some of you took issue with.

I understand that this has worked for you in the past, but I am asking you now to please not continue to use the power of your office to intimidate, manipulate, and to ultimately control the press.

We're not perfect. If we have published anything that can be verified as being either false or misleading, we'll correct it if we can, but we're not going to ask our contributors to change their opinions just because we're afraid you won't like them. And we're not so in awe of your position of authority that we're going to refuse to publish something just because one or more of you don't like it.

The other media outlets, of course, are free to establish their own policies.

Ours is a policy of inclusion. We don't have to agree with you in order to publish your opinion column or your letter to the editor. In fact, we have regular contributors with whom I disagree with more often than not.

If any of you would like to write a regular column for the Morning Star, we'll publish it without comment. If MAGIC would like to have a regular column, we would happily publish it, and I'll even promise to try really hard to keep myself from filing it under fiction or fantasy.

If RESTORE were to send me a column, I'd publish it.

To conclude my remarks, I'd like to say that if you think that the Magic City Morning Star is unfair, that it is one-sided, or that it needs balance, then - rather than threatening us or complaining about us from your council seat - take a positive approach and help us to provide that balance by participating. We're quite willing to publish your side if you are willing to give it to us. It might take a little bit of work on your part, but I'm sure you'll accomplish a lot more through participation than you will through threats and intimidation. I extend this invitation to the general public as well.

Our readership extends far beyond the Katahdin region, throughout Maine and the United States, even to many other parts of the world.

Be a part of it. Don't stand on the sidelines and complain. We hear this, or something similar, from the MAGIC group a lot, and I'll send it back to you for consideration.

Those who write for the Morning Star are contributing. You might take issue with our contributions, but in a free society that would be okay. It doesn't seem to be okay in Millinocket, and that concerns me.

We are told that we should celebrate diversity. It's in the vision statement that we paid $60,000 for not so long ago.

Let me suggest to you that diversity is about more than skin color and sexual orientation. It's about tolerating ideas and beliefs that are not your own, and which may not help to enrich you financially.

I know that it's more comfortable for you when everyone is singing the same song - your song. But that's not Millinocket, or any community that I'd want to live in.

To achieve that goal here, you have found that you have to shut people up who might prefer to sing another song. Either that, or convince them that they can't sing.

This is what I object to.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.