If readers were editors of the Toronto Star, by a wide margin you would have nixed that Stargazing nastiness of making fun of a young gap-toothed girl photographed with actor Brie Larson.

In fact, 80 per cent of readers who responded to my 12th annual, “You be the editor” holiday quiz that asks readers to weigh in on which of the questionable words and images published in the Star you would publish, said no to publishing that Stargazing blurb. It was the second largest percentage of “No” answers in the 16-question feature.

And, to be clear, those in the newsroom who were involved in publishing the ill-advised photo caption — that said, “Brie Larson poses for a photograph in London and uses a cool app to show the fan what she will look like when she gets those teeth fixed” — agree those mocking words should never have made it into the Star.

Readers also made clear their strong distaste for a columnist’s reference to Toronto Maple Leaf forward Auston Matthews as “the Leaf stud” and the conclusion of that column stating, “Suck it, Auston.” Overall, 72 per cent of the several thousand readers who weighed in with their editorial judgments on whether to publish or not publish opted for a no-publish call on that one.

Once again, my sincere thank you to every reader who took time over the holiday period to consider the words and images presented in my You be the Editor feature.

As always, all the questions were based on concerns expressed by some readers to the public editor’s office in 2019. These matters are representative of the many thousands of reader questions the public editor’s office fields each year about accuracy, fairness, ethics, taste, editorial style and language usage in the Star.

Of course, not all reader complaints about what is published are ultimately deemed to be sound. Fact is, some are neither reasonable or rational. But most all are given fair consideration with the matter judged against the Star’s journalistic and style standards. It is worth remembering too that journalists themselves don’t always agree on the many journalistic judgments made daily. This quiz is intended to be a wee peek into the kind of discussions that take place constantly in the newsroom.

Overall, results indicate that readers were aligned with newsroom judgments about what to publish in 8 of the 16 scenarios presented — 50 per cent of the time. I agreed with readers in all the cases where they opted for a no-publish judgment, and, most of those where they opted to publish.

The closest call was not surprising, given that the question of “unpublishing” news reports of those charged by police with crimes that are subsequently withdrawn by courts is an ongoing source of discussion within Torstar newsrooms and the news media overall. Readers were almost evenly split on whether to remove (what we refer to as “unpublishing”) the name of a medical technician charged with sexual assault following an incident at a Toronto hospital.

Shortly after the news report of the charges was published, the charges were withdrawn, and the hospital determined no wrongdoing. Overall, 50.03 per cent would have agreed to a request from the man’s lawyer to remove his name from the original news report found easily by googling the man’s name. But, 49.97 of you opted not to unpublish this, in line with the Star’s policy to update such articles with the outcome of the charges but not to remove information from the public publishing record.

The other matter that so evenly split readers was the question of whether the Star should publish a column about women and oral sex that was first published in The Kit, Torstar’s fashion and beauty publication. In all, 50.69 readers nixed publishing the column that offered explicit and graphic guidance for women on how to enjoy oral sex. But, 49.31 per cent of readers were just fine with publishing that column — clearly, those were not among the many readers who had complained about the column’s publication in the Star.

Again, thank you for participating in this feature through these past 12 years. I hope you have found it to be both fun and somewhat illuminating of some of the complexity of journalistic decision-making.

Please see my comments on the results written in bold beneath each question below.

Here are the full results of the 2019 You be the Editor quiz:

Q1. Ahead of Halloween, a Star photographer captures an image of two dogs in costume at a Halloween parade for dogs. Do you publish an image of the two dogs dressed as French Toast and syrup?

Yes: It is a cute Halloween feature photo of two adorable dogs. 65.07%

No: It is a racist photo given the Aunt Jemima syrup logo. 34.93%

I opt for the cuteness call.

Q2. In the days following the federal election, in which speculation about the future of Andrew Scheer’s beleaguered leadership of the Conservative Party dominated Canadian news and commentary, do you publish an editorial cartoon depicting Scheer in a coffin?

Yes: Editorial cartoonists have wide latitude to satirize public issues and skewer public figures. 78.69%

No: This cartoon crosses the taste line in its allusion to Scheer’s death. 21.31%

Having written numerous columns explaining the latitude of editorial cartoonists, I am glad most readers seem to understand this.

Q3. The Kit’s monthly “Sex Talk” advice column, that seeks to answer “I-would-only-whisper-this-to-a-friend sexual health questions” offers explicit and graphic guidance for women on how to enjoy oral sex. Do you publish this column in the Star?

Yes: In seeking to address the “lack of positive media portrayals that can have a very real effect on our oral sex lives” the column provides positive, helpful advice to women about cunnilingus. 49.31%

No: The column’s explicit content is not appropriate for the Star’s wider audience. 50.69%

Having listened to the complaints of many Star readers on this one, I agree, this column was more suited to the audience of The Kit.

Q4. Do you publish this photo of Russian skater Anton Shulepov to illustrate a news article about the International Skating Union issuing an apology after the skater’s Holocaust-themed outfit, featuring elements of uniforms from the Auschwitz Nazi concentration camp, was nominated for a best costume prize, apparently, according to the ISU, mistakenly?

Yes: The image adds to the public understanding of the controversy. 72.40%

No: There is no need to show the distasteful costume that caused offence and controversy. 27.60%

I am with the majority here.

Q5. Do you publish the headline, ‘Gone to the Dogs’ with a news brief about a Texas man who had been missing for months and discovered to have been “eaten, bones and all, by his pack of 18 mixed-breed dogs?”

