I agree newspapers should keep THEIR subjective views on the editorial page and not pass them off as reporting. However I am not opposed to newspapers allowing the public to post comments about stories. The stamp of approval by the editors is a dangerous slope. The policy should be clearly stated and strictly adhered to by the paper. If you allow free-for-all posting you are going to have to deal with sophomoric "first post", completely off topic ramblings, and of course massive spam.
The public writes letters to the editor about news stories and editorials. The letters printed obviously had to get at least one editor's stamp of approval. The big difference is the printed page has a very limited amount of space so only a handful of letters are printed. A blog-type page has no such limitations, therefore the editors should allow all points of view and ONLY block off topic and things offensive to community standards. I would hope there would be a grassroots lynching if the editors start blocking views opposite their agenda.
The bottom line is it is their paper & website and they can do with it what they want. If someone doesn't like it you are free to start your own (provided you got a few million extra dollars).
I agree with the sophomoric side of things, but I'd expect a paper to allow suitable comments. Apparently mine didn't fit suitable. I felt my statement, although long, was suitable. It definitely wasn't crude or sophomoric.
But in reality, I'm not surprised that they chose not to run my comment. It's what we've come to expect.
Commenting by HaloScan
