The mystery of what was so “offensive” about last Friday’s Doonesbury seems to be solved. Daily Cartoonist reader Jimmy Delach noted in the comments that The Chicago Tribune has told its readers that they pulled the comic because it “broke from its satirical mission in order to deliver a direct fundraising appeal for a specific charity that the author favors. The Tribune’s editorial practices do not allow individuals to promote their self-interests.”
Michael Cavna got a response from Garry Trudeau who pointed out contradictory actions by the paper such as that it pulled Friday’s strip (which promoted the charity that he has no affiliation with) yet let earlier strips run that did have a self-interest.
Get a life people, it’s a comic strip.
Get a name, troll.
Get a clue Clint, its called a contract and Trudeau broke the terms.
Get a grip Gimp, it’s a comment section on the internet.
Get a room commenters, your comment thread was funner to read than the article.
Why is this unfunny, left winged crap “comic strip” still in papers? My local rag displays it in the editorial section, so you know what kind of panel this is! Enough already!
Isn’t there some clause in Trudeau’s contract that requires his strips to be funny? I think he’s been in breach for over 20 years.
This strip has never ever once made me laugh.
Don’t worry, Pepe. The strip is not for you, it works a lot better for intelligent folks who are aware of what is going on beyond their kitchen counter. Go make a sammich, baby…
Luna…does it make you feel intelligent to think that? Because it comes of more self-righteous than intelligent. I guess if you keep telling yourself, “I’m intelligent and aware”, you’ll one day think you are. Hopefully it will hit you before long, that you’re neither.
Poor persecuted Garrrrrry. Poor persecuted 1% Garrrrry with his miserable upper crust life. Life’s a bitch Gare, get over it. Do your charity in secret anyway.
Wow, this really brought out the Doonesbury haters in full force. Surprised to find such a thick crowd of them here as opposed to, say, FreeRepublic.