Here and across much of the digital universe, the monster story last week was the decision by UC Davis police to spew pepper spray into the faces of seated students and other protesters.

Revulsion over the police action washed over the campus, and then quickly transcended into a battle over language.

UC Davis Chancellor Linda P.B. Katehi initially said she was "saddened" by what happened. But that wasn't strong enough. So by Sunday she had to "take full responsibility" and UC President Mark Yudof issued a statement saying he was "appalled by images of University of California students being doused with pepper spray and jabbed with police batons on our campuses."

Yudof's statement seemed bold at first, but critics quickly began to parse it. Was Yudof only appalled by the "images" he saw – video images that created a public relations disaster for the university? Or was he appalled by the police action itself, but couldn't bring himself to say it?

The media's choice of words also came under attack. Zack Whittaker, a British writer who authors the iGeneration blog, faulted reporters for using the word "incident' in referring to the pepper-spraying, which he said seemed to trivialize it. In his blog post, he used the term "attack."

Body language soon became an issue. The image of Lt. John Pike with his pepper spray quickly went viral – cropped into thousands of pieces of famous art – and Pike's casual demeanor was part of the reason.

"This was not a cop who was threatened," wrote Scott Herbold, a columnist for the San Jose Mercury News. "He didn't spray in anger, or desperation, but in disdain. And his sheer coolness – the stride, the relaxed angle of his arm – reveals the fundamental unfairness of the moment."

In an editorial Monday, The Bee became the first major California newspaper to decry the police action and question claims by UC Davis' police chief that her officers had little choice but to use pepper spray. Yet the editorial had a guarded tone, partly because of unanswered questions about Katehi's role. We also had concerns we might inflame the situation at UC Davis, where a demonstration was planned that day.

Several people criticized us – on Facebook and elsewhere – for not be harder in that first editorial.

"The Bee needs to take a tougher line," one commenter said. "The videos clearly show both the UC Davis and police at UC Berkeley brutally attacked peaceful student and faculty protesters. This is what a police state looks like."

Words have power, and on our letters page, readers used some pretty powerful ones in reaction. One compared the UC Davis police to the "modern-day version of the cops of 1965 Selma, Alabama." Others said the students got what was coming to them.

We disagreed with both views but printed them so readers could see the range of opinions out there. That said, we decided not to publish some letters that seemed completely divorced from reality, such as one that opined that "what happened at UCD is every bit as disgusting as what happened at Penn State."

In a digital world, news travels faster than ever and citizens don't have to wait for reporters to ensure an event gets coverage. The reason Pike's image will now live in infamy is because so many at UC Davis on Nov. 18 were carrying cellphone and video cameras, as multiple videos of the pepper-spraying demonstrate.

This is something to celebrate, as Whittaker does on his iGeneration blog. "Instead of being reliant on information given to the public through media channels, we are now able to instigate our own broadcasts. Immediately connected to a global audience, two YouTube videos alone are prime examples of how witness reports to scenarios like this are no longer chained to censorship or secrecy."

Empowered by the technology of an Internet age, citizen journalism has undoubtedly changed the playing field of news gathering and the ability of authorities to oppress dissent. We've seen that in Egypt and other Arab countries, and we may soon see it more in China.

But video images alone can be misleading, as can poorly drawn historical comparisons. In his blog, Whittaker mentions UC Davis in the same breath as Kent State, where National Guardsmen shot and killed four students and wounded nine others during a protest in 1970.

Are the two tragedies really comparable? No, but with emotions stirred, some attempted to make that link.

Part of our jobs as journalists – the distrusted MSM, or mainstream media – is to provide context and perspective in a world where blogs, YouTube and Twitter have supercharged the news cycle. There are now zillions of places you can go to find information, but far too few that attempt to sort out what it all means.

Judging by the letters we are receiving, an increasing number of readers think the UC Davis story has gotten too much attention. I tend to agree, but see it differently than many. This is fundamentally a story about mistreatment of students and protesters. But it is more than that. The storyline has changed. It's now about a chancellor fighting for her job at an institution that is crucial to this region and state.

We'll continue to comment and interact with you on that story, and we'll try to pick our words carefully. We'll also be watching to see if other players in this drama – UC administrators, lawmakers, faculty leaders and protesters – take similar care.

Tale of two Morains

Commenting on the UC Davis furor was challenging enough last week. But we faced an extra challenge: Our senior editor and columnist Dan Morain is married to Claudia Morain, news service director and chief spokeswoman for UC Davis.

As you might expect, Dan was recused from all deliberations about what the editorial board decided to say about the UC Davis police action, and had no role in selection and editing of letters, cartoons and other commentary on the matter. Those rules have applied to Dan on previous issues pertaining to the UC system and will remain so in the future.

© Copyright The Sacramento Bee. All rights reserved.