One of the reasons I enjoy being a journalist is that every day brings something new.

The basic tasks associated with producing the newspaper and publishing on the Web are largely the same from day to day, but the developments we cover are widely varied and, often, unpredictable. A newsroom isn't always an exciting place to be, but it's rarely boring.

Our role as public institution that invites citizen scrutiny also provides for a certain level of rollercoaster-like circumstances. Interacting with readers can be enlivening, affirming, discouraging and maddening - sometimes all in one day.

Such was the case Friday.

I was already in a pretty good mood, having found little to complain about in my daily search for errors in that morning's paper. (Editors do that, and that's why they can be a little grouchy at the start of the day.)

As I checked my e-mail after arriving at work, one of the subject lines from an unfamiliar address caught my eye. "Good newspaper," it said.

Some vacationers from Oklahoma passing through Casper had stayed in our fair city and read the Star-Tribune - they apparently make a point of picking up local papers wherever they stop - and decided to share some glowing observations about our news product. Reading their kind words was a great way to start the day in the office.

A few minutes later, a longtime subscriber called to say how much she, her husband and her friends enjoy "The Grouch," our daily front-page wisecracker.

Wow. This really was going to be a wonderful day.

I should have known it wouldn't last.

It didn't take long for another e-mail to reach my inbox. The subject line? "SHAME ON YOU."

I won't go into the details of the e-mail, other than to say that it was from a reader upset about how something we published had caused pain for a grieving family (the writer asked that I not publicize his concern). The message was stinging, yet civil, and it caused considerable personal introspection and some internal discussion. I ended up e-mailing back in defense of what we had published, but I took no joy in doing so.

The experience reminded me that working at a newspaper isn't supposed to be fun and games. The items we publish sometimes bring smiles, but perhaps just as often grimaces, and even tears.

Knowing we can have that effect is humbling, and gratifying. It's one of the reasons we do what we do.

As I wrote last week, we welcome reader opinions on public issues - and those sometimes include our decisions to publish certain items on the news and opinion pages. Most of the time, we leave it to readers to decide if those criticisms are valid. Every once in a while, a criticism warrants a response.

Early last week, a letter to the editor slammed us for publishing a large photo on our front page of a man charged with murder, and of identifying the suspect as a homeless man and the victim as a former Marine. The letter also criticized the naming of a 16-year-old charged with aiding and abetting in the killing.

The letter writer concluded that our report had amounted to "exploitative, sensationalistic journalism which negligibly benefits the reader…"

I strongly disagree. And I think most readers agree with me.

First of all, when someone is charged with murder, it is of great interest to the community. We regularly publish large photographs of people charged with that and other serious crimes, and we provide as many details as we can about the allegations and the people involved - never presuming that anyone is guilty until there's a conviction. That's what we did in this case.

As for publishing the name of the teenage suspect: We always do that when the juvenile is charged as an adult, as is the case here. Only the identities of youths charged in juvenile court are afforded protection under the law, and so we aren't able to publish them.

Do you have a question or a comment for Editor Chad Baldwin? You can call him at 266-0545, or send e-mail to chad.baldwin@trib.com.