Yes: It is an accurate summation of the news brief. 14.80%

No: The glib headline is in bad taste. 85.20%

Really, what were they thinking in publishing this?

Q6. Do you publish this description of a violent car crash: “Police said the driver was headed eastbound when his car lost control, striking a pair of light posts ...”

Yes: The sentence reflects what happened when the car crashed. 33.30%

No: Cars do not lose control; drivers of cars lose control. The sentence needs rewording. 66.70%

I am with the majority. The Star is giving considerable thought about how it writes about car crashes and pedestrian deaths to make clear the responsibility of drivers, not vehicles.

Q7. A columnist writing about then 21-year-old Toronto Maple Leaf forward, Auston Matthews, refers to him as “the Leafs stud” and concludes by stating, “Suck it, Auston.” Do you publish this?

Yes: Columnists have wide latitude to express their own views in language and tone that befits their writing style. 27.98%

No: Imagine referring to any female athlete as the “team babe.” 72.02%

Gotta agree with the big majority here.

Q8. A columnist writes of her experience with a raccoon in her Toronto garden: “I stabbed a raccoon. With a fork. He was after me, but to what purpose I cannot say, Your Honour, I don’t think food and I hope not sex,” the columnist wrote. Do you publish this?

Yes: Columnists have wide latitude to express their own perspectives and experiences. 61.32%

No: The column is in bad taste and celebrates cruelty to animals. 38.68%

Tough one for me, given the hundreds of complaints the Star received about this column. Was this satire? Hard to tell and for me, that was its problem.

Q9. An item in the Sunday ‘Stargazing’ feature shows actor Brie Larson with a young fan, an unidentified preteen with a gap in her front teeth. The photo caption reads, “Brie Larson poses for a photograph in London and uses a cool app to show the fan what she will look like when she gets those teeth fixed.” Do you publish this photo caption?

Yes: Stargazing is intended to be satirical and poke fun at celebrities. 20.55%

No: Making fun of the young girl is mean. 79.45%

No, no no, for me too.

Q10. Do you publish this headline, ‘Halifax man who lost his 7 kids in blaze still unaware of tragedy’ with a news report about a Syrian refugee who remained in a coma in a Halifax hospital, unaware his seven children had been killed in a house fire?

Yes: The headline is an accurate summation of the news report. 71.53%

No: Children should not be referred to as “kids,” especially in this context involving tragic loss of life. 28.47%

I would not publish and generally the Star should not refer to “kids” in such contexts.

Q11. After a jury convicts two Toronto brothers of second-degree murder for randomly ambushing and killing 17-year-old Trevor Seraphine, whose horrifying final moments were captured by an apartment lobby surveillance camera, do you publish this photo that was submitted as evidence in the trial?

Yes: The image depicts what happened and was evidence the jury considered in reaching its verdict. 55.78%

No: In publishing this photo the Star amplifies its public exposure and causes further grief for the victim’s family. 44.22%

No question in my mind about publishing this court evidence, as graphic as it is.

Q12. Do you publish this headline, ‘Brightburn is an origin story that should be strangled in its crib’ with a movie review of the film, ‘Brightburn’?

Yes: The headline reflects the negative review of the movie. 41.82%

No: The suggestion of a child being strangled in its crib is inappropriate and offensive. 58.18%

I agree with the no-publish call.

Q13. A columnist writing about Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s interview with American comedian Hasan Minhaj wrote that “Minhaj didn’t interview Trudeau. He took him to the woodshed.” Do you publish this, as well as the headline, ‘He took him to the woodshed’?

Yes: Columnists have wide latitude to express their own views in their own voice and tone. 75.78%

No: “To the woodshed” is an offensive phrase that refers to children being taken to a woodshed to be beaten so that no one could hear them. 24.22%

I agree with the large majority here.

Q14. A news report about growing labour anger in Alberta, reports that “Union bosses have signalled that they’re ready to resist, whether that be in court or on the streets.” Do you publish this sentence as written?

Yes: This is an accurate news report. 54.33%

No: “Union bosses” is an outdated label for union leaders and, according to The Canadian Press Stylebook, is “a term to be avoided.” 45.67%

I go with the style guide on this: avoid this term.

Q15. Following the termination of legendary Hockey Night in Canada commentator Don Cherry after an on-air rant about “you people” not wearing poppies, and shortly after Maxime Bernier’s far-right, People’s Party of Canada (PPC) was shut out in Canada’s federal election, do you publish this editorial cartoon?

Yes: Editorial cartoonists have wide latitude to satirize public issues and skewer public figures. 89.35%

No: There is no connection between Don Cherry and the PPC. 10.65%

I say publish.

Q16. A medical technician is charged with sexual assault following an incident at a Toronto hospital. His name and photo are published in a news report about the charges. Shortly after, the charge was withdrawn at the request of the Crown and the hospital determined there has been no wrongdoing. The Toronto Police Service news release, the source for the article, is taken down from the police website. The man’s lawyer requests that the Star “remove any reference to xxx and his arrest in relation to this charge from your website and other news sources so that it does not continue to harm his reputation.” Do you unpublish this information?

Yes: The charges were withdrawn so it is unfair to this man for this news report to be found online when his name is searched. 50.03%

No: The Star’s policy states that it does not “unpublish” news reports, including reports of criminal charges. It must update such news report to reflect the facts when charges are withdrawn. 49.97%

A tough call, but since the public editor’s job is to uphold Torstar journalistic policy, I would have to say no to this request.