A reader, counting himself among the &#8220;old ink-stained wretches&#8221; who have worked in journalism, noted that a story a few weeks ago about Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich didn&#8217;t mention up high that he is a Democrat.</p><p>Recalling his days in the biz, the reader wrote: &#8220;There were specific requirements on how to identify the party affiliations of elected officials. Politicians were supposed to be identified by party as soon as possible, usually in the lede sentence.&#8221;</p><p>(&#8220;Lede&#8221; is journalism jargon for the first few lines of a story. It&#8217;s not &#8220;lead&#8221; to distinguish it from the metal of the same spelling, which was used in the days of hot-type printing.)</p><p>He suggests a rote system of always identifying politicians with an &#8220;R&#8221; or &#8220;D&#8221; and state in parentheses, preferably upon first mention.</p><p>Sure, that would be formulaic &#8212; but I think it&#8217;s a very good idea that could go a long way to allay readers&#8217; concerns that <em>The Kansas City Star </em>intentionally and strategically omits or plays up parties to tilt readers&#8217; perceptions.</p><p>Political party ID is just one among many small but meaningful details that I know people pay attention to closely. Journalists are sometimes so deeply involved in a topic that I think they just forget on occasion that not everybody remembers Sen. Sam Brownback is a Republican, or that Democrats control the House.</p><p>This isn&#8217;t a new problem. With just a quick perusal of microfilm, I found lots of examples where <em>The Star </em>didn&#8217;t mention party when covering political scandals. A series of stories in late 1920 and early &#8217;21 about alleged voter fraud involving Missouri state Sen. Thomas J. Lysaght didn&#8217;t mention his party. He was a Democrat, by the way, and charges were eventually dismissed.</p><p>Those significant little bits of information are hardly relegated to the world of politics alone. &#8220;Would it be too much trouble for you folks to mention if an area referenced in Kansas City is either in Kansas or Missouri?&#8221; wrote Kevin J. Bradshaw last Friday. &#8220;You have to read the body of most articles to figure out where they are.&#8221;</p><p>A caller the same day complimented details in coverage of the sad story of a mother who allegedly killed her daughter in a murder-suicide in the Blue River. &#8220;You got it right, because a lot of other people were saying it was in the Little Blue River,&#8221; he said.</p><p>One problem I&#8217;ve identified several times over the years: <em>The Star </em>occasionally fails to provide attribution when describing the many crimes and accidents that fill the &#8220;Public Safety&#8221; column in the Local section. Obviously, reporters are rarely on the scene, so most of the information comes from police reports &#8212; though the briefs don&#8217;t always say so explicitly.</p><p>I know why a quick &#8220;police said&#8221; is sometimes trimmed. Space is tight, especially when seven or eight items are vying for a spot. But attribution is one of the bedrock principles of reporting, and it shouldn&#8217;t fall prey to the editor&#8217;s scissor.