Letter - Letters to the editor reflect the community

Advertisement

It is good to know that the U-B editorial page editor is concerned with printing articles from all viewpoints. I do think the opinions and the letters from readers do overwhelmingly slant to the right, but this slant to the right is not necessarily “wrong.”

That is the viewpoint of the majority of people in our community who care about political matters and write to the paper.

But I would suggest staying away from the comments posted on the U-B website and Facebook, because many are neither right nor left — but are just plain nasty and attack those who simply want to make a political statement.

Luckily, there is a good administrator of the U-B page who deletes the posts that contain the annoying nasty comments. I get very weary reading the thoughtless snap judgments written in reply to thoughtful people who care enough about political matters to speak out.

One problem I see in tallying whether an article is “left” or “right” is when the subject matter is science, some automatically believe it is a liberal article. Do those who read an article in the business section automatically believe it is a conservative article? I would hope not.

Perhaps there should be a separate section in the U-B for articles dealing with science. Of course, some articles about scientific subjects have a liberal agenda, and would fit into the “Perspective” section, as some articles on business and money have a conservative agenda, and would also fit into the “Perspective” section.

One U-B reader gave me a good suggestion the other day: Read the first few paragraphs of each article or letter to the editor, and see if the writing catches your interest and is written well. Do not necessarily scan the titles, as the reader may miss an exceptional writing, by judging the writing by its title.

Sharon K. Schiller

Walla Walla

Comments

Chas 3 months, 3 weeks ago

Science has no agenda but data, tested, then found, or, not, to be supported by evidence. It is neither "left" nor "right." If you read any article of science and find disagreement, then by all means conduct your own experiments, collect data, publish it for peer review. That's science. This newspaper prints valuable information about science. I don't want to read those articles in the Perspective section.

Willful ignorance of our elected politicians is regarded a badge of honor. That's nothing new. We elect few leaders to Congress, but sycophantic demagogues from all sides of the political spectrum with most currying favor from their corporate sponsors/donors who seek their payoff when they leave public office. This is nothing new, either. Mark Twain and Will Rogers made reputations addressing the same buncombe in their day. What has improved is the finesse our radio and TV, now, online media shape their propaganda and the gullibility of the witless who think shouting loudest will win any argument.

E pluibus unum was the Founders and Signers ideal of a motto and is a philosophical principle of government. "In God We Trust" is vacuous to the notion of self-agency being a requirement necessary of any people desiring good governance. The UB staff publish letters from people with vastly different outlooks of the world. I think they do a fine job with the paper. I look forward to read the ideas of a younger generation and hope they've success recruiting those voices.

I'd seriously like to know why the editors allow anonymous posts on their website which has "annoying nasty comments" but require a signature for print? It must be for the greater views to the most pages i.e. it's just about the money. Their policy is incoherent.

1

Sign in to comment

Click here to sign in