Editorial Rules
A letter to the editor in today’s Virginian-Pilot violated what many newspapers consider to be its editorial rules. The letter both bashed one candidate and praised another. I like the rule where the writer has to pick one or the other. It can’t do both. I don’t even want to see “vote for _______” at the end of a hit piece.
The other editorial rule that should be employed is not to print pro- or con- candidate LTEs at least one week prior to the election. The paper needs to allow time for publication of responses to that hit piece.
Join us on Facebook.
Follow us on Twitter.
August 12th, 2010 at 11:38 am
So much for that first amendment, eh Eileen? You want to dictate what people can write in their own letters to the editor and also dictate to the press when they can be punished?
Is there anything you Democrats don’t want to micromanage and control?
August 12th, 2010 at 11:38 am
Oops…”published” not punished
August 12th, 2010 at 12:14 pm
Personally, I don’t have a problem with the Virginian-Pilot’s lack of rules about being for and/or against a political candidate or proximity to an election. Of course, other newspapers are free to set their own rules, as long as they apply equally to all. (In any case, Eileen obviously can’t “dictate” anything to them — she was merely stating her opinion.)
I had an issue with a rule the Virginian-Pilot used to have limiting writers to one published letter every six months. I always thought that was overly restrictive and that the editors should be able to exercise their own judgment to prevent abuses. I see now that writers are only limited to one published letter per month.
August 21st, 2010 at 9:31 am
I’m waiting patiently for Eileen’s outrage over this morning’s editorial blasting. Randy Forbes as the “most ineffective” and throwing unabashed support behind the dem candidate LeGrow. Obviously against the “rules”. Waiting…waiting…
August 21st, 2010 at 10:44 am
Yeah, that one violated my rule too. It bashed Forbes then “rah rah’ed” LeGrow. These dual duty letters read to me as campaign plants, untrue to the spirit behind editorials and the editors need to filter those out.
http://hamptonroads.com/2010/08/donors-motivate-forbes