Those crazy letters

Tim Lawson · **Posted:** Fri Nov 28, 2003 12:52 pm

I'm a copy editor on the "features" copy desk. At my paper, my desk is responsible for editing letters to the editor. Just today, I labored for two hours on a single screed that came to my desk with easily detected plagiarism and obvious libel. I'm wondering if other news or "features" copy editors out there have this terrible responsibility. These letters often require heavy-duty research that we just don't have time for. Having said this, perhaps the problem is that the letters "editor" rarely edits.

KfitzR · **Posted:** Fri Nov 28, 2003 2:14 pm

Why is such a letter being considered for publication?

Tim Lawson · **Posted:** Fri Nov 28, 2003 3:19 pm

Because there is an institutional problem of the letters "editor" not editing. If they are desperate for the column inches, they'll run whatever letters they sent us, damn it. By the way, I got this one killed, but we've run some really bad ones over my desk's vociferous objections. I just wish they'd use the Commentary copy editor instead of us.

BobbyZ · **Posted:** Fri Nov 28, 2003 9:50 pm

The newspaper I work at publishes a feature on the Editorial page nearly every day titled "30 Seconds." (I'm sure many of your papers have a similar feature; it's not that we're that incredibly clever.) We have an answering machine in the newsroom that readers can call and complain/praise/talk mindlessly to for 30 seconds, and we screen them, write the best down, and publish them. Very few of the comments get in the paper, mainly because the vast majority of them are trite, really stupid or just plain libelous. I'm not sure how I feel about the whole thing. People can basically get whatever they want off their chests, but the whole thing's anonymous, so people can pretty much just gossip and repeat rumor after rumor that's been refuted by the paper in many cases.

jmcg · **Posted:** Fri Nov 28, 2003 10:19 pm

At least Tim's paper has a full-time letters editor. Too often, that's one more job added to the responsibilities of an overburdened editorial page staff.

Bumfketeer · **Posted:** Sat Nov 29, 2003 12:15 am

Jmcg is right.I spent three years on the edit pages in Syracuse. This meant laying out the edit and op-ed pages, editing the columns to fit (we had only 9.5 inches the layout for George Will, which was a bitch), choosing and editing all the letters and filling the op-ed page with almost entirely local content.Also, calling to verify letters. Also, beating the bushes for local talent to fill the gaping op-ed page.Oh, yeah...and serving as one of three editorial writers. Which meant sitting in meeting with a lot of tiresome "public servants." The only two I really enjoyed were Cuomo, who came in a couple times a year,. and Pat Moynihan.People ask me why I left such a great "cushy" job to become a copy editor. It was most certainly NOT a cushy job.

Powderhorn · **Posted:** Sat Nov 29, 2003 2:56 am

Welcome in from the fringe, Tim. I hope the Times is working out well for you.At any rate, as the "news editor" of my paper, my job regularly entails editing letters to the "editor." If we had an editorial page editor, that would be something, but in this case, it's just letters to the actual editor, and I'm usually the one calling for confirmation.The rules I currently live by include: if it's absolutely libelous, don't bother calling to confirm, and if it looks as though it may be libelous, when calling to confirm, request the source of such material.Usually, I get either "well, everyone knows that" or "you're just trying to protect [insert name of local 'person of interest' here]," but sometimes, it results in a good tip, which brings us a good story, and in that case, people don't seem too upset that their original letter didn't run.Admittedly, though, it's a slightly different situation in Ashland.

Oeditpus Rex · **Posted:** Sat Nov 29, 2003 12:57 pm

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by BobbyZ:
The newspaper I work at publishes a feature on the Editorial page nearly every day titled "30 Seconds." (I'm sure many of your papers have a similar feature; it's not that we're that incredibly clever.) We have an answering machine in the newsroom that readers can call and complain/praise/talk mindlessly to for 30 seconds, and we screen them, write the best down, and publish them. Very few of the comments get in the paper, mainly because the vast majority of them are trite, really stupid or just plain libelous. I'm not sure how I feel about the whole thing. People can basically get whatever they want off their chests, but the whole thing's anonymous, so people can pretty much just gossip and repeat rumor after rumor that's been refuted by the paper in many cases.<hr></blockquote>At least your paper screens these rants. My former employer introduced a similar column about four months ago. Submissions are neither screened nor verified (nor are signed letters), and as a result the paper's credibility is down and there're two or three libel suits pending. Of course, the EE defends this rickety soapbox in the name of freedom of speech.I get so sick of hearing "freedom of speech" while hearing little about the responsibility that goes with it.

BobbyZ · **Posted:** Sat Nov 29, 2003 4:02 pm

That's a bummer, Rex. A few months after I started working, I was curious as to why we weren't printing the large amount of calls we get. But after looking at the verbatim transcripts so heroically typed up by our elderly obituary editor, I know why. Hold on to your hats, but most of the calls are stupid.
40 percent are of the "These Damn Kids Nowadays" variety, 20 percent are of the "The Editor-In-Chief Is A Dagburned Id-Yut" variety, another 20 percent are from a single woman who, as the obituary editor notes, "Hates Democrats and Liberal Republicans" and...um...let me do the math here...remember, I was a journalism major...that leaves a thin 20 percent of calls that are, astonishingly, somewhat coherent and often make a good point.

RimRat · **Posted:** Sun Nov 30, 2003 9:38 pm

I've been op-ed editor at two different papers, one a tab, the other a broadsheet. It can be a major pain made somewhat better by having a good editorial page editor, and clear letters-to-the-editor criteria displayed prominently. I got lucky in both cases with the bosses. I left one job and the other left me -- a victim of downsizing. No. Wait. Make that right-sizing.

Testy Copy Editors

Those crazy letters

Who is online

What They're Saying

Useful Links