Romenesko reader Bob Patterson has been reminding me about National Columnists’ Day for nearly a decade now. He did it again last night and sent me his link to this year’s NCD column.

It is about a rascal who was raised in Berkeley and became a columnist who was a friend and arch rival of Herb Caen. He lived in Berkeley about a hundred years ago. He is a name sake because he was named Bob Patterson.

Of course, the National Society of Newspaper Columnists takes note of this day, too.

The Salt Lake Tribune’s Robert Kirby tells his readers how reporters differ from columnists:

Reporters are hard-working news professionals with a keen interest in keeping the public informed.

Columnists are different. We’re more like Hollywood actors or circus freaks, meaning that someone found a way to profit from whatever is seriously wrong with us. Depending on the columnist, it could be (and often is) a lot.

Aaron Barnhart

Kansas City Star TV critic Aaron Barnhart (@TVBarn) hasn’t tweeted since early December. His last Star column was published on Christmas Day, a year-in-review piece. It appears he hasn’t been on Facebook since January.

What happened to him?

The Star has yet to tell readers.

“It could be health issues,” says a longtime TV blogger. “But why all the mystery and secrecy?”

“His readers are worried for him,” adds former Dallas Morning News writer and editor Joyce Saenz Harris.

Earlier this month, Kansas City blogger and Star “watchdog” John Landsberg asked about Barnhart’s whereabouts in a post. He noted:

The Star, which normally leaks like a sieve with layoffs and personnel changes, is very close-mouthed about the veteran columnist. Rumors about serious health issues abound.

I’m told that Barnhart’s absence is in fact related to his health. The journalist has previously discussed his battle with leukemia in a Broadcasting & Cable interview headlined “Getting Better.” In 2010, he reviewed “The Big C” — the Showtime series about a woman battling cancer — and called it “an important show … that’s not necessarily a great show.” At the end of the review, readers were invited to “read how TV critic Aaron Barnhart, also a cancer survivor, reacted to “The Big C” and discuss the show on his blog, TVBarn.com.”

Landsberg tells me that reaction to his Barnhart column “has been mixed” and that “some people think it is a fair question to ask about a prominent columnist who simply virtually disappears for several months. Others consider it a private matter.”

He writes in his email:

I personally think that readers deserve an explanation when a high-profile journalist or columnist is no longer in the newspaper. They are public figures and major influencers and ones like Barnhart have a national following. From a customer’s standpoint, many people buy the newspaper to read columns and stories by their favorite writers, and I believe readers deserve an explanation when that person suddenly is gone.

If it is a medical issue the Star is likely prohibited from saying anything because of HIPAA rules. However, that doesn’t preclude the paper from noting something like “Aaron Barnhart’s column is on hiatus” or some such note.

I asked Star public editor Derek Donovan about the way his newspaper has handled Barnhart’s disappearance from its pages. He writes:

A newspaper company is, of course, a public trust. Its journalists are public figures, and readers come to feel as if they know them. That’s particularly true with columnists. And the industry operates a lot more transparently than just about any other I can think of.

But a newspaper company is also a private business, with all the legal responsibilities to its workers that any other employer must follow. As long there hasn’t been a violation of journalistic ethics, the conditions of a journalist’s employment are a private matter. The employee may choose to divulge more, but the newspaper company can’t — and shouldn’t.

* Mystery of Star’s Barnhart continues

MLive.com

UPDATE: MLive.com’s Jen Eyer tweets: “We’re happy to discuss policy, just not on story threads, out of courtesy to other readers.”

Mary Schmich

The Chicago Tribune’s Mary Schmich won the Pulitzer for commentary this week, and her column today is about that. Well, in a way it is. She’s doesn’t mention Pulitzer even once, but her piece — at least online — has some Pulitzer celebration photos. She tells readers that….

Twenty years ago this week, I drove into Chicago in a used silver Dodge Colt, bought cheap from one of my brothers, to start a new job.

The job was writing a column for the Chicago Tribune, a remarkable opportunity that I had accepted with awe and a pinch of apprehension. About the time I hit the Kennedy Expressway, my apprehension swelled into terror.

After 20 years in the Windy City, Schmich still hears from readers who claim she can’t understand Chicago because she wasn’t born and raised here.

They’re not entirely wrong. There are things you will never know about a place unless you sprang from its soil.

But I understand and love this city in a way I couldn’t have imagined this week in April 20 years ago, and I understand it better because people have let me tell their stories. To the people who have shared their stories, and to everyone who has read them:

Thank you, for the ongoing adventure and privilege of knowing Chicago.

* Thank you, Chicagoans, for letting me tell your stories