The Metro does the same thing, but I have no problem with it. While I many not agree with some letters, it is their duty to print the people's ideas in the opinion section be it whether they are intelligent or completely idiotic. I don't read the opinion section for facts or news. I read the opinion section to challenge my ideals and ultimately they are either strengthened (by the opposition's idiotic responses) or shifted (by the opposition's enlightening responses).
...that it is a newspaper's duty to print letters that contain factual errors. Crazy opinions are one thing; things that are objectively, unequivocally false are another thing altogether. They should no more print a letter containing falsehoods then they should print an article or op/ed column containing falsehoods.
Furthermore, they frequently print letters that are so outrageous that a response is really required, and then fail to print any such response. And I don't for certain that it's not just that no one bothers to respond, because there have been occasions when I have been the one sending in the response to the outrageous letter so I know for a fact that they received one and yet didn't print any.
Printing a letter containing a statement that is not true, and then refusing to print a response correcting the falsehood, is just as bad as printing a news story containing an error and then failing to print a correction when it is brought to their attention.
Speaking of out there letters, did anyone catch the foot fetish dude in the Metro this morning, encouraging "ladies" to not forget about taking care of their feet?
Comments
The Metro does the same
The Metro does the same thing, but I have no problem with it. While I many not agree with some letters, it is their duty to print the people's ideas in the opinion section be it whether they are intelligent or completely idiotic. I don't read the opinion section for facts or news. I read the opinion section to challenge my ideals and ultimately they are either strengthened (by the opposition's idiotic responses) or shifted (by the opposition's enlightening responses).
I don't agree...
...that it is a newspaper's duty to print letters that contain factual errors. Crazy opinions are one thing; things that are objectively, unequivocally false are another thing altogether. They should no more print a letter containing falsehoods then they should print an article or op/ed column containing falsehoods.
Furthermore, they frequently print letters that are so outrageous that a response is really required, and then fail to print any such response. And I don't for certain that it's not just that no one bothers to respond, because there have been occasions when I have been the one sending in the response to the outrageous letter so I know for a fact that they received one and yet didn't print any.
Printing a letter containing a statement that is not true, and then refusing to print a response correcting the falsehood, is just as bad as printing a news story containing an error and then failing to print a correction when it is brought to their attention.
Speaking of out there
Speaking of out there letters, did anyone catch the foot fetish dude in the Metro this morning, encouraging "ladies" to not forget about taking care of their feet?
Another Danger From Pencils
Pencils may be more dangerous than you think. Is it possible that #2 pencils could spread e coli bacteria?
Sure...
...if you stick them up your ass far enough.
<rimshot>
There may be a danger from lead in pencils...
...if they are manufactured in China, per this article from 2007. Of course, it's not in the core but in the outer paint.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/05/business/05count...