THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1994, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Tuesday, July 12, 1994 TAG: 9407120004
SECTION: FRONT PAGE: A14 EDITION: FINAL
TYPE: Letter
LENGTH: Short : 46 lines
I must add my voice to those of other readers who have expressed disapproval of the tone and content of the opposite-editorial page - the Perspectives section - of your paper.
Since the present editorial policy went into effect early in May, the character of the page has changed from one that recognized a diversity of opinion to one that limits its offerings almost exclusively to extreme ``conservative'' (or reactionary) views. The few articles by more-liberal, moderate or just more-tolerant commentators have often been humorous or on relatively non-controversial subjects; they have rarely advanced serious arguments to counter the ``point of view'' of the editor. Does your newspaper fear to trust its readers to make the ``correct'' choices when presented with a variety of opinions?
Other common flaws in the columns selected for this page include the tactic of pronouncing guilt by insinuation and a tendency of columnists to present as facts their opinions, unproved allegations and even rumors.
Almost equally objectionable are the general tone and language in much of the commentary. Political criticism often takes the form of intemperate attacks on the president and other public figures, and especially on Mrs. Clinton, against whom some writers seem to feel a particular animus.
At times the language is such that the Perspectives page reads more like some extreme letters to the editor or even a gossip column than the serious commentary section of a respectable newspaper. Two examples: identifying ``the portals of the first lady's office'' as ``the gates of hell'' (Don Feder, June 29), and a reference to the president in an article about Hillary Clinton as ``the man she sleeps with'' (Suzanne Fields, May 22). The language of the first is extremely intemperate; of the second, malicious and vulgar.
These samples are exceptional only in degree, not in fact, in their offense against generally accepted standards of reason, courtesy and taste. A newspaper worthy of respect would have more respect for its readers than to provide them with such poor Perspectives choices day after day.
BEVERLEY DABNEY
Norfolk, July 2, 1994 by CNB