Muggs archive

▼

Friday, April 20, 2007

Columns: A question of balance

The Courier prides itself in the political balance it displays on the editorial page. We report, you decide.

Today we have a love-letter to a wannabe Presidential candidate from religio-fascist nutbar Cal Thomas, originally titled "Run, Fred, Run," carried verbatim at 701 words.

Also today we have a view from Washington Post columnist Eugene Robinson on the credibility or lack thereof of some of our public servants, originally titled "Are They Serious?," minus 417 of its 766 words. Now, as a topic this is a pretty easy target, but the Courier's elisions eviscerate Robinson's arguments and obscure his craft.

I'm sure these cuts were made to fit the available space, no question. But why cut one by more than half and the other by not one word?

Given the proper treatment of yesterday's column by Robinson, I'm beginning to think that at least in some cases this frequent abuse of syndicated columns is somewhat less political than it seems. Rather, the Courier page editor thinks of non-rightwing columns as filler, and treats them as such.
at

3 comments:

  1. leftturnclydeApril 20, 2007 at 8:37 PM

    Ya know John, or Tim or whoever on the editorial staff is lurking out there We notice when you do this kinda crap .cut it out...its worse than censorship.in fact open refusal to print the columns at all would actually be a more open and honest statement of the couriers political stance than this nod and a wink sly approach which allows you to water down one side and bolster the other.
    Let your readers decide for themselves or as I've been sayin ..if It wont fit dont print !

    ReplyDelete
  2. coyoteradiotheaterApril 20, 2007 at 9:41 PM

    ". . . religio-fascist nutbar Cal Thomas."

    Pure genius, Steven.

    I bow before your righteous venom.

    ReplyDelete
  3. AnonymousApril 22, 2007 at 1:49 AM

    I'm with clyde on this one. I've said it before, I will say it again:

    I would much rather deal with an acknowledged bias than a claim of objectivity despite the evidence.

    ReplyDelete

I encourage you to share your own views and experience with me and other readers. How you do that matters, and I'm committed to maintaining a place where readers and commenters can feel safe from adolescent BS. So here's the deal:

There are two kinds of anonymous comments: those by people who have a genuine fear of revenge from the dark side, and those from darksiders just hiding to avoid accountability. You may post comments anonymously, but I reserve the right to treat anonymous comments as found items that belong to me and do with them as I see fit.

If, on the other hand, you're willing to stand by your convictions and post under your own name or a regular handle, your comments belong to you, and I'll edit them only on egregious violations of respect for others.

If this doesn't work for you, I'm sure you'll be happier somewhere else